.300 Win Mag vs. .30-06 Springfield

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dr Cook, I've shot about 3 inch groups at a thousand slung up in prone using a .308 with metallic sights. But all the other groups were bigger.

As we're all the others your friend shot bigger than 5 inches. Right?
 
I have no clue. I would imagine so.

The OP was asking about 30-06 -vs- 300 wm and what I said and posted was part of the conversation. He didn't ask about a .308.

The whole point is that a 30-06 is not inherently inferior to a .300. No need to come out on the attack or try to impress me as it didn't.
 
Last edited:
Help me out here

I copied your entire post. First off I respect your knowledge and informative history of posts.
Elk were dropped at 500 yards with .30-06 rifles before belted magnums were on the market. The .30-06 loads were much weaker back then in the early 1900's.

Most people will shoot a .30-06 more precisely at 500 yards than using a 30 caliber magnum.
__________________
US Navy Distinguished Marksman Badge 153
Former US Navy & Palma Rifle Team Member
NRA High Power Master & Long Range High Master
NRA Smallbore Prone Master
Click to expand...
And I do wholeheartedly agree that the average buy off the shelf shooter is better off with a 30-06 as apposed to any of the alleged magnums. 99% of those shooters do not have the training or obvious skill level you possess.

Educate me here. Discounting the 375 H&H mag of 1912, the 300 H&H was introduced in 1925. That is about 19 years after the 30-06. I'm kind of discounting the 30-03 here with the really heavy crappy round nosed bullet.
If I'm not mistaking you are saying a bunch of Elk were killed between around 1906 and 1925 by a 30-06 at at least 500 yards with open sights. I really would like to understand how you know that.
 
WIN71:
If I'm not mistaking you are saying a bunch of Elk were killed between around 1906 and 1925 by a 30-06 at at least 500 yards with open sights. I really would like to understand how you know that.
Click to expand...
You're mistaken. I said:
Elk were dropped at 500 yards with .30-06 rifles before belted magnums were on the market.
Click to expand...
I didn't mention anything about numbers killed nor type of sights used.

It's a well known fact that a good marksman could keep most of his shots with a .30-06 and aperture sights inside 20 inches at 500 yards; the size of the 5 ring on high power targets at 500 yards back then. I've heard from a few people over the years their Dads and Granddads did that back then. Not every one shot at was downed, but some were. It's not impossible.
 
Okay, so from what I am hearing, the .30-06 is not disadvantaged to the .300 win mag until out past 500 yards. Seeing as I am not going to be shooting past that mark too often, the .30-06 seems like the better choice. But the one thing I am skeptical on is if the extra 700 ft-lbs of muzzle energy and the extra 590 ft-lbs of energy the .300 WM has at 500 yds means anything. If it doesn't then why couldn't I safely use a .30-30 bolt action with spitzer bullets on an elk at 500 yards? I guess my question is, does there come a point when energy and velocity don't matter?

Thanks,

John
 
Last edited:
But does the .30-06 already have enough velocity and energy that a magnum .30 cal would not do anything better, or is the extra velocity a big gain?

Thanks,

John
 
It's all about making do with the tools at hand. I have a 300 win mag for no other reason than I like the idea of projecting a 30 cal bullet at 1000 yds with more game-dropping power and flatter trajectory than any non-magnum 30 cal. Do I need for the hunting I do? nope. Do I even get to shoot at those ranges nowadays? Nope. It's just a sentimental "if I want it, it's there kind of thing" although I can't prove it at this point, I suspect even the shorter 24" barrel is probably going to have some deleterious effect on those really long shots than say a 26" or longer. I never met a gun I didn't like, so I invest in them for more than just practicality's sake. But all things being equal, if you had to watch your budget and needed to maximize your return on investment--my vote would go to the 308 win based on the options/scenarios mentioned here.
 
Stagpanther,

The cost difference between a .300 win mag and .308 are not something that is going to make my decision. I just want to know if my money would be well spent with a .30-06 or a .300 win mag.

Thanks,

John
 
I'm not talking about the cost of the weapon--you brought up several times cost per round vs annual usage. Viewed strictly from that perspective--as well as the utility of easily developed cartridges for moderate range shooting and hunting most likely to be on your menu--I'd say 308 is the clear winner.
 
Stagpanther,

Like I said earlier in this thread I do not want a .308 because for a Savage rifle, that is short action, and after a year or so of shooting the gun,I will likely put a match barrel on it and I do not want to be limited by action length.

Thanks,

John
 
30-06 Springfield, for all the reasons posted above.

You can't go wrong with the 30-06 as it all comes down to shot-placement on-target.

Plus IF you were to forget your ammo for a hunt (it does happen), 30-06 ammo is easy to find in various configurations.

On the reverse, IF your rifle were to become unserviceable during a hunt, a replacement rifle could easy be obtained in 30-06 chambering.

Good Luck & Good Hunting !!!!!
 
Thank you for your reply. I definitely see the forgetting the ammo thing, but if your rifle becomes unserviceable, I am not sure how having a gun (that is now unserviceable) in .30-06 would help.

What would the advantages of a .30-06 be over a .300 win mag? I get the cheaper ammo and less recoil, but if I reload, both could be migitated. I could load a .300 win mag down to .30-06 ammo, but not vice versa. But I can definitely attest to the .30-06's availability, which would lead into availability of brass.

Thank you,

John
 
What would the advantages of a .30-06 be over a .300 win mag?
Click to expand...
There is no simple answer to that question without more parameters defining the intended use

Obviously larger cartridges offer some advantage at longer range, but at closer distances all they offer is more recoil and more expense, since the smaller ones will get the same results most of the time
 
if your rifle becomes unserviceable, I am not sure how having a gun (that is now unserviceable) in .30-06 would help.
Click to expand...

I think he just meant you could buy a replacement rifle identical to your rifle more easily in the more common 30-06.

Of course that would probably pertain mostly to the more common brands and models, not if you have an odd brand.

I hope you decide on the 30-06 because it's the wise choice. However, there's something to be said for getting something unusual and unwise.... and surprisingly enough, those choices can turn out ok, too.
 
How is the .30-06 a wise choice? I agree it is likely a very good choice, but aside from recoil, which is not a problem, because I can load lighter powered rounds, and a small cost difference, the rounds aren't too different.

Thank you,

John
 
Cost of ammo, availability of ammo, recoil, blast, flash, need for a longer barrel and heavier rifle, resale or trade value......

Speaking of value......you would probably do better to buy an older, used bolt action rifle like Winchester 70, Remington 700, Ruger 77, Browning......etc. in excellent condition than a new off-brand rifle.
 
Last edited:
I have said several times I wanted a Savage because in the future I would like to change the barrel, possibly to other calibers. Plus, a stainless steel gun is a must and I very much dislike used guns that are not mil surp. No offense towards anyone who likes or buys used guns, they just aren't my cup of tea. Plus, since when is Savage an off-brand rifle? They are know to be very accurate out of the box and the action is fairly desirable.

Thanks,

John
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top