Slightly frustrated, Mike
You folks are referring to the fact that in the rifle in question, both are fine. Both have the same pressures in the chamber. The specs back that up.
That’s fine and I agree. I also agree 100% that we are talking about a bolt action’s ammo
But you’re making the point with the sweeping statement "The fact is that .30-06 ammunition of 1906-1945 operates at the same pressures and specifications as modern (post 1945) ammunition" which implies the civvie ammo of today is identical to the M2 ball of yesteryear
Yes, for the rifle in question, civvie 30-06 is a fine and appropriate substitute for M2 ball. But that in and of itself does not mean that therefore civvie 30-06 is identical to M2 ball.
I apologize if I offend but when two things have different measurable qualities, they are not identical even though they may perform identically in some applications. If in even one application there is a difference, the two cannot be identical. Unfortunately I cannot back down from that standpoint.
I am concerned that because of the respected sources this fact is coming from, that this may breed misconception; clarification is my only goal here. I hope you can appreciate my motive. Despite the fact that the intent of this thread is to use the ammo in a bolt action, the perception produced is that 30-06 is M2 ball by another name
If we can agree that a measurable value (port pressure on an M1 rifle and/or powder burn rate overall) is in fact different between the two cartridges, then despite the fact that " .30-06 ammunition of 1906-1945 operates at the same pressures and specifications as modern (post 1945) ammunition", I respectfully submit to you that a difference absolutely exists. It cannot be identical and yet also have a distinct difference; the fact that this ammo is for a bolt action doesn't nullify the diffrence, it simply makes the difference irrelevent
for this rifle
If Wrothgar were to buy an M1 rifle tomorrow and follow the "The fact is that .30-06 ammunition of 1906-1945 operates at the same pressures and specifications as modern (post 1945) ammunition" rule, then where does that leave him? In my opinion it leaves him under the impression that 30-06 is 'the same' as M2 Ball because respected and knowledgeable members told him so. The information I beleive to be an addendum to your truthful statements shows that the burn rate is slower, resulting in a higher pressure away from teh chamber, which could have implications despite the ammo having the same chamber pressure and specs
My goal is not win an argument. My goal is to show that yes, a difference
does indeed exist, so folks who come to this forum for info on curios and relics can be aware