I just "have" to go there! .270/.308/30-06

old roper:
Bart B, From my understanding the 308 Win came out first 1952 and the 7.62 Nato (T65) was 2yrs later.
Click to expand...
That's true. After Remington had developed the new cartridge, Winchester got the first contract in 1952 to make a large batch of ammo for the US military. NATO didn't adopt the round as the interntional standard until two years later. A friend was the first to use the .308 in competition at the 1963 NRA National Matches.

Are you suggesting that Remington developed the 7.62 Nato but took no credit but they let Mike Walker take credit for the 222 etc?
Click to expand...
Yes.
 
Last edited:
Old Roper's article is confrmed in Hatcher's Notebook.

No where could I find that Remington was the first to come up with the 308.
 
There is no BEST among those three. They are three distinct rounds with some very minor, and some very major differences. The .308 will be BEST to create a short action bolt rifle that weighs very little. The 30-06 will be BEST if a person wants to create a full sized near magnum rifle designed only to fire .220 grain soft points into large game. The .270 will be BEST if a person is wanting to hunt moderate sized game at longer distances, and doesn't want to do it with a .308 caliber.

There is so much argument because lots of people enjoy arguing small points like the differences between three cartridges that are for most purposes and measures, are practically equal in all ways.

If you gave a tribe of hottentots 1,000 rifles of each caliber and plenty of ammunition, those guys would spend the next 20 years killing every critter they could get close to, and you would never, ever hear any one of them arguing that his rifle is better "because."
 
old roper comments:
Bart B. I guess this article is false

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com...in-of-308.html
Click to expand...
No, it's not false. It's true.

It just doesn't mention that Remington's people worked with Frankford Arsenal to develop the cartridge.

Then kraigwy states:
No where could I find that Remington was the first to come up with the 308.
Click to expand...
That's true. Winchester did it. Remington was involved with designing the T65 cartridge which ended up as the 7.62 NATO round.
 
Remington was involved with designing the T65 cartridge which ended up as the 7.62 NATO round.
Click to expand...

The orginal T65 rsembled the 300 Savage, Both Remington and Winchester were given contracts to produce the ammo for testing. The Ordnance Corp modified the T65 several times and the latest case had a lengthened neck and sharper shoulder and was called the T65E3 (with variations for Armor Piercing, Ball, Dummy, Drenade Launching, Spoting, and Armor Piercing Incendiary.

This was adopted as the 7.62X51 NATO. It was not developed by Remington or Winchester, but by the Army Ordnance Corp.

Soon after the Army started work on the T65E3 Winchester dicided to bring out a hunting round in this case and in Aug. '52 announced the 308 Winchester in the Model 70 and the Model 88 in 110 grn, 158 grn and 180 grn.

Other then Remington (and Winchester) being given a contract to produce some of the orginal T65 ammo, I cannot find any information where Remington having anything to do with the developement of the 7.62X51/308 Win case.

Recommended reading for anyone interested in the development of this round (and a lot of other great information) consult "HATCHER'S NOTEBOOK" MG J. Hatcher, Chief, Ord Dept. US Army
 
kraigwy states:
I cannot find any information where Remington having anything to do with the developement of the 7.62X51/308 Win case.
Click to expand...
I wish I'd saved that document on the interview some years ago when Mike Walker gave some shooting rag info about Remington's work with the arsenal who designed the NATO round. Shame, shame on me!!!!!!!!
 
I will add something usefull to this discussion.

One thing that has not been brought up, that I think will give the .308 a slight edge is, Its cheaper to shoot, You can buy Surplus ammo, and many brands of inexpensive ammo that are not available in the other cartridges.
Some will blow their nose at that, but in this economy being able to pick up a box of cartridges for 8 bucks at Academy Sports, to take out to the range and practice, is something that alot of people apreciate these days.:)
Good times or Bad, the .308 Winchester is there for you.:D
 
Id like to see the comparisons for powder used/bullet weight and amount of recoil.

When you get a 30 cal bullet at 3500+ so what. I dont shoot at 400++ yards and many who do will be surprised to find their 400 yd range is really about 175 yards.
 
Guess I always thought it has more to do with what your using it for opposed to one being better than the other.

The 06 ammo has some more versatility than the 270. Can go heavy.

270 faster and flatter lighter.

And if your not manually pumping the bolt its a 308 want quicker second shot.

I like all three :)
 
They're all excellent, and I've had all three, but .270 is it for me--my predominant rifle/round for forty or so years. If going to the shorter action, I'd get a 7mm-08--in a Featherweight as the quintessential "Mountain Rifle.--which of course was derived from the .308 anyway.
 
I would take the velocity numbers with a grain of salt. I am having troubles getting the bullets in my 270 Win to go any where near the velocities for published maximum loads. Only have a couple of 130 gr loads clocking over 3000 fps, the one 150 grain load I tested, and I think it is max, only 2700 fps.

I have some chronograph data where I pushed 168’s in my 308 much faster, so I believe it would be very easy to push a 150 in a 308 faster than a 270 Win.

My load with a 150 gr Sierra was clocking faster than the 150 Speer in the 270.

The old gunwriter trick, comparing bullet drop starting at 400 yards, well the drop numbers are true, but I don’t think most people should be shooting at things beyond 300 yards anyway. Considering just how much the wind will blow a bullet, and just how many shooters can’t hit a barn from the inside, we should not be encouraging these people to blast away at poor animals 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, or 1000 yards away.

They might hit one, and it will more likely crawl away to die a horrible death.

A 30-06 will push a 150 at 2900 fps without any trouble. So what.


270 Win FN Deluxe 24" Barrel


150 gr Speer Flat Base 53.0 grains H4350 wtd lot 22655 R-P cases WLR OAL 3.250"

29 Dec 2011 T = 51 °F

Ave Vel = 2704
Std Dev = 18
ES = 49
High = 2727
Low = 2678
N = 5


308 Win Ruger M77 MKII 26” Barrel


150 Sierra SP BT 44.0 grs IMR 4064 IMI brass CCI200 LC90
OAL 2.760"
30 April 2008 T = 80 °F

Ave Vel = 2749
Std Dev = 14
ES = 47
High = 2777
Low = 2730
N = 10

v.good accuracy, no increased effort on bolt lift
 
Slamfire, not sure about your numbers, but mine are different.

Using Hornady 150 SSTs, and 50 grns of IMR 4350, I get an average of 2883 @ 10 feet from the muzzle.

I get 2994 average with the 130 SSTs.

This all out of my Model 70 Featherweight with a 24 inch barrel.
 
Slamfire mentions:
I would take the velocity numbers with a grain of salt. I am having troubles getting the bullets in my 270 Win to go any where near the velocities for published maximum loads.
Click to expand...
My first centerfire rifle was a .270. It didn't live up to published velocities for the handloads I made. So I had the bore slugged and learned its groove diameter was several ten-thousandths bigger than my bullet diameters.

I've later learned that's the biggest cause of someone's handloads not speeding up to data's velocities. Other causes are different powder and primer lots, case neck tension, firing pin strength and throat erosion.

And when I and a friend were shooting his .30-06 loads through a chronograph, he consistantly got about 50 fps faster with two different loads than when I shot them. So he was holding the rifle harder against his shoulders than I.

There may be even more reasons why a given load in a rifle shoots differently than someone else gets.
 
lovesthosesooners comments:
I don't have an axe to grind, I'm just always wondering when I read these threads what I am missing?
Click to expand...
I think what you're missing is how repeatable the .308's ballistics are.

Those numbers you provided are just averages for different ballistic values. As long as each fired bullet travels the same way to the target, they'll all land atop each other. It doesn't matter how big the trajectory curve is as long as its repeatable. This is what the .308 has over the .30-06. Even when a 250-gr. Sierra HPMK bullet in a .308 case leaves at only 2150 fps, it does wonders at long range.

All this aside, there have been a few .30-06 rifle barrels that did virtually equal the accuracy of those using the .308 case. The "secret" is the chamber throat's leade angle. .30-06 chamber specs (SAAMI and MIL-SPEC) had a different angle than the .308. When the .308's lead angle was used in .30-06 chambers, their accuracy was virtually the same. Few folks used reamers that did this for .30-06 chambers.
 
My first centerfire rifle was a .270. It didn't live up to published velocities for the handloads I made. So I had the bore slugged and learned its groove diameter was several ten-thousandths bigger than my bullet diameters.
Click to expand...


Interesting. Thanks for sharing.
 
.270/.308/30-06

All good cartridges,and for that reason I have all three.

The .308 is chambered in a short bbl light carbine it was chosen for this gun because the .308 seems to be less affected by bbl length than the other two.

The .270 is chambered in a light wt rifle ( Win FWT ) to me it provides the best balance of deer capability for a walking rifle where shots may be either long or short.

The 30-06 is chambered in a full size ( 24 in ) rifle capable of taking anything other than the big biting/scratching type things. This was my do it all rifle for many years,now it gets the call if I'm not going to walk too far. The little jewel is a bit much to carry all day when you are past the three score and 10.

TGR
 
There is no basis to the OP's original question. Each caliber has its unique characteristics that make it too close to call.

Me? I like the .30-06 because of the versatility in bullets and purpose. Especially when reloading. For a Long action weapon it doesn't get any better for me. I will also the throw in on a .308.

Good round, but the 7mm-08 is a GREAT round! For a short action it's da bomb. Perfect ballistics for whitetail and mule deer, and is very gentle on me or someone I am teaching. My 2 cents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top