Looking for advice

Status
Not open for further replies.
PVL,
To be sure, the main reason for changing to .308 instead of the '.06 is price. To special order the first rifle, it was going to cost me $1,300 exactly. The final rifle I am ordering, if I can find a dealer that can get their hands on it in Phoenix, is $1,100 MSRP, yet I see it on Cheaper than Dirt for about $850. For this guy, that is scope money!!! I do appreciate reading the differing interpretations, however. The more I learn, the better I am. Thanks guys!
 
We are talking about cartridges, not the rifles of yesteryear compared to the rifles made today.
Click to expand...

They made .308 and .30-06 rifles then, they make .308 and .30-06 rifles now. Is anyone using .30-06 in matches where it is allowed but not required? How does that compare to .308 rifles allowed but not required? What record does the .30-06 hold, at any point since the introduction of the .308, that the .308 has not broken?

Do you suppose that competitors care about names of cartridges? They use what's best. If the .30-06 was superior, they'd be using it. How many are, when it's an option?

Any improvement in quality of rifles, barrels, shooters, bullets, etc all applies equally well to both cartridges. If the .308 was better then (and it was), it is also better now (and it is).

Show me a .308 accuracy record that a .30-06 has beaten (or even matched), any where at any time. Show me a .30-06 accuracy record that the .308 has not beaten, any where at any time.
 
I have researched the '06 quite a bit. I don't care to dig up all those resources but what I found was that the 308 is NOT the cartridge the 30-06 is. It never will be.

I don't really care about punching a hole in a piece of paper at 1,000/1,500 or even 2000 yards. What I care about is "what can that bullet do when it gets there?"
If its only moving at 50 FPS when it hits the paper, what does is matter if you can put 10 of them in the same hole?

This is why the '06 will always be a better cartridge in my mind. It will do more down range than the 308.

If we are talking about target practice then I would say the 260 or a 7mm would be the best since they have the least bullet drop at long ranges.
Does my argument make sense?
 
Last edited:
If we are talking about target practice then I would say the 260 or a 7mm would be the best since they have the least drop.
Does may argument make sense?
Click to expand...

There are any number of cartridges that might be better for the task than either the .308 or .30-06, but that doesn't matter when the question is between just those two. I have no interest in .308 or .30-06 for any task.

Your argument about "more down range" doesn't really make sense, except in the most literal sense. As I explained above, using Hodgdon data and 200gr bullet, which is the range where the -06 has an "advantage" over the .308, that advantage amounts to about 40 ft-lbs (out of over 2,800 ft-lbs) and 2-4" trajectory at 500 yards.

Is that advantage worth 10-20% more recoil and roughly 1/2 the load data and factory ammo?
 
I don't know of any animals in the us that would go down with 2,040lbft of energy and would not with 2,000lbft of energy.

Seems to me, you just like the -06 more, which is fine. I'll stick with my anemic .308...
 
Ahhhh, the 3006 vs 308 debate carries on through the yet another winter thread...

Before I comment on the time honored debate ;) I'll respond to the op.

IBD, some things to consider, first off Bambi or Bullwinkle will not care whether you shoot a 3006 or 308 so just forget about that for now. It's all about shot placement, which in effect is accuracy.

While you can have carry hunting rifles you can paper punch with and target rifles that you can hunt with the more you compromise toward one use or the other, the less suitable it will be for the original use.

Think about the overall weight of the rifle. Most folks will want to keep the all in weight of a carry rig hunting rifle under 9lbs. That includes a full magazine, scope, and sling. This varmint rig is at 10 lbs before you start. Unless you are planning on truck and stand hunting only I would suggest something a little trimmer. While I do truck hunt more than half of my hunting is on foot and a big chunk of that is in mountains - 10+ pound rifles get old fast when you carry them all day. My two goto carry rigs are about 7.5 and 8.5pounds.

Barrel length, while I prefer a longer barrel because for me they seem to "point" better than a 18" to 22" barrel, IIRC the velocity gain or loss per inch of barrel with this type of cartridge is in the neighborhood of 20-25fps per inch - not enough to be a material consideration. For a hunting rig I would council you toward a 22" - 24" barrel.

Detachable vs fixed magazine, while I like the concept of a detachable magazine in my experience, for hunting, it makes no difference in readiness and is just one more thing to lose.

For the kind of money you are spending I would suggest looking at an all weather Ruger Hawkeye, a Winchester Model 70 extreme weather (stainless steel and synthetic stock), or the equivalent SS & synthetic stock in a 700. I have shot all of these with outstanding results. While I don't care for Remington's they do shoot. One of my hunting partners out of the box extreme weather Model 70, in 3006, shot sub MOA for me when we were setting it up three years ago.

Just my opinion but I would try to spend as much on your glass as you do on the rifle. And please consider a 3-9x40 with good glass over a lower quality junior Hubble telescope. You don't need more than 9 power for 500 yard shooting and it will mount in a way that facilitates a better cheek weld than a 50 or 56mm objective bell. Buy good quality mounts, think Badger, Nightforce, Talley, or Warne. And invest in a baby torque wrench so you do not over tighten them. A suggestion? Zeiss 3-9x40 Conquest with the 600 yard ballistic reticle and Warne rings. It won't break the bank, it will give reasonably good performance, and it will provide hold over points past 350 yards.

Distance shooting is harder than it sounds and requires a ton of practice and good glass. I just shoot to 500 yards and it has taken a while to get very consistent at those ranges. I would focus on getting very consistent shot placement out to 500 yards before I pondered long distance shooting. As well, by the time you get good to 500 yards you will have a lot better idea of what will really work at long distance.


Now the 3006 vs the 308...

It doesn't matter.

BUT the 308, in my view, is NOT inherently more accurate, it recoils less, so most folks tend to shoot it better just my opinion.

Here is a link to guy named who did the best test I have ever come across.

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com.es/2011/04/cartridges-sibling-rivalry-308-vs-30-06.html

This guy, German Salazar, basically found that the 308 wins more because it is easier to shoot, because it recoils less. All other things being equal there is no difference in accuracy between the two cartridges. His inquiry, with all due respect to the posters on this thread, was very objective and is worth a read.

At the end of the day I still like the 3006 better than it's smaller, weaker cousin, the 308. :p
 
Last edited:
Ivebeenduped said:
I want to save about 600 before I start looking. I know that isn't much for a scope but my means are my means...
Click to expand...

I won't go into the case war for fear someone will find out I shoot 16ga, .38 S&W, 6mm Remington and other such silly habits- so lets start beating each other up over scopes.

What were some ideas you were tossing around for brand, power, crosshair type, and such?

I personally see no reason in the world to spend over $300 on a scope, well unless I could find a really slick dual post running target match specific scope- then I might entertain the notion. I'm pretty much sold on the Mueller brand myself.
 
Years before German Salazar did his tests cited in that link above, several top ranked bolt action match rifle competitors proved the .308 Win. case shot bullets more accurate than a .30-06 case did. They shot better scores than those shown in Salazar's article.

Folks thinking:
Statements about one cartridge being "more accurate" than the other are a good way to spot those who are either deluded, or wish to BS somebody.
Click to expand...
..might want to check out the facts of what happened in the late 1950's through the mid 1960's by getting it straight from the horses mouths of those who done it building and testing the rifles and cartridges as well as shooting the scores and test groups and watching it happen.

The guy who started that's mentioned up front in Salazar's article. Comparisons were made with the same rifle except for the barrel's chamber. The same bore and groove dimensions and twists were used as well as bullets, powders and primers. That started in 1958 and finalized in 1963. By 1966, match rifle scores toppled virtually all the records held by .30-06 chambered rifles, so the NRA had to make new targets with smaller scoring ring diameters so breaking ties would be easier. And the .308 case used in 300 meter free rifles took home the gold in international competition.

Even the Garands converted from .30-06 to 7.62 NATO in 1964 shot more accurate with the new round.

Best accuracy .30-06's produced at 600 yards back then was about 6 inches at 600 yards. Along came the .308 Win and best accuracy dropped to under 4 inches. Tests were conducted by rifles held in free recoiling machine rests eliminating all human error. And Sierra Bullets immediately started using the .308 case to test virtually all of their 30 caliber bullets becase it shot them more accurate than any other 30 caliber case. One of Sierra's tool and die makers (Ferris Pindell, of the "PPC" cartridge design group) used a .308 with their new 168-gr. match bullets to win some benchrest matches; something no .30-06 had done in all its attempts to do so.

Since 1963, when either a .308 or .30-06 cartridge could be used in competion, those shooting the .308 produced better scores. If that's not good enough reason to choose a .308 for accuracy, then the fact that all the old records held by the .30-06 have gave way to the .308 by the late '60's is meaningless. Even with 250-gr. match bullets, the .308 shoots 'em more accurate than the .30-06 did.

It's easy to build a rifle that'll shoot bullets from a .308 case into no worse than 3 inches at 600 yards. I've not heard of any .30-06 rifle that'll do that.

If one makes muzzle velocity comparisons using the same length barrels and equal bore and groove diameters fixed in place hard mounted and SAAMI peak pressure specs for both, the muzzle velocity difference is only about 100 fps.

And with equal barrel bore, groove and length dimensions and at SAAMI peak pressure specs, there's no way a .30-06 will come close to the velocities a 30 caliber magnum produces. Check 'em out in:

http://www.saami.org/specifications_and_information/specifications/Velocity_Pressure_CfR.pdf
 
Last edited:
If the OP is going to use the rifle for hunting most of the time, with a little target shooting thrown in, he should get the 30-06 in a rifle with a manageable weight. If he's mostly a target shooter and does a little hunting, he should lean toward the 308 in a rifle with a manageable weight.

I do believe that the 308 is a bit more accurate, but the only reason it was ever created was to get as close as possible to 30-06 performance with a smaller cartridge case. The 30-06 can be had in a rifle with as much accuracy as most folks can employ.
 
I will be using this for hunting, of course, as well as long distance shooting..
Click to expand...

Two different rifle types, in my opinion apples to oranges comparison.

Since I am unaware of any Polar Bears in Phoenix AZ or any Moose hunts, I tend to think the 308 would be sufficient for anything you are hunting there.

Since there are different problems with each type of use of the rifle, long distance shooting (wind and bullet drop), and hunting (terminal velocity and bullet construction and expansion) one that would be excellent for one type of use may not be good for the other type of use. Finding a rifle that does both without problems could tax your skill as a shooter.

Since most will do a lot more target shooting than hunting, it would pay to look to that type of rifle more so than one that will only be used for hunting. Along those lines the 308 will be cheaper to shoot than the 30-06.

If long range competition is your goal, then as mentioned before a lot of practice will be required, again 308 will be cheaper to become proficient with than 30-06. If the rifle will be sitting in the closet 11 months out of the year and taken out once or twice a year for hunting, then it really does not matter which caliber you get (only which will give you better terminal velocity at the distance you will hunt at).

Most of us purchase rifles for a specific purpose and have some for hunting and others for target or long range shooting. Some get used often and others very little.

Get the rifle you will enjoy and shoot the most.
Jim
 
Last edited:
On the other hand, (and as much as I respect Brian's advise) I'd choose the .30-06, simply because I'm a curmudgeon.

There's a lot to be said for the .308, and some consider it one of America's best cartridges, and I own a couple of them, but when I'm reaching into the locker for the hunting rifles, the .30-06 gets the nod every time.
Click to expand...

I would amend that a bit and pick it for nostalgia.

On the other hand for the OP mission that is not a nostalgic stroll down history lane the 308 would be a better choice I believe.
 
I recently purchased that exact rifle...Savage Model 12 VLP DBM in 308. I installed a DNZ one piece mount with a Zeiss 3.5x10x50 scope. I have only had the rifle for a week now but have not been able to get to the range with it yet. I adjusted the trigger to minimum pull and its super smooth. Hoping to get out to put some lead through it this weekend.
 
Took the new Savage Mode 12 out to the range on Saturday for an initial test run. Got it on paper then began working on a load. Had cartridges with 150 grain bullets and IMR 4064. Loads ranged from 44.0 grains to 46.0 grains in .5 grain increments. POI did vary slightly but all 5 loads were MOA at 100 yards. Best results were with the 45.0 grain load. Now to fine tune...
 
If you don't handload, odds are that a .308 will work as well as the '06. This is particularly true for the common 22" barrels.

My own pet '06 has a #2 profile, 26" barrel. Based on the trajectory at my 500-yard range and the Sierra book's coefficients for their 150-grain bullets, I'm driving a 150-grain at about 3,100 ft/sec. And it's just under one MOA.

FWIW, a Sierra 180-grain SPBT has almost exactly the same trajectory.

The rifle, "fully dressed", weighs 9.5 pounds. I'm no studhoss, but I've done many a ten- to twelve-mile walking hunt in rugged mountain country with it.

All that said, by and large a .308 will average tighter groups than the '06 when it comes to paper punching. And the typical muzzle velocity of a 150-grain bullet is around 2,850 ft/sec or so. That's easily enough punch for whitetail to 400 yards; 500 if the shooting skill is there.

It's with larger animals and heavier bullets that the '06 has the advantage.
 
Sounds about right. An average of around 100 ft/sec advantage for the '06, which isn't worth bothering with. But as I've noted many times, most .308s come with 22" barrels or even less, and my '06 is 26".

And as has been noted many times, the advantage increases notably with 180-grain bullets.

Extreme specialization: Some three or four years ago, a couple of guys posted on THR about using 230-grain VLD bullets in '06s with 30" barrels. Claims of one MOA at 1,100 and 1,300 yards. It sounded like they knew what they were talking about. :)
 
David Tubb shot Sierra 250-gr Sierra HPMK's in his .308 Win Palma rifle back in 1988 to shoot the high score in the Palma Team tryouts. He told me those bullets left at 2150 fps from his 28 inch 1:8 twist barrel with bullets seated long for powder room in a long leade chamber. He and I shot together one day and it was neat watching those bullets arc higher than folks shooting 190's enroute to 1000 yards. Tested from his machine rest in Texas, he said it held 3/4 MOA at 1000 for at least 25 to 30 shots in a row.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top