No way the mighty 30-06 can be beat?
- Thread starter Bart B.
- Start date
I don't know how many 30-06s and 308s I own, maybe a half dozen of one and 13 of the other....
But those cartridges do not do it for me.
I prefer the 7mmRemMag.
140 gr 3400 fps
There are trade offs.
The gun can only be so heavy.... ~10 pounds.
A 50BMG might be better if the limit were 40 pounds.
A 223 might be better if the limit were 5 pounds.
But what a man can carry, 10 pounds, I think the 7mmRM is best.
And I handload 64 different cartridges.
But those cartridges do not do it for me.
I prefer the 7mmRemMag.
140 gr 3400 fps
There are trade offs.
The gun can only be so heavy.... ~10 pounds.
A 50BMG might be better if the limit were 40 pounds.
A 223 might be better if the limit were 5 pounds.
But what a man can carry, 10 pounds, I think the 7mmRM is best.
And I handload 64 different cartridges.
Pathfinder45
New member
Well, FWIW, my younger brother has shot the 30-'06 quite a bit over the chronograph with a lot of handloaded ammo. He was able to work up to 3,000fps with 180 grain bullets and good case life. I think that's overly optimistic to expect to get there with the average rifle, but it worked for him with that particular rifle. I expect the pressures were in magnum-rifle territory..... I probably would have quit at 2,800.
The way I look at it, the 308 a slight increase over the 300 Savage, which itself is a modest but notable increase over the 30-30. None of them are equal to the 30-'06 in power. There are perhaps several reasons that make the 308 a better choice for a long-range, competitive target rifle. But that rifle is not a hunting rifle. Long range target shooting is slightly interesting, but not my discipline. To me, long range means 300 to 500 yards, and that's further than most hunters are competent to take a shot at, let's say, a deer. For this purpose, I prefer a 270 Winchester but a 30-'06 would be my second choice. For hunting around in steep, timber covered woods; I like a 30-30 carbine better.
esthetically, I have no fondness for calibers that have only been around since the last half of the previous century. If I was a long range competitor, I would have a greater appreciation for the 308. In an appropriate rifle, it's certainly an adequate deer cartridge. It just doesn't charm me. Life's too short for having a rifle you don't really, really, like, when you could just as well have one you do like a lot.
The way I look at it, the 308 a slight increase over the 300 Savage, which itself is a modest but notable increase over the 30-30. None of them are equal to the 30-'06 in power. There are perhaps several reasons that make the 308 a better choice for a long-range, competitive target rifle. But that rifle is not a hunting rifle. Long range target shooting is slightly interesting, but not my discipline. To me, long range means 300 to 500 yards, and that's further than most hunters are competent to take a shot at, let's say, a deer. For this purpose, I prefer a 270 Winchester but a 30-'06 would be my second choice. For hunting around in steep, timber covered woods; I like a 30-30 carbine better.
esthetically, I have no fondness for calibers that have only been around since the last half of the previous century. If I was a long range competitor, I would have a greater appreciation for the 308. In an appropriate rifle, it's certainly an adequate deer cartridge. It just doesn't charm me. Life's too short for having a rifle you don't really, really, like, when you could just as well have one you do like a lot.
You can push the 06 and 308s beyond limits, sure but why.
I never found the need, you certainly wont gain anything in the accuracy department.
I've found the most accurate 308s in my M1A to be just fast enough to reliably work the action. That being (168-175s) about 2500 fps.
Same with the '06 on to about 2600 fps.
The 308 is more accurate, that's a given. I believe but can't prove, it to be because the case is smaller and the powder to get the above loads fills the case more then that of the '06. Again that's just a guess on my part.
I'll stick to the 308 for target shooting in my M1A and Model 70 Match rifle because it's more accurate.
I'll stick to the '06 in my Garand and other US vintage rifles because that's what they are suppose to shoot.
I'll stick to the '06 in my Pre 64 Winchester for hunting because the Pre 64 is suppose to be a 30-06. Just like its suppose to have a Weaver 4x scope.
If I want a faster 3o cal, I have a couple 300 WM's.
In my nearly 40 years of shooting High Power, and other shooting I've discovered velocity doesn't mean accuracy.
Yes a 30 cal bullet going 3000 fps bucks the wind better then the same bullet going 2500 fps, but my rifles came with little knobs to adjust for the wind.
I do know that less powder means less pressure and less recoil. Less recoil means less fatigue which means I can shoot relaxed. Being relaxed means higher scores.
I never found the need, you certainly wont gain anything in the accuracy department.
I've found the most accurate 308s in my M1A to be just fast enough to reliably work the action. That being (168-175s) about 2500 fps.
Same with the '06 on to about 2600 fps.
The 308 is more accurate, that's a given. I believe but can't prove, it to be because the case is smaller and the powder to get the above loads fills the case more then that of the '06. Again that's just a guess on my part.
I'll stick to the 308 for target shooting in my M1A and Model 70 Match rifle because it's more accurate.
I'll stick to the '06 in my Garand and other US vintage rifles because that's what they are suppose to shoot.
I'll stick to the '06 in my Pre 64 Winchester for hunting because the Pre 64 is suppose to be a 30-06. Just like its suppose to have a Weaver 4x scope.
If I want a faster 3o cal, I have a couple 300 WM's.
In my nearly 40 years of shooting High Power, and other shooting I've discovered velocity doesn't mean accuracy.
Yes a 30 cal bullet going 3000 fps bucks the wind better then the same bullet going 2500 fps, but my rifles came with little knobs to adjust for the wind.
I do know that less powder means less pressure and less recoil. Less recoil means less fatigue which means I can shoot relaxed. Being relaxed means higher scores.
Ruger480:
Better jacket material available these days as enabled smaller caliber bullets to be longer and heavier with the same accuracy levels as shorter, lighter ones. Good examples are with bullets used in long range matches. It wasn’t until the late 1980's that 28 caliber, long and heavy match bullets shot as accurate as the 30 caliber ones. That was followed a few years later when 26 caliber ones came out, then later 24 caliber ones. Lighter bullets mean less bore axis displacement variables while they go through the barrel; one big reason why 24 caliber bullets are popular in 1000-yard bench rest matches. But their average accuracy down range is not much better than larger caliber ones. They all shoot somewhere under 6 inches at 1000 yards.
Many cut rifled barrels are made on Pratt & Whitney riflers made before or during the 1940's and some in use today are over 100 years old that still make very accurate barrels. Button rifling is still made the same way; only the tools used to push or pull the button to swage the grooves in the bore has changed. They’re still lapped the same way and measured to .0001" tolerances the same way. Hammer forged barrels are not popular with accuracy afficianados. There are some old timers who think nothing today equals the center fire Hart or rimfire McMillan button rifled barrels made until about 1990.
I don’t think so. Sierra gets the same accuracy with their bullets in today’s barrels as they did back in the 1960's in barrels made then.. Benchrest groups are still under 2/10th MOA at 100, 3/10ths at 200, 4/10ths at 300, 5/10ths at 600 and 6/10ths at 1000. The average group sizes are smaller and those tiny record ones are the result of all the rifle and ammo variables being at zero or cancelling each other out. There’s no way to tell which one made them so tiny, but the odds are in favor of cancelling them out. Recently, the average benchrest group sizes got smaller when they quit neck sizing their fired cases and properly full length sized them. That made their largest groups somewhat smaller; increased the odds of getting a very tiny one that sets a record.
Better jacket material available these days as enabled smaller caliber bullets to be longer and heavier with the same accuracy levels as shorter, lighter ones. Good examples are with bullets used in long range matches. It wasn’t until the late 1980's that 28 caliber, long and heavy match bullets shot as accurate as the 30 caliber ones. That was followed a few years later when 26 caliber ones came out, then later 24 caliber ones. Lighter bullets mean less bore axis displacement variables while they go through the barrel; one big reason why 24 caliber bullets are popular in 1000-yard bench rest matches. But their average accuracy down range is not much better than larger caliber ones. They all shoot somewhere under 6 inches at 1000 yards.
Many cut rifled barrels are made on Pratt & Whitney riflers made before or during the 1940's and some in use today are over 100 years old that still make very accurate barrels. Button rifling is still made the same way; only the tools used to push or pull the button to swage the grooves in the bore has changed. They’re still lapped the same way and measured to .0001" tolerances the same way. Hammer forged barrels are not popular with accuracy afficianados. There are some old timers who think nothing today equals the center fire Hart or rimfire McMillan button rifled barrels made until about 1990.
tahunua001
New member
I have to agree with bart. there has been little change in production practices. what the major difference between now and 50 years ago is that DIY has gotten a lot easier. 50 years ago you had to have a laminate stock custom built per your rifle, and then have a gunsmith fit it properly and then your only option for a new trigger was Canjar, which IIRC was also a gunsmith only modification. nowadays there's timney, badger ordnance, geisselle and a dozen other companies that make darned good triggers you can drop in and adjust yourself and you have a half dozen stock companies that make stocks which you still end up having to either fit yourself or have a gunsmith fit for you.
there has also been a large advancement in optics. a 1960s scope has a hard time living up to the standards set by any of the reputable makers of today. the bullets are still made to the same standards today and infact that is one area where quality has dropped off due to ammo shortages and increased production and such. so by barts perspective, the barrels have changed little and you will see no difference while shooting from a vice. however if you are shooting freehand, a new rifle with all the bells and whistles of today will likely be easier to shoot accurately than a 50 year old rifle, but has nothing to do with the barrel construction.
there has also been a large advancement in optics. a 1960s scope has a hard time living up to the standards set by any of the reputable makers of today. the bullets are still made to the same standards today and infact that is one area where quality has dropped off due to ammo shortages and increased production and such. so by barts perspective, the barrels have changed little and you will see no difference while shooting from a vice. however if you are shooting freehand, a new rifle with all the bells and whistles of today will likely be easier to shoot accurately than a 50 year old rifle, but has nothing to do with the barrel construction.
Old roper:
The NRA's first rule for Palma rifle cartridge was made in the late 1980's stating either the .308 Win or .30-06 chambered rifles were allowed. Prior to that, any cartridge whose caliber was under 35 could be used, but the .308 was most common and popular after 1963. That was done so people owning only a Garand for high power competition could compete in Palma matches. And to limit the caliber to 30 to parallel what other country's rules allowed. I know that because I wrote that rule the High Power Committee accepted. And there were a few who tried the .30-06 in bolt action match riles but they never cut the mustard accuracy wise. People who knew the .308 was more accurate than the .30-06 didn't make any mad rush to using it for Palma rifles. It's superiority for accuracy was already known. If the .30-06 really was superior, there would have been .30-06 commercial match ammo made for it.
That rule was later changed to what exists today to comply with other country's Palma rifle rules for international competition allowing only the .308 Win/7.62 NATO round:
People shooting the 22 caliber round had dismal performance compared to the .308; the reason the US Army got the NRA to allow .308 Win. chambered AR10's to compete against AR15's and M16's in service rifle matches.
No USA NRA Palma rifle rule has ever allowed any caliber; that includes anything up to 49 caliber; at least for small arms.
Sorry, roper, I think you've got your facts mixed up again. When was the USA NRA Palma rifle rule made that allowed any caliber; that's anything up to 49 for small arms? 35 caliber's been the NRA limit for competition for decades.
The NRA's first rule for Palma rifle cartridge was made in the late 1980's stating either the .308 Win or .30-06 chambered rifles were allowed. Prior to that, any cartridge whose caliber was under 35 could be used, but the .308 was most common and popular after 1963. That was done so people owning only a Garand for high power competition could compete in Palma matches. And to limit the caliber to 30 to parallel what other country's rules allowed. I know that because I wrote that rule the High Power Committee accepted. And there were a few who tried the .30-06 in bolt action match riles but they never cut the mustard accuracy wise. People who knew the .308 was more accurate than the .30-06 didn't make any mad rush to using it for Palma rifles. It's superiority for accuracy was already known. If the .30-06 really was superior, there would have been .30-06 commercial match ammo made for it.
That rule was later changed to what exists today to comply with other country's Palma rifle rules for international competition allowing only the .308 Win/7.62 NATO round:
People shooting the 22 caliber round had dismal performance compared to the .308; the reason the US Army got the NRA to allow .308 Win. chambered AR10's to compete against AR15's and M16's in service rifle matches.
No USA NRA Palma rifle rule has ever allowed any caliber; that includes anything up to 49 caliber; at least for small arms.
Last edited:
This what I'm posting about
http://www.6mmbr.com/gunweek088.html
http://www.accurateshooter.com/featured/f-open-champ-kenny-adams-7mm-rsaum/
I may have wrong class but still why didn't they pick 308 to shoot with it's long history of winning. Only time 308 wins is against another 308.
http://www.6mmbr.com/gunweek088.html
http://www.accurateshooter.com/featured/f-open-champ-kenny-adams-7mm-rsaum/
I may have wrong class but still why didn't they pick 308 to shoot with it's long history of winning. Only time 308 wins is against another 308.
Last edited:
I started out comparing the .30-06 to the .308.
Old Roper, thanks for the clarification in your links. I commented on 24 caliber rifles and ammo earlier in my post #47; maybe you overlooked that.
But to date, I don't think any cartridge has bettered that 1971 performance of a Hart barreled Win 70 action in a wood stock putting several 10-shot groups at 600 yards inside 1.5 inches and a couple down in the .7 inch range; average a bit over an inch. Then it put 40 shots well inside 2 inches. All from .308 Win cases. That was just an ammo and rifle test. But I think the rifle and its ammo thought it was in a benchrest match.
Old Roper, thanks for the clarification in your links. I commented on 24 caliber rifles and ammo earlier in my post #47; maybe you overlooked that.
But to date, I don't think any cartridge has bettered that 1971 performance of a Hart barreled Win 70 action in a wood stock putting several 10-shot groups at 600 yards inside 1.5 inches and a couple down in the .7 inch range; average a bit over an inch. Then it put 40 shots well inside 2 inches. All from .308 Win cases. That was just an ammo and rifle test. But I think the rifle and its ammo thought it was in a benchrest match.
Last edited:
The NRA High Power Rifle Committee was convinced to reduce the size of their short and midrange targets in 1966 based on the better accuracy of the .308 over the .30-06. Too many unbreakable ties came about and the smaller scoring rings separated the smaller groups on paper more realistically for scores. In the early 1970's the long range target's scoring rings were reduced for the same reason.
99% of all competitors though it was a good idea.
99% of all competitors though it was a good idea.
The Verminator
Moderator
I'll admit that for those who are heavily into target shooting, the .308 is a better choice.
For all the rest of us in the hunting world, the old '06 totally RULES and the .308 is just a weak sister.....or cousin......or something.
For all the rest of us in the hunting world, the old '06 totally RULES and the .308 is just a weak sister.....or cousin......or something.
The Verminator
Moderator
Yes, I think at that time EVERYBODY'S groups were shrinking due to a variety of reasons.
To credit the .308 alone for the change is a bit of a stretch.
To credit the .308 alone for the change is a bit of a stretch.
When the top ranked high power folks did nothing but put in an equal quality .308 barrel, replace the magazine parts and bolt stop, their .308 rifles shot more accurate than with .30-06 parts. No other changes were made. That happened overnight. The best .30-06 match rifles in the early '60's put a few dozen shots from accuracy cradles into 5 to 6 inches at 600 yards. .308 barrels in the same rifle did that into 3 to 4 inches.
Same thing with Garands after having a 7.62 barrel installed with new hand guards epoxied to it and sometimes a new bolt for correct headspacing. Another overnight job but not quite that accuracy level.
Same thing with Garands after having a 7.62 barrel installed with new hand guards epoxied to it and sometimes a new bolt for correct headspacing. Another overnight job but not quite that accuracy level.
Last edited: