What makes the 30-06 less accurate then the 308 or any other round for that matter .

Status
Not open for further replies.
in case someone else has not mentioned it yet, I noticed while hand loading both (.308, 30-06), it was much easier to find a load that would fill the .308 case than it was to find one that fill the 30-06 case to 100% loading density. Just suggesting that as a possible factor.
Being a rifle bullet caster and member of the Cast Lead Bullet Association for many years, I took note that many of the top cast lead bullet rifle competitors would choose the smaller capacity cases for their .30 caliber, production class, shooting. For instance, 30-30's in single shots (Ruger #3), or the rare Winchester 52', .308's rather than 30-06's. Even 7.62x39 in a Ruger M77.
 
Metal God, at least some of, or most of, the perceived recoil is due to "ejecta", that is, the stuff blown out the muzzle of the rifle, including the bullet, hot gases, and unburnt powder etc.

Years ago when shooting IPSC, folks wanted to shoot the 40S&W with heavier bullets to "make major" with a fast burning powder, as it was considered to generate less recoil, thus less muzzle flip, and quicker split times. I never really looked any deeper into this than what I read. So I used heavier bullets, and faster powders.

I think perhaps what you have discovered in your search to calculate recoil is a numerical expression of this same phenomenon, when comparing faster to slower burning powders in the same cartridge.
 
Until the bullet leaves the muzzle, the weight of the compressed gas equals the weight of the unburned powder. That mass gets accelerated just as does the bullet.

Most of my '06 loads have been with 3031 or 4064, so a max load is around 52 grains. I used 54 grains of H414 with a very accurate 180-grain load. So, a bit of uniformity as to how full the case is.

In Metal god's example, 190 + 57.5 = 247.5. Times 2,500 = 618,750

190 + 44.3 = 234.3. Times 2,500 = 585,750

618,750 divided by 585,750 = 1.056, or just under six percent more recoil with the heavier charge. (Since the velocities are the same, the same percentage results from just using the total weights that are accelerated.)
 
There are two primary powder related factors in recoil. The one is powder weight, which is obvious, the other relates to burn speed... muzzle pressure. The bullet's exit of the barrel essentially "uncorks" a very, very high-pressure bottle. You have a rocket in your hands, at that moment. The higher the pressure is at the instant that the barrel is "uncorked", the higher the resultant "rocket effect". The two effects work together. A faster powder will reach max pressure at a lower charge weight. It burns faster and will have a lower muzzle pressure. So, lower pressure AND lower weight.... less recoil. The rocket effect percentage of recoil can be very significant. As much as 1/3rd, even 1/2, of total recoil.
 
I can't believe my calc does not calculate correctly or at least they way I think it should . I feel a little dumb right now . Here's how I calculated the numbers . 190+57.5 x 2500 . I never noticed it was not adding the 190 and 57.5 together then x-ing the total by 2500 .I can continuously add and subtract numbers till I'm blue in the face and it tracks what I'm doing just fine . As soon as I throw in a Xs it only uses the last number entered to Xs by the next number added . oops :(

Maybe that explains why all my bullets impact the ground about 100yds in front of the target .

LOL just kidding :D If you can't laugh at your self , something ,something , etc etc :)
 
"If you can't laugh at your self..."

I've always told folks that my wrinkles come from grinnin'. Now you know why. :D
 
I can't believe my calc does not calculate correctly or at least they way I think it should . I feel a little dumb right now . Here's how I calculated the numbers . 190+57.5 x 2500 . I never noticed it was not adding the 190 and 57.5 together then x-ing the total by 2500 .I can continuously add and subtract numbers till I'm blue in the face and it tracks what I'm doing just fine . As soon as I throw in a Xs it only uses the last number entered to Xs by the next number added . oops
Click to expand...

In mathematical formula, multiplication and division is done before addition or subtraction, unless prioity is designated by parenthesis. Most scientific calculators follow that protocol.
You should have entered (190+57.5) X 2500 instead of 190+57.5 X 2500
Also, functions have priority over multiplication and division.
A x B^2 gives a different answer than (A x B)^2
 
Interesting thread...
Some of the calcs made my head hurt, so I didn't take the time to try to follow all the science.

But seems that one point missed (at least I didn't see it) is a simple one. Larger case capacity, means the .06 can push heavier, high BC bullets than the .308- or the same, faster...just like the .300 WM

So the "plus" for added case capacity, doesn't offset the "downside" of the shoulder/case design as far as ability to put the round on target at long range?
 
I wonder why not many have mentioned ammo. A lot depends on the ammo too, like the kid of brass you use, the primer type, the positioning of the bullet in the case. Why 308 is better than 30-06 is pure economic. More 308s built now than 30-06 so 308 has lots of production hours tweaks, man efforts behind them. 308 is also a bigger community than the 30-06.
 
I wonder why not many have mentioned ammo. A lot depends on the ammo too, like the kid of brass you use, the primer type, the positioning of the bullet in the case.
Click to expand...

This thread was brought by me out of another thread most of us were in . I think we all understood that the ammo issue was not an issue cus we surrendered the thought that both cartridges were loaded to the best they could be . This was strictly about accuracy of the caliber and not the components that make it accurate .

one point missed (at least I didn't see it) is a simple one. Larger case capacity, means the .06 can push heavier, high BC bullets than the .308- or the same, faster...just like the .300 WM

So the "plus" for added case capacity, doesn't offset the "downside" of the shoulder/case design as far as ability to put the round on target at long range?
Click to expand...

Same answer as above really . This was never about the capability of a round , Meaning knock down power , energy transfer and what not . That was not part of the debate but the 300 WM and the 30-06 comparisons is one of the reasons I started the thread . I wanted to know why guys like to use the 300 WM for long rang shooting and not so much with the 30-06.
 
Last edited:
I thought that the reason a .30-06 could shoot the heavier bullets was because most .30-06 barrels have a 1 turn in 10 inches rifling pitch whereas the most common rifling pitch for rifles chambered for .308 was 1 turn in 12 inches, though I'm sure custom barrels can be had in any rifling pitch for either caliber.
 
Both cartridges can shoot bullet weights from 90 to 250 grains. And both have done so. More 200 to 250 grainers have probably been shot from the .308 in competition than any discipline from a .30-06. Typical muzzle velocity from the .308's about 100 to 150 fps less than the .30-06, too.

Note the .30-06's standard 1:10 twist makes their bullets spin a lot faster than the 1:12 standard twist does from a .308. Harry Pope (famous barrel maker a century ago) knew a 1:10 twist was too fast for best accuracy with the .30-06; he made them with a 1:12 twist for the US Palma Team. A given bullet from a .308 spins much slower from a 1:12 twist than from a .30-06 with a 1:10 twist.

The ultimate 30 caliber cartridge for accuracy at ranges up to 300 yards when shooting for score:

http://www.6mmbr.com/30BR.html

As to why guys like to use the 300 WM for long rang shooting and not so much with the 30-06 started back in 1935 when a .300 H&H set a new 1000-yard prone record. Belted magnums have more consistant/uniform primer ignition as they headspace on their belts in properly chambered rifles. Even the later 30 caliber magnums with much sharper shoulder angles headspacing on their shoulders shot more accurate than the .30-06. In the late '50's and early '60's, the best built 30 caliber belted magnums would shoot inside 6 to 7 inches at 1000 yards. The .30-06 round with the best handloads using the best bullets in the best rifles would do no better than 10 to 12 inches at 1000. While recoil during barrel time is more with the magnums than a .30-06, the better wind bucking ability of heavy bullets leaving faster makes a difference at the longest ranges.
 
Last edited:
Its not...

What makes the 30-06 less accurate then the 308 or any other round for that matter .
Click to expand...

Short answer, its not.

Not for any practical field application, anyway. Its a question of the individual rifle, and shooter, not .30-06 vs .308 or any other round.

Now, there is a lot of discussion, technical and otherwise about how the shorter rounds are more "inherently accurate" and shorter actions are "stiffer", etc.

And they are real things. However, "inherent accuracy" mattes when you are talking about large numbers of rifles, or when tiny degrees of improvement make a significant difference (such as benchrest shooting).

Take any two basic sporters, one in 06 and one in any other .30 cal and you will find that one rifle may "outshoot" the other. The difference may be tiny, or it may be a fair amount. Either way it is the rifle, ammo, and shooter that make the package, not JUST the caliber the rifle is chambered in.

A .002" difference in group size might be what wins the match, or 3" smaller group at 1000 yds might be the difference. But in the game fields, that tiny degree of improvement is normally meaningless to both the game, and the shooter.

If you have a good shooting 06, you have a fine rifle. Don't be mislead by old records, as more than just the cartridges were involved. Rifle technology has improved considerably since then, as well as new cartridges.

45 years ago, a rifle (sporter) that would shoot 1MOA was a gem to be treasured. Today (at least if you believe what you hear on the internet) rifles that shoot 1MOA are common, and nothing special, or so it seems. Rifles shooting half that (or less) are apparently not rare at all these days...
 
44 Amp claims:
Its a question of the individual rifle, and shooter, not .30-06 vs .308 or any other round.
Click to expand...
Leave the rifle out unless they're identical in every way except for the chamber's dimensions. Otherwise, your comparing more than one thing and that's guaranteed to skew the results. When comparing two systems' performance with something different in them, make sure what's different is only one thing; in this case the cartridge/chamber part.

And nowhere was the shooter part of the comparison, so leave the shooter out, too.

The issue's not "who" nor "what rifle" shoots most accurate, just what each of two cartridges do. It is plainly .30-06 rounds versus .308 rounds.
 
Last edited:
If all you are interested in is what the cartridges themselves will do versus each other, then get the two most identical barrels you can (other than the chamberings), put them in a universal receiver, and feed them the most carefully crafted ammo you can make.

Do that, and I think you will find basically identical results within the tolerances of the barrels and ammo used. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Real world accuracy involves all the variables, so telling someone that round A is more accurate than round B, as a blanket statement, doesn't even begin to consider any of the variables.

Some combinations of gun and ammo design, manufacturing quality, and tolerances are more accurate than others. No question. But believing that this one will outshoot that one, just because its a.308 and that one is an 06 just doesn't make sense to me.
 
Fun to read all of this.

This thread has been very interesting to read.
Thank you to all that have participated.

My brother is the rifle guru of the family. He likes his 220 Swift for ground hogs. He has .30-06's a plenty and 300 WinMags too. He loads for his son's .308 and shoots it as well.

My father gave me a Browning BAR .30-06 for my birthday a few years ago. It was bought used by a cousin, so no idea how many rounds through it. If I recall correctly it was made in 1994.

I will state the only advantage I have seen of having a rifle chambered in .30-06 instead of .308. I can find ammo! :D

Practical accuracy, the accuracy of in field hunting use, we can't tell the difference in any of the .30 calibers.

Now, talking about recoil... let me say this:

My .30-06 will knock the snot out of you. :eek:

I shot it 30 times one afternoon and remembered each shot for the next week every time I moved my right shoulder. No, I do not have any butt pad on it. :eek:

My brother usually shoots bolt actions for the known reasons of consistency. When he was helping me sight in the BAR with a new scope he commented how nice the rifle was. He had put in two off the shelf Hornady Superformance cartridges (150 grain) and one of his 110 grain hand loads that he had made specifically for hunting antelope. After he fired all three and we walked out to the target 100 yards away he was pleased to see a little Mickey Mouse pattern. "That's great, a rifle that isn't too sensitive to loads is a lucky find". He also commented, "That Superformance load kicks worse than my 300 WinMag, you need to get a butt pad."

My cousins shoot .243, and have never failed to take an Elk each year, and they drop them on the spot, with good shot placement. Point is, shoot what you like and the range of cartridges is quite large for hunting Elk down to Antelope.

I personally believe that anything that improves "placing" the cartridge in the chamber the same way every time, minimizing wiggle room, avoiding things that would alter the cartridge (like moving the bullet back) would be a good thing for precision.

Next, I believe anything that promotes consistency in the ignition would be good as well. If case shape helps, then case shape must be considered an important factor.

If there is a sweet spot in time and distance for when the powder is burned relative to the position of the bullet in the barrel then it has to be considered.

As this is a multivariate problem it is clear to me why so much work, study, and experimentation is done and why competing would be so very addicting to the inner engineer in all of us.

As for practical accuracy for hunting get a rifle you can afford in a cartridge that you can afford to shoot and actually find some ammo in that cartridge! :D

I don't know why I just typed all of that in, I don't think I added anything to the discussion, but it has been so fun to read I wanted to participate.
 
44Amp says:
If all you are interested in is what the cartridges themselves will do versus each other, then get the two most identical barrels you can (other than the chamberings), put them in a universal receiver, and feed them the most carefully crafted ammo you can make.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what happened in the early 1960's. (I've mentioned this before)

The top high power match rifle competitors used the same quality Hart and Obermeyer barrels their .30-06 rifles had, same bullets and primers that produced such good results, but chambered them with a .308 Win. reamer. In all other respects, the rifles were the same.

Those .308 Win. chambered barrels shot 30% to 40% better than the .30-06 ones did.

Sierra Bullets' test barrels in their rail guns used to test bullets' accuracy with barrels chambered for the .308 shot more accurate than the ones for the .30-06.

Did anyone notice I mentioned that the scores shot with the .308 soon broke all the records held by the .30-06? And that the NRA had to make the target scoring rings smaller 'cause too many unbreakable ties shot with the .308 were at hand.

Universal receivers, per se, are fixed breech mechanisms used with precision test barrels for pressure and velocity testing only. They are not used for accuracy evaluation as the pressure measuring parts are unique to them and not part of standard firearms. There's different types available Here's a picture of one:
http://www.newlenoxordnance.com/universal-receiver--barrels.html
 
Last edited:
I reload, shoot and hunt with both, truth be told if there ever was any difference in inherent accuracy you would have to be shooting really long range to notice. My 308 holds 1/2" with 150gr BTSP with Varget and my 30-06 holds 1/2" with RL19 and 150gr Accutips. To me as a hunter accuracy is a wash. Interestingly if there ever was such a thing as an inherently accurate cartridge it is neither the 308 or 30-06, my 6.5x55 is so darn accurate I have a hard time finding anything it does not shoot REALLY well, and it is older then the 30-06 even the 30-30!
 
Kachok, there's many a .30-06 and .308 that'll hold 1/2 inch (at 100 yards, if that's the range you're using). Down in the sub 1/4 inch range at 100 yards is where the differences exist.

Regarding the 6.5x55, it was a favorite for 300 meter biathlon and free rifle competition around the world. Dr. Henry Cross, former US International Rifle Team manager told me some years ago that the 6.5 Swede was a favorite of the US Olympic Team, but the .308 Win. easily outperformed it as it quickly won the gold medals in the late 1950's.
 
I have a couple friends who shoot 1,000yd F-Class with 6.5x55s, they report better results with the old Swede then with their 30 calibers so I think it is fair to say that it is still a highly competitive cartridge, the tightest groups I have ever shot have all been behind my 6.5x55 it shoots remarkably well and it is NOT a heavy barrel match gun, nor have I ever shot a "match" bullet through it. RL22 and 140gr bullets work remarkably well together, as does RL19 and 129gr. A 6.25lbs gun shooting one hole groups at 100 I call that a helluva hunting rifle, I am often tempted to put a higher powered scope on it and see what it would do out to 600yd.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top