Your choice, 7mm-08 or.308? and why?

B

bergie

New member
Subject line about says it all. Is there any real advantage to the necked-down offspring? Looking at a couple of books, it appears that they will both push bullets of about the same weight to about the same speed, ex. 150gr. Partition is available in both, both are maxed out around 2800fps (.308 can be pushed slightly higher). Both have similar levels of energy (but when launched at the same speed, the 7 seems to hang onto it a little better).

What do you experts have to say? Let's hear it guys!
bergie
 
there's not a thing wrong with a 7-08 compared to the .308. my friend shoots the 7-08 i shoot the .308, he must reload or buy new. i reload but, i shoot a lot of hurtenburger from austria and he can't, and that's the only thing bad about a 7-08 no surplus as to .308.
 
I like the 7-08 better because of higer SD but the 308 is availible everywhere.

I was thinking of getting a 7-08 as a non military cartridge because I hope to get to several places in S. America which tend to prohibit military calibers.

But they came out with the 260 which is even better IMO. I could live with just 260/6.5's and 338's

YMMV
 
I'd give a hunk of my backside for a SIG R93 in a SAAMI minimum chamber 7-'08. It may be the perfect 7mm cartridge, considering all the possible end uses of a rifle cartridge.

A friend of mind sent a 700V in 7-08 off to a place in Tehas to get the barrel set back and rechambered with a tight neck. Now that's a shooter! BUT, if he had it to do over again, he would forego the tight neck and just go with a SAMMI min chamber.

7mm-'08 is a fantastic cartridge.

For years, the 7mm bullet was considered the perfect caliber for a personal weapon (find Krupp and DuPont ballistic research in library). It may be, but if it's not, then it is probably the 6.5mm or 6mm. Right in there (6mm - 7mm) is where air molecules and air mass for external ballistics, range of different bullet masses available, all the available powders and materials technology for barrels (pressure chambers) all comes together.

Of course, all this is without regard to the practical, economic limitations of whether a cartridge is available in a commercial loading. But then, if you're not reloading, you're limiting yourself in ways you'll never know, IMHO.



[This message has been edited by sensop (edited May 20, 2000).]
 
For me? .308, no question about it. About the heaviest bullet you can use in the 7-08 is 175 gr. The .308 can use 200 gr. bullets, and I have good loads with 220 gr. bullets as well. I worked those up to see what the potentential was, should I have to carry a .308 in bear country.
I would also think that in back country areas, what few general stores around would have some form of .308 ammo, while 7-08 just might be conspicuous (sp) by it's absence.
For game up to elk size? I would not feel handicapped by either, provided I could load my own ammo for the trip.
Paul B.
 
Theres no comparison really The 308 or at least mine out shoots any 7-08 to my knowledge.Im shooting 150gr combined tech. failsafe bullets on top of 50 gr of varget. No pressure signs in my rifle but it travels at 3100 fps. Thats crazy for a 308. but that bad boy dropped 2 mule deer in fall of 99 both one shot .One I hit at 375 yards dropped in itd tracks.But besides being able to find good ammo just about wherever you go for a good price you also have a better bullet selection like Paul said so Id get the 308 But thats only my opinion based on my experience Happy Hunting
 
the .308 has the most vesatility from bullets ranging from 110 to 180 gr.thats the reason i have 5 .308 rifles.
 
An article written by Finn Aagaard, just now appearing in this month's (June) issue of "Handloader", makes a good case for the original 308.
His writing is always a good read, even if you have another opinion.
Was the recent report on this board of his passing true? The magazine makes no mention of it, even though he is/was one of the field editors.
 
Herodatus. Yes, it is true. It was comfirmed in Jeff Cooper's Commentaries shortly after I heard it on the web. it's too bad. He seemed to be an honest writer that was not full of the bull. Besides that, he was a damn good writer.
Paul B.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top