If identical technology were used to produce a .308 and a 30-06 rifles does anyone truly believe that the .308 will be more accurate and repeatable than the 06? Is there any creedance to the statement "the .308 is inherently a more accurately designed carteridge"?IF SO WHY? roger

I think the 308 would be more accurate for two reasons.

Reason one:
I've read in either "Precision Shooters" or "The Accurate Rifle" an article by engineers at Morton Thiokol about the internal ballistics of how the powder inside of cartridges ignite and the combustion's effects. Basically, the fatter and shorter a cartridge is the more efficient and consistent it will propel a projectile. It has to do with how the cartridge case walls conduct the heat away from the cartridge and cool down from the rifle's chamber and slow down combustion.

Reason two: Magnum Effect, this is basically that a shooter will react to a heavier shooting cartridge than a lighter shooting (recoiling) cartridge. Now, if you want to make a case that you'll have a weapon of equal recoil, sound and blast between the two rifles, this may not be an issue. It is an issue in many competition where there is a weight classification for rifles, such as Benchrest Shooting.

Of course, I believe you are talking about hunting type rifles. I'm not sure a 308 Win. or 30/06 really kick all that much different, so magnum effect may not make a difference in recoil, but in noise. Everything I've heard about recoil in regular hunting rifles is referred to as apparent recoil, which is a person impression. I've know people over 6'8" that thought a 30/06 kicked too much. I know people under 5'8" that thought a 338 Win Mag was just fine.

Different people have different tolerances to recoil.

Agree. According to the benchrest boys, "short and fat is where it's at". Which explains the appearance of the 6PPC.

I'd bet my hat that if you tested a hundred factory sporters in 308 and a hundred more in 30-06, there wouldn't be any statistical difference, though.

Many coon's ages ago Gun Digest ran an article which included a Remington-produced graph of average group accuracy for their M40X target rifles, which can be had in a variety of cartridges including .308 Win and .30-'06 (I have owned them in 6X47 and .308).

The .308 Winchester rifles had a smaller group average than the '06, not a heck of a lot but definitely smaller.

The military T-65 cartridge that became the 7.62X51 and later the .308 Winchester was itself derived from the .300 Savage -- which was designed to put '06 ballistics in a shorter action.

jim

quote:

Originally posted by Noel H.:
Agree. According to the benchrest boys, "short and fat is where it's at".

Is this why the new Super Short Magnums are getting popular, like the .243 WSSM?

Hunter308

IMO, the short magnums are getting popular because there are enough hunters who think buying one will enable them to shoot the eyes out of running bucks at 700 yards, even though their entire rifle practice amounts to half a box of factory loads every August.

OTOH, I could just be grumpy because I lost my hat to HunterJim on a bet.

There is a study in the US military comparing accuracy between the 308 Wind (7.72 Nato) and the 30-06. I think it was out to 600 yards. I think it was with "non-match" ammo. I do recall the 7.62 Nato/308 was significantly more accurate. The report didn't measure MOA. I think it measured something like "mean distance from center," or something like meausuring radius, vs diameter.

Another "I think", but I seem to remember that the 7.62 was about 25% more accurate, using the accuracy basis used to screen and measure, than the 30-06.

I may be off a bit on specifics, but I'd bet a load of money on the results. The 308/7.62 was significantly more accurate than the 30-06 by the US military study.

I would like to add that what happens in a benchrest rifle and what happens in a hunting rifle is comparible to what happens in an "Indy" car vs. your Ford pickup.
I believe you would find no statistically significant difference between the two in any off the shelf rifle.
Further, the current shorter,fatter line of cartridges is marketing at its finest and the argument in favor of the new rounds is very weak at best and a load of road apples at worst.I can think of no more ridiculous rounds than the .223,.243 and .257 WSSM rounds......but I digress....

Hello the campfire:
.30 is .30. The difference may be in consistancy between shots. In my humble opinion, it depends on the weight of the bullet that you are shooting. I feel for no good reason that the .308 is better for lighter bullets as 125/150 gr. 30/06 is better up to and including 225gr. 300 mags ain the 200/250 range. This ia a matter of balance of powder capacity to bullet weight. With the proper powder, I doubt that you could the difference in any of the .30s. The individual rifle and its design would be more important that the cartrige.
Judge Sharpe

Put me in the .308 is more accurate camp. I think there are a few factors for this, one already being mentioned is the shape of the poweder colum. I also think with std rifle primers, the capacity of the .308 makes a more consistant burn, ie burning less powder will be more consistant.

Now, for a hunting rifle, the increase in accuracy is moot. Inside the effective ranges of both rounds, a more than sufficiently accurate rifle can be built.

It's only on the target range that the benefits will be seen, and it won't be a huge difference, but a bit more accuracy is the differnence between being a top shooter, and a mid pack shooter.

1965 was the first year 30-06&7.62 match were both standardized.testing was 27 10rd groups(270 shots) all measured.mean radius for 30-06 was 2.0" ,for 7.62mm it was 1.9" MR is~1/3 group size. 1965 NM 7.62mm was at that time the most accurate ever.

sorry, range was 600yds,174.5 gr BTmatch.30-06 was2663fps, 7.62 was 2546fps.

I doubt that caliber is the determining factor any way you cut it, mostly its a matter of which one has the better barrel...That is why some benchresters will go though 20 to 50 barrels before the settle on one...

I hate to disappoint you Ray but most Br shooter don't do the 20/50 barrel first off 20 barrels that about $6000 plus chambering which is about another $4000 most have one or two barrels. You need a case first then bullet,barrel and twist. The HBR match guys use the 308 case for along time mainly with 168gr match bullets then as twist got faster they when to a 125/135gr bullet. I started match shooting with a tight neck Hammond built 308 and 6HLS. When you hear all the stuff about the 308 being more inherently accurate that is true because it uses a med action and it fits more application and you have more shootetr using that round and it is a good round. Problem with the 30-06 is it's a long action round don't see any factory varmit rifles it's more of a hunting round. I would also assume you could build a pretty good match rifle using the 30-06 case. I did some match shooting when I was in the USMC in the 60's with a garand.

quote:

Originally posted by tom holland:
Problem with the 30-06 is it's a long action round don't see any factory varmit rifles it's more of a hunting round. I would also assume you could build a pretty good match rifle using the 30-06 case. I did some match shooting when I was in the USMC in the 60's with a garand.

I think you got it right ,Tom.Using varmint or tactical rifle technology and processing an 06 can be made to shoot just as good as a short necked .308. roger

I think the topic was about which cartridge was inherently more accurate in a rifle. It is extremely difficult to separate the fact that we are talking about a combination of rifle, ammunition and shooter.

Whether we are talking about Minute Of Angle (MOA) at a rifle range or Minute Of Elk (MOE) in the field is definitely important, but not so much about the inherent accuracy of a cartridge.

For all practial purposes all standard hunting cartridges are equally accurate in terms of what most every shooters can shoot. Not many of us are world class shooters. I have a rifle which will always be capable of more accuracy than I'll be able to shoot, that just precludes me of blaming the rifle, scope, or cartridge.

Tom,
with all respect, I got s news flash for you, some to these guys are serious...Dwight Scott, well known bench rest rifle builder that hunts with Saeed and I tells me different....He has many customers that will go through several dozen barrels before they settle on one, they make their living that way and the cost of barrels is just an operating expense...

As to inherent accuracy, well perhaps the .308 is more accurate than the 06, but perhaps that is because more folks use it today..the 06 won many matches in the old days...I would put more emphasis on the rifle itself than the caliber myself...If the 06 shot better then that is the one I would use...some do btw.

From what I've seen in the past, the two are very similar. Internal pressures in the .308 are greater, and can equal velocities of the bigger '06, but I don't know if you would notice the difference in accuracy in a hunting rifle, in a non-benchrest scenerio.

I'll look later, but if you go to sniper country or somthing like that it has an article that states after 308s were let into competition the zeros had to be made smaller. This was due to too many perfect scores. capt david

When a cartridge is "inherently" accurate, what exactly does this mean? I've even used the phrase and I still think I know, but are we talking that it is "theoretically" more accurate because of it's design, and thus, should produce better groups?

Example: I have my 30.06 that has been customized and it sports a nice PacNor barrel. If I had the identical rifle, but chambered in .308, what factors should I look for to determine it's "inherent" accuracy?

Does this mean that if the very best load I can achieve with my .06 is 0.4" with 4 bullets, I should be able to get less than that with the very best in the .308?

Does it mean that loads should be easier overall to achieve?

Does it mean that if I load the exact same bullet, powder (say Varget), primer, and brand name of brass, that the .308 will print better groups overall than the .06?

Sometimes I question these things because I've been to the range so many hours in my life that I've chalked up quite a bit of experience with both of these, as well as a bunch of 270's, 7mags, 300 mags both shorts and long actions.

What I have found is that it can be just as laborious for short fats as it is for standard or magnum longs.

I still don't have what I consider an excellent group with my brothers new 300 SAUM. I've printed some 1" groups but nothing to go WOW.

Same with my .308. In fact, in all cases, my 30.06 has always achieved better groups, and quicker.

How can we "dissect" this "inherency" thing? Is it all from shooter experiences? Do we rely on benchrest cases to show that the short fats are king?

I'm not sure how to tackle it. But for me, it's really never been the case. a 1/2" group is a 1/2" group. Seems to me, no matter what the cartridge, you still need to work up a good load for THAT rifle, or find factory that works.

I guess I've repeated the original question which started the post to begin with but I think I've pondered on it too long and now question it myself

Here's what a dictionary states as inherent:
: involved in the constitution or essential character of something : belonging by nature or habit

Here's theoritical:
1 a : relating to or having the character of theory : ABSTRACT b : confined to theory or speculation often in contrast to practical applications

I read the topic comment as what inherent properties exist in the 308 cartridge versus 30/06. It wasn't about whether a particular rifle, barrel, twist, bullet or powder was used.
The 308 based on its more efficient utilization of powder and it's lesser recoil would have inherently better properties that would give it a better opportunity for accuracy. Is it enough to make a difference? It doesn't matter, the question was which is inherently more accurate. Through the numerous tests by snipers, competition shooters, etc. the consensus is that the 308 is inherently more accurate.

The above are supported by the vast numbers of shooters that require accuracy that choose cartridges that have the same properties as the 308 Win. Specifically, those cartridges that are shorter and fatter. All the articles written by physicists doing tests on the internal ballistics of cartridges tend to bear out the above. If anyone here is aware of any differing articles, I'd like to know which ones so I could read them.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Tom,
with all respect, I got s news flash for you, some to these guys are serious...Dwight Scott, well known bench rest rifle builder that hunts with Saeed and I tells me different....He has many customers that will go through several dozen barrels before they settle on one, they make their living that way and the cost of barrels is just an operating expense...

As to inherent accuracy, well perhaps the .308 is more accurate than the 06, but perhaps that is because more folks use it today..the 06 won many matches in the old days...I would put more emphasis on the rifle itself than the caliber myself...If the 06 shot better then that is the one I would use...some do btw.

No Ray you don't have a New Flash for me! There are a great number of Br shooter use 3 rifles LV,HV and Rail and then you have the HBR rifles and for those shooters a dozen barrels a year is normal and D. Scott is a well known gunsmith. I think Tony Boyer has helped Shilen barrels and his gunsmith Dwight Scott alot. I still find it strange someone would have a Br rifle build for around $3,000 plus or minus then have 24 barrels chambered at a cost of $12,000 to get one barrel how do you figure that as operating expense. You still have the cost to shoot that many barrels. I wasn't there so really cann't comment on the text of what Dwight said. I will tell you one thing if I had to do 24 barrels to get one barrel for one rifle I'd be hunting up a new gunsmith. What you need to so is put that statement you said Dwight Scott made on http://www.benchrest.com and see what News Flash you will get and I'm sure Dwight will have some comments to make. Ray you can say anything here but back up what you say and here is your chance.

quote:

Originally posted by cs273:
the question was which is inherently more accurate. Through the numerous tests by snipers, competition shooters, etc. the consensus is that the 308 is inherently more accurate.

Is it not possible that the competiters and snipers were testing not the .308 alone but rifles tuned for the idiosyncrasies of the .308 such as the short neck? It received tighter neck clearance, more restrictive throating, optimum lead angle into rifling,more accurate dies to produce brass. Non of these features and many more do not fall into the inherent disign category.

The .308 came along as a military cartridge in the mid 50s. Because of its military adobtion it burst into the commercial world and enjoyed great attention promulgated by marketing to produce SALES. Modern technology produced EQUIPMENT that made this sows ear look as though it were something just marvelous.

The 30-06 was enjoying good sales so marketing attention for this 50 year old dinosaur was nil at best.It was a "boring" cartridge and got no technical resurection.

It dosn't seem to me that comparative testing of apples to oranges( 1903 to present day technology) has any sensible value.

As far as the short fat contribution to accuracy,I think the jury may still be out on that one. That is unless you believe all that marketing tells you.

Case in point; I designed and built a series of 4 wildcats based on the .308 case cut down to 41mm. That really is short and fat.The design goes back to 1958.
They should be inherently accurate ---Right? They were built with all premo stuff and put together by Elmer Spurger; probably the most accurate GS I know.They will shoot good but no better than other much longer cartridges I have or had.

Personally I think technology did a great job of overcoming the inherently inaccurate short neck of the .308 and other short fat wonders of the day. Hello? roger

This could go on forever between the 30/06 and the 308. The 308 is 30/06's little brother developed by the military to shoot specific bullets better. You could pull either rifle off the shelf and kill anything you want to. But when in doubt talk to the military snipers and find out why they use the .308.

On the fat rounds that is supposed to be so much better, I don't believe they have surpassed the old 30/06 or the .308. They may have more velocity in some cases and after spending 6 grand to build a rifle it might out shoot a regular bull barreled .308 in some cases. But I didn't see the military rushing to change to them. The fat cases are just another different item to sell a few more rifles because of a slump in rifle sales. I remember when the 270 become real popular in the 60s. You would have thought that the 30/06 had become obselete over night and the 270 was the best thing since sliced bread. But the old hunters kept on with thier old 30/06 and even use them today 45 years later. The fat cases will sell a bunch of stuff and the rifle makers will pick up some business, but don't ever think the 30/06 or the 308 will disappear because of it.

It's not that any cartridge that is shorter and fatter than any other cartridge will necessary be more accurate. It is that if there are two cartridge with like size and capacity the shorter and fatter one will tend to have more consistency in accuracy since the combustion will be more efficient. This is what the physicists have determined through theoritical and emperical testing.

In terms of snipers testing, in Vietnam most snipers used 30/06's, which were off the shelf hunting rifles pushed into service. When the Marine Corps wanted to develop a standard sniper rifle they first looked to the military newly accepted 308 as the test cartridge. Since that's what they had they tried to make the most of it.

In the last 20 years or so, the military has looked at all types of rifles/cartridges to get the best accuracy out of the shooter/rifle/ammunition combination. They stick with the 308 for anti-personal out to 600-1000 yards. The Army is switching to the 300 Win Mag, mainly because they want some more FPS speed. Of course, they use only 24 inch barrels, which could be moved up to 26 inch and the 308. For long range, a lot of specialized military units are moving to the 338 Lapua for 1000 plus yard anti-personnel and material shooting. The 50 BMG for anti-material.

I'm not saying that for us normal people there is one bit of difference between the 308 or 30/06. It's just that the 308's case lends itself to more consistency. At 1000 yards, consistency is the name of the game.

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
If identical technology were used to produce a .308 and a 30-06 rifles does anyone truly believe that the .308 will be more accurate and repeatable than the 06? Is there any creedance to the statement "the .308 is inherently a more accurately designed carteridge"?IF SO WHY? roger

The .308 is slightly more CONSISTENT that the '06, and it is due to having a lower-capacity case that is usually loaded close to or over 100% loading density (compressed loads). The primer is closer to the base of the bullet. Consequently, ignition and burning of the powder charge is more closely identical from one shot to the next.

This accuracy advantage of the .308 has been proven in long-range target shooting. But as mentioned above, in sporting rifles of equal quality, the difference is not significant - or maybe even noticeable!

quote:

Originally posted by Blob1:
This could go on forever between the 30/06 and the 308. .

Yes I think it will. Sorry to bore you blob. roger

quote:

Originally posted by Blob1:
But when in doubt talk to the military snipers and find out why they use the .308.

Those that are still using the 7.62x51 (see previous posting to identify others being used, even though that poster missed the 50BMG that's also used) do so because that's what their issued, not due to choice. One advantage (from a military point of view) to the military 308 bolt guns is that if there ammo supply is cutoff they can "borrow" rounds from the M-60 gunner (kinda hard to do with anything else, except the 50cal), not up to there accuracy standards, but more effective than using the rifle as a club.

Guys, ask yourself a question. Suppose you make your living as a competitive shooter, and you're going to have a gun built to shoot everything from 100 to 1000 yds. The competition is very good. You can afford only one gun, and you only have a choice between .308 and 30-06 - which caliber would you choose?

I don't make a living at shooting, but when I decided to buy me a sniper rifle and spend over $5000 doing it, I decided on one based upon the 308 Win. It's built to surpass the Marine Corps M40 Sniper rifle, for whatever that's worth.

I have a friend who competes in Sniper competitions and he had his rifle done in 30/06.

quote:

Originally posted by Tailgunner:

quote:

Originally posted by Blob1:
But when in doubt talk to the military snipers and find out why they use the .308.

Those that are still using the 7.62x51 (see previous posting to identify others being used, even though that poster missed the 50BMG that's also used) do so because that's what their issued, not due to choice. One advantage (from a military point of view) to the military 308 bolt guns is that if there ammo supply is cutoff they can "borrow" rounds from the M-60 gunner (kinda hard to do with anything else, except the 50cal), not up to there accuracy standards, but more effective than using the rifle as a club.

It may be true that there are military snipers who would prefer a rifle chambered for a cartridge other than the 7.62X51mm, but I'll guarantee their optimum choice would not be a .30/'06!

El D
I made no comment on which was better (personaly I feel it's 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other) only on the WHY they chose the cartridge they did. That is to say Logistics and Supply is/was the deciding factor, not superiority.

Tailgunner

It may be possible that a sniper may borrow a round of ammunition from an M240 gunner, the US military's new 7.62 General Purpose Machine Gun (GPMG), only some units still use the M-60. It would be highly doubtful they'd actually use it. The trajectory on standard ball ammunition would not give the proper trajectory for their ballistic drop compensators (BDC).

Also, the US Army and US Marine Corps forbid the use of any other ammunition in their rifles except for the M118LR, using Sierra's 175 Hollow Point Boat Tails (HPBT).

quote:

Originally posted by Tailgunner:
El D
I made no comment on which was better (personaly I feel it's 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other) only on the WHY they chose the cartridge they did. That is to say Logistics and Supply is/was the deciding factor, not superiority.

Right! As it usually is......

Are you stirrin up a pot again Rodger?

Once again I have to agree with El Deguello and commend him on another well thought out explanation.

Most of us know that a well made 06 CAN be made to shoot with a 308 or even best it due to the individuality of rifles, but for consistant performance I also give it up for the 308, and it is hard to argue with benchrest records that chamberings like the ppc's, 08's and now the 6.5 284's continue to hold and produce.

Whether or not there is something real about such designs that aid accuracy is one thing, but explaining why is quite another. When fire hits the powder and pressures begin to build there are a thousand different factors that influence the projectiles final resting place.
Personally, I do think there is something to it with the short fats and I my choice of words would be efficent, consistant combustion which also relies heavily on a well designed powder for said application. There are numerous powders on the market made specifically to give benchrest results from the 308 win, but I cant think of any such products made for the 06. How significant that may be I myself can say, just food for thought.

Personally, I can not add anything valuable to this thread, but here is a very interesting article that might:

http://www.snipercountry.com/Articles/AccuracyFacts.asp

For me it's .308 all the way!
All the best,

elwood.

quote:

Originally posted by Wstrnhuntr:
Are you stirrin up a pot again Rodger? I guess I am

Once again I have to agree with El Deguello and commend him on another well thought out explanation.

Most of us know that a well made 06 CAN be made to shoot with a 308 or even best it due to the individuality of rifles, but for consistant performance I also give it up for the 308, and it is hard to argue with benchrest records that chamberings like the ppc's, 08's and now the 6.5 284's continue to hold and produce.

Whether or not there is something real about such designs that aid accuracy is one thing, but explaining why is quite another. When fire hits the powder and pressures begin to build there are a thousand different factors that influence the projectiles final resting place.
Personally, I do think there is something to it with the short fats and I my choice of words would be efficent, consistant combustion which also relies heavily on a well designed powder for said application. There are numerous powders on the market made specifically to give benchrest results from the 308 win, but I cant think of any such products made for the 06.I think here in is part of the technology used favoring the .308 and not the 06 How significant that may be I myself can say, just food for thought.

I might add that you and El Deguello handle a discussion rather constructively This is not to say that others haven't. Matter of style I guess. roger

Elwood, that's an interesting article, and I accept the findings. The reasons - higher load density and more uniform ignition of powder - seem reasonable as well. Yet, I wonder if one loaded the '06 to the same load densities with slower burning powder, one could substantially improve '06 accuracy.

I own a '06 AI, which has a somewhat "stubbier" case architecture due to the expanded shoulder. It shoots very nice groups with full charge reloads - 1/2 MOA.

All this is of academic interest, since out in the field both have more-than-adequate accuracy. Finally, I'd like to own a 30-338, which seems to be about perfect bore for .308 caliber.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Yet, I wonder if one loaded the '06 to the same load densities with slower burning powder, one could substantially improve '06 accuracy.
All this is of academic interest, since out in the field both have more-than-adequate accuracy. .

Darn good point.

A statement like" the .308 is inherently accurate" is accepted as fact when seen in print and parroted enough; especially by the young Turks. When this thread was started it was hoped that some reasonable approach to truth and understanding would be displayed. I think the majority of posters have contributed to that end. roger