My further thought is, you'll never see any meaningful test to conclusively proove the accuracy superiority of the .308 over the 30-06. There is however ancedotal proof. The fact that the .308 has been a dominent choice in the target shooting world isn't just follow the leader. There are always guys in competitive sports that are looking for an edge, and if the 30-06 had an edge over the .308 then guess which chambering would be showing up on the firing line, and in the winners circle?

Assuming shooters of equal ability, the difference between winning and not is very slim, and every edge to gain performance will be taken by the top comptetitors.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
My further thought is, you'll never see any meaningful test to conclusively proove the accuracy superiority of the .308 over the 30-06. There is however ancedotal proof. The fact that the .308 has been a dominent choice in the target shooting world isn't just follow the leader. There are always guys in competitive sports that are looking for an edge, and if the 30-06 had an edge over the .308 then guess which chambering would be showing up on the firing line, and in the winners circle?

Assuming shooters of equal ability, the difference between winning and not is very slim, and every edge to gain performance will be taken by the top comptetitors.

Today there is a slight edge in favor for the .308 but it has NOTHING to do with superior inherent accuracy .The accuracy came form technical devoleopment given the .308 and not the 30-06. Just the shorter neck of the .308 alone makes it as a stand on its own design inferior. Some smart technical people have worked around this type design accuracy defect and made rifles ,chambers , throats and yatada yatada to compensate for the flaw and now rifles are made in the .308 that really work well. That type of modern devotion was NEVER given to the 30-06. I'm enjoying this thread . It certainly has put a new spin on my understanding of individual perception of evidence and cause and effect relationship. roger

So what basis do you have for stating that short necks are inferior? It seems to be a mantra of many, with no imperical proof that it is true

quote:

That type of modern devotion was NEVER given to the 30-06. I'm enjoying this thread . It certainly has put a new spin on my understanding of individual perception of evidence and cause and effect relationship. roger

Maybe so, but if you looked at the amount of time, effort and money put into the old '06 from 1906 well into the early 50's, you might think otherwise. A good starting place for such a study would be Hatcher's Notebook....

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
So what basis do you have for stating that short necks are inferior? It seems to be a mantra of many, with no imperical proof that it is true

Agreed! Just look at the .243 Win. vs the 6mm Rem.!

quote:

Originally posted by El Deguello:

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
So what basis do you have for stating that short necks are inferior? It seems to be a mantra of many, with no imperical proof that it is true

Agreed! Just look at the .243 Win. vs the 6mm Rem.!

In an effort to be objective about this topic I've ordered Hatcher's Note book. I, noticed ,however, in going through what appear to be rave reviews that all the attention and technology that could have been accorded the 30-06 had to take place prior to 1946.The book first came out in 1947. A lot of good stuff in the accuracy game has taken place over the last 60 years.

I see you focused on the short neck comment and as an example brought up a comparison between the .243 and the .244(6mm) We all know that the popularity of the .243 to .244 had nothing to do with accuracy as such.We don't have to rechew that bone. A resent discussion on one of the accurate reloading forums indicated that amoung those who own and shoot both many state that the 6mm is a degree more accurate than the .243.

In a large sense what has been said about lack of attention for the 30-06 can apply also to the .244. It's minimal popularity because of Remington's screw up in marketing and barrel twist made the .243 far more accepted first as a game rifle and than for more accurate use.The 6mm cartridge is as good a performer as the .257 Roberts, 6.5x57, 7x57 or 8x57. notice any commonality there?

I'm not sure how long it will take me to read the book but when I do and it shows me the error in my thinking I will be man enough to post my retractions. spirited discussion. roger

quote:

Originally posted by El Deguello:

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
So what basis do you have for stating that short necks are inferior? It seems to be a mantra of many, with no imperical proof that it is true

Agreed! Just look at the .243 Win. vs the 6mm Rem.!

Senor! Question; Is it true that the .243 is a better cartridge than the 6mm? El Deguelo's answer. "Nope; the other way..." Recognize that?

You're just playing with me, right? Now I'm going back to the and wait for my book. roger