I like the 06 and the .308, owned a lot of both and most all of them shot well...I could never tell the .308 was a more accurate round as some claim, at least from a hunting rifle aspect...

The 06 has the advantage of 200 and 220 gr. bullets and performs better with 180s as a rule...

I'm satisfied with either round...but if I had to pick one caliber to survive in the North American wilderness for the rest of my life, the 30-06 would rank high in my choices, the 308 would not.....

Bottom line is although I shoot a couple of .308s and one nice 30-06, the 06 will do anything the .308 will do, and more, is that an advantage? Maybe,if your hunting something big and mean...

It probably boils down to a personal choice. I personaly view the .308 as a fine deer rifle and the 30-06 as a nice caliber for elk..knowing both will kill about anything if I do my part.

i second mr atkinson

Bottom line is the .308 is the little brother of the.30-06'.

It has no advantages over the .30-06' as a hunting round and never will.

I have shot enough of them and never felt the need to step down to something that mimmics
the Springfields tried and true level of
performance.

In the military they have an advantage but not in the hunting field.

Have you guys noticed how HOT! Nosler is loading the 308 - some into the ~70,000 psi range?

Seems to me, the 30-06 has lost some of it's power lately leading me to believe the ammo makers have emasculated it even further. A while back, I caught a super deal on Winchester brand 30-30, .308 Win. and 30-06 ammo from a Super K-Mart that was closing down The 30-30 was $4.00 a box and the .308 and 30-06 was $5.00 a box if I took it all. One day, while shooting at the range, I ran some of the .308 and 30-06 over the chronograph. Both loads had the 180 gr. Silvertip bullet. The shocker was that the .308 ammo was 50 FPS faster than the 30-06. The .308 was a Remington 660 with 20" barrel and the 30-06 a Remington 700 with 22" barrel. So, it seems to me that at least Winchester is downloading the 06 to below .308 specs. Whether this is just a bum lot of ammo or deliberate downloading I can't say. However, some Remington 180 gr. ammo shoots to exactly the same point of impact in that Remington 700 leading me to believe that velocity must be in the same range. FWIW, with careful handloading, a 30-06 can be loaded to push quite closely on the heels of the .300 H&H Magnum if the rifle has a 24" barrel and my Ruger #1B with 26" barrel will be right at the H&H factory load level with 180 gr. bullets.
The .308 was developed to deliver 30-06 velocities in the same range as the military version of the 06, roughly 2750-2800 FPS. IIRC, WW-2 ammo gave 2700 FPS with the 150 gr. bullet. Commercial 150 gr. 06 ammo was reputed to give 2960 FPS according to the ads of the day, although probably somewhat slower in factory rifles due to shorter barrels and looser tolerances.
For those who feel the .308 isn't any good with 220 gr. bullets, consider this, a .308 can shoot a 220 gr. bullet to 2300 FPS from a 22" barrel with prober handloading. That ain't exactly a slouch load, and damn well should penetrate like nobody's business. No, it's not a long range load, but you wouldn't be shooting at long range with it anyway. As far as accuracy is concerned, my Win. Mod. 70 will put three into .375".
Paul B.

quote:

Have you guys noticed how HOT! Nosler is loading the 308 - some into the ~70,000 psi range?

Yep, if all things being equal (pressure)are the same it will still be the little almost could but not quite
do it good enough to compare to its parent cartridge.

no offense intended it is respectable but NO
.30-06' in a hand loaded form by any comparison!

With the new enhanced ammo, the 308 will duplicate the 30-06 and the 30-06 will duplicate the 300s, so there ya go...

Truth be that in the killing dept, most all the calibers are about equal in killing power if you stick the bullet in the right place...I am sure a 30-30 in the heart or lungs of a deer kills just as well as a 300 Magnum in the same place...Its about range, not killing power that makes the faster 30s popular, but then should we be shooting game beyond say 350 yards? probably not.

quote:

Originally posted by seafire/B17G:
I really don't think for North America they have really introduced any new calibers since 1925 that were really any better than what was already in existance...

Wellll..... maybe.

What about the 7mm Rem mag?

3006s are like arseholes - every one has got one. I find them boring.

Thats not to detract from the fact that its an excellent caliber.

But maybe not as good as the 300wsm!!

And I'll bet that for the same given conditions, the 300wsm is more accurate (short, stumpy case - what do all the bench rst shooters use these days?)

But I am sure it would be like picking fly---- out of the pepper.

I almost forgot - I can hear all the critics saying - "Oooh, but the 300wsm doesn't feed properly from the mag - Doesn't it? If you have the right rifle it does ie: Tikka T3 with its vertical stack mag feeds flawlessly, and I believe the Ruger does the same, likewise the Kimber.

But at the end of the day its all P.P. (personal preference!)

quote:

Originally posted by LE270:

quote:

Originally posted by seafire/B17G:
I really don't think for North America they have really introduced any new calibers since 1925 that were really any better than what was already in existance...

Wellll..... maybe.

What about the 7mm Rem mag?

Lloyd;;

NO disrespect, but what about it?

I don't see any greater need in 7 mm in my book than the 7 x 57....The 7 Mag won't do anything that my 6 different 30/06s won't do....

I don't knock it for other guys, I just don't have a personal need for it.... Doesn't mean they are a bad round... the older I get, the older I seem to like my rifles and calibers....We Band of "Old" brothers!

cheers
seafire

quote:

But maybe not as good as the 300wsm

If you bought it for benchrest great,
But as a hunting round it will always take a back seat to ALL the belted .30 mags.
If you want to limit yourself to 3 shells in the magazine you might as well get something
with some real power.

quote:

If you want to limit yourself to 3 shells in the magazine you might as well get something
with some real power.

I have 2 mags plus Tikka I believe is bringing out a 4 or 5 round mag for the WSMs this year.

Anyway, normally its all over if you haven't got what your shooting at within 2-3 rounds.

I have been looking for a heavy barrelled 30 cal rifle and it seems that bugger all manufacturers make a heavy barrelled 30/06but they all make heavy .308's it pissed me off a bit but I am getting used to thefact that I will have a heavy barreled .308 made by cz but I just feel they could alos offer heavy barreled 30/06's as well.

It would seem that it's 30/06 for light barrels and .308's for heavy barrels.

Does the .308 hold more accuracy records than the 30/06 ??

I don't know if the .308 holds more accuracy records or not, but if it doesn't, it's catchin' up fast. I think that if I wanted a heavy barrel 30-06, I'd scrounge up a used rifle already in 30-06 and rebarrel it. An old Remington 700 would work just fine.
Anyway, that's how I'd do it.
Paul B.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul B:
I don't know if the .308 holds more accuracy records or not, but if it doesn't, it's catchin' up fast. I think that if I wanted a heavy barrel 30-06, I'd scrounge up a used rifle already in 30-06 and rebarrel it. An old Remington 700 would work just fine.
Anyway, that's how I'd do it.
Paul B.

I had thought of that seeing as I ahve a heap of cases and dies but really it is simpler just to get the heavy .308 off the shelf and probably cheaper with less wait, the animlas I whop out to 300 yards I doubt will notice the difference bewteen the Nosler 125 gr BT going at 3100 fps or 3200 fps. Sako do amke a heavy barrelled 30/06 but it's bloody expensive and not worth a 100-150 fps Secondly I have mostly cz rifles so would like to keep to the same trigger group and saftey across the board.

I also reckon the .308 cz varmint will shoot good.

One of the great disapointments in my life was my first chronograph and the 7MM Mag. compared to a std. .270 or even my 284 Savage...

There may some advantage by using the 175 gr. bullets in a 7 mag, but I know a deer or elk wouldn't notice any difference in a 160 gr. .270 as compared to a 7 mags. 175, thats 15 grs. and the velocity difference is less that most think..

I lived in a better world of europhoria prior the the affordable chronographs...

It took cheap chronos to teach me that a 7mm mag is really only a louder 270 that holds one less round. Since I had already used the 7mm for twenty years with no problems I guess I don't care much what the chrono says anymore.

What is the real world diff between a .270 and the 7mm rem mag ??

Now that we've ascertained that there isn't enough difference to matter between a .270 and a 7mm Rem. Mag., what about the .338 Win. Mag.? It was developed after 1925,and fills a niche between the .375 H&H and the .30 calibers, so it would be a refutation, I think, of the claim that nothing nothing better was introduced after that date.

quote:

Originally posted by LE270:
Now that we've ascertained that there isn't enough difference to matter between a .270 and a 7mm Rem. Mag., what about the .338 Win. Mag.? It was developed after 1925,and fills a niche between the .375 H&H and the .30 calibers, so it would be a refutation, I think, of the claim that nothing nothing better was introduced after that date.

Yeah.... unless one considers that the .333 Jeffery (Rimless) pretty much had the .33 caliber niche filled prior to World War I. It fired a .333" 250 gr bullet at a stated 2500 fps. Then, of course, there was the .318 Westley Richards that fired a .330" 250 gr bullet at a stated 2400 fps. (Very similar to the .338-06) If memory serves, I believe both the .318 W-R and the .333 Jeffery came out about 1908-1910. (I don't have any reference books handy at the moment to check the dates of introduction.)




And, also, we mustn't forget about the .350 Rigby Magnum (Rimless) that also came out about 1908. It fired a .358" 225 gr bullet at a stated 2600 fps.



And that's just mentioning three of the British cartridges.

I think a mistake a lot of American firearms enthusiasts make is only thinking in terms of what the American ammunition manufacturers have offered. So, we tend to think that, for example, that the .338 Win Mag filled the niche between the .30 calibers and the .375 H&H simply because there was not really anything on the American market previously that filled that niche. We forget, or are unaware, that prior to World War II (and in some cases prior to World War I), the British and the Germans had some very advanced sporting cartridges available. Post-World War II, the American companies were basically reinventing the wheel with many of the cartridges they brought out in the 1950s and 1960s.

Examples:
.280 Remington? Check out the 7x64 Brenneke.
7mm Rem Mag? Check out the .275 H&H Magnum.
.300 Win Mag? See the .300 H&H Mag.
.243 Winchester? See the .240 H&H Belted Rimless NE (aka: .240 Apex)

-Bob F.

quote:

Originally posted by BFaucett:

Yeah.... unless one considers that the .333 Jeffery (Rimless) pretty much had the .33 caliber niche filled prior to World War I. It fired a .333" 250 gr bullet at a stated 2500 fps. Then, of course, there was the .318 Westley Richards that fired a .330" 250 gr bullet at a stated 2400 fps. (Very similar to the .338-06) If memory serves, I believe both the .318 W-R and the .333 Jeffery came out about 1908-1910. (I don't have any reference books handy at the moment to check the dates of introduction

And, also, we mustn't forget about the .350 Rigby Magnum (Rimless) that also came out about 1908. It fired a .358" 225 gr bullet at a stated 2600 fps.

And that's just mentioning three of the British cartridges.

I think a mistake a lot of American firearms enthusiasts make is only thinking in terms of what the American ammunition manufacturers have offered.

It depends, I think, on what you mean by "introduced" and "existed." If you mean that it was invented and existed somewhere in the world, that's one thing. But that doesn't qualify, I think, as being "introduced" in any way that would make sense to an American shooter or hunter. The three calibers you mention were so obscure in America that I doubt that there was a dozen rifles in any of those calibers in the entire North American continent in the years between WWI and WWII. So, for any practical purpose, they could be said not to exist in America, although in another sense they did exist.

LE270,

Yes, I agree with the points you make. I was just pointing out that the niche between .30 and .375 had been filled by the Brits and Germans prior to WWII. But, as you say, that doesn't mean that these cartridges were commonly available to a hunter in North Amercia. Still, we have to remember that most of the hunting being done in Africa prior to WWII was being done by citizens of the colonial powers. To them, these cartridges were available.

-Bob F.

quote:

There may some advantage by using the 175 gr. bullets in a 7 mag, but I know a deer or elk wouldn't notice any difference in a 160 gr. .270 as compared to a 7 mags. 175, thats 15 grs. and the velocity difference is less that most think

I have chronographed mine and agree with you. My .270 and .06' especially the 06' is a
better big game cartridge IMO .
I can kick a 180 grainer out actually faster than the 7 mag with a 175 grainer,and still have the option of going HEAVIER.

Dont get me wrong I have killed plenty of game with my 7 mag and they are still dead.
But when I was shooting it I did indeed feel
I was using a superior round.
A chronograph proved that I was not.

Gidday LE270,

I note your contention that the calibres mention by Bob are not readily available in the USA. However prior to the 60s they were readily available in the rest of the world where the majority of the worlds hunting population reside and hunt.

The reason that these calibres have slowly disappeared is the economic dominance of the US since WW2. Americans are well known for their patriotism and loyalty to things American and these old cartridges were seen by many as being foreign and as such suspect. To sell their products in the more affluent US, Brit and European manufacturers had to provide them with calibres seen to be American and more trustworthy.

quote:

Originally posted by Hamish:

To sell their products in the more affluent US, Brit and European manufacturers had to provide them with calibres seen to be American and more trustworthy.

Were these proprietary cartridges, meaning that only those who were licensed by the patent holder could sell rifles in them? If so, that could be one reason they never caught on or were used in America.

No, they just couldn't compete price-wise with an imported product and American hunters were as much subsistence hunters and/or commercial hunters as sportsmen before WWII. Domestically produced ammo and guns were simply cheaper and more available.

You can probably tell by my handle I rather like the 30,06. Mine is a model 70 classic, and preforms very nicly ! As a hunting round the only time I might prefer a .308 IS if i am shooting a 20 inch barreld carbine. In a rifle like that the 30,06 kicks somthing awfull. My currant .308 is a 1953 featherweight winchester. If I can find a replcement mag box (06 size) I will probably rebarrel the 308, ito a 257 Ack imp, or mabhye a 7 Mauser. I have a 7 mag too and with equal barrel lenghth and hand loads the 06 mabye not quite the equal of the 7 mag on paper but close enough no critter will know the difference unless it reads the paper.
...tj3006

I don't see how anyone with a lick of since could fault the 30-06 or the 7x57, and a bunch of other in that same catagory, they all work.

gidday LE270

I don't know. Some were I guess. But not all I would think as the 7x57 7x64 375 H&H are all manufactured by US factories along with 6.5x55. Another reason could well be that most American cartridges developed since the 270 win are based on the 06 case. Well the standard ones anyway. This makes tooling alot easier and cheaper. Just makes sense. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying its a bad thing, just that economic clout after WW2 plus a distrust/dislike of things European borne out of two wars which cost the American people alot meant European Arms manufacturers had to produce the calibres which the American shooting public would buy or go the way of the Brits (BSA, Parker Hale, Rigby, Holland & Holland etc). That may be why we still have Mauser, Sako, Baretta, Steyer etc.

Happy Hunting
Hamish

quote:

Originally posted by Hamish:
Gidday LE270,

I note your contention that the calibres mention by Bob are not readily available in the USA. However prior to the 60s they were readily available in the rest of the world where the majority of the worlds hunting population reside and hunt.

The reason that these calibres have slowly disappeared is the economic dominance of the US since WW2. Americans are well known for their patriotism and loyalty to things American and these old cartridges were seen by many as being foreign and as such suspect. To sell their products in the more affluent US, Brit and European manufacturers had to provide them with calibres seen to be American and more trustworthy.

I think there is much truth in this statement, however I also think those calibres were doomed to obsolescence for some of the very same reasons the original model 70 Winchester was: they were expencive to produce -especially in small numbers. The Mauser "dynasty" for the most part didn't survive the war, so just where were the proprietary manufactures going to get the actions for those wonderful old calibres?
I think too, that Americans have an affinity toward that which is flexible like the .30-06, whereas the "proprietary" cartridges were less so, and the double rifles weren't.