THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM MEDIUM BORE RIFLE FORUM

Page 1 2 

Moderators: Paul H
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
30.06 @ 2,700 fps
 Login/Join
 
one of us
posted
I have been enjoying reading Stewart Edward White's 'The Land of Footprints' recently about his African safari and came across this line:
"I was armed with the new Springfield rifle, a weapon with 2,700 feet velocity, and with a marvellously flat trajectory."

That line struck me, considering where we are ballistically today in 2021.

It must have been quite the cartridge back at the turn of the last century. It was Teddy Roosevelt's main arm on his 1909-1910 safari, along with his 405 Win. and 500-450 DR, and also the same for Hemingway, Ruark, and even today, Boddington. That spans a few years of time.

What is remarkable, is how common and useful the 30.06 still is over a century later. We have quite a few more 30 caliber rounds that exceed the ballistics of the '06 today, but I have taken the 30.06 to Africa a number of times, and it would still be my choice in that caliber. Today, most might think the '06 as rather slow and pedestrian, but in the day of some of these great hunters, it was truly a hot and flat shooting round.

White did not state what weight bullet was producing the 2,700fps, but I assume it was the 150 gr. back in 1912 when he wrote the book. John Taylor states in his book 'African Rifles & Cartridges' written in the 1940s that the 150 gr. was then traveling 2,700 fps and the 180 gr. at 2,500 fps (British loading). Today, that same 180 gr. is going 2,700 and the HE loads around 2,800-2,900 fps. And, that same 150 gr. of White's day is now going 3,000 fps. or a little more in some factory loads.

Can you imagine what advanced technology the '06 was back in White's and Roosevelt's day? Coming off the age of the BP rounds, it must have seemed flat shooting indeed! And really, it still is today.

What a GREAT cartridge! S.E. White must have been gobsmacked in 1912.
 
Posts: 2122 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
HMMMM, Im still shooting the 30-06 with a 180 gr. bullet at 2700 FPS, a pre 64 fwt mod-70 with old Redfield rings and bases from WW2 and a 4X Leupold with no click adjustments both pretty much missing blue and stock of custom drift wood, and hey I think Im younger that that African guy..shot my last half dozen elk with that old outfit..I just cannot imagine how that happened...Yeah gobsmaked thats the deal!!

I can squeeze 2800 FPS out of the 06, but why nothing changes in the field, only on paper..I don't think the 300s show me much as to the results on game, maybe a bit flatter way out yonder..


Ray Atkinson
Atkinson Hunting Adventures
10 Ward Lane,
Filer, Idaho, 83328
208-731-4120

rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com
 
Posts: 37867 | Location: Twin Falls, Idaho | Registered: 04 June 2000Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Im still shooting the 30-06 with a 180 gr. bullet at 2700 FPS


So am I.

If I want more I move up to my 300mag
 
Posts: 16942 | Location: wis | Registered: 21 April 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Just over 20 years ago I was finally able to go on an African Safari. I was advised that the 30-06 would be ideal for PG, particularly with heavy bullets. I purchased a M70 Classic Stainless featherweight with a walnut stock. I loved the fit of that rifle and still do. It seemed to prefer the Federal High Energy 165 gr Bear Claws. I shot a lot of game with that rifle on that trip. I also used a 375 H&H and a 416 Rigby (both the Ruger RSM's). The 30-06 did seem a little "pedestrian" and still does but it is without doubt a great all around cartridge. Hard to go wrong with a 30-06 and 375 combo.
 
Posts: 117 | Registered: 26 March 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
A slow appreciative smile began when I read the word, "...the new Springfield rifle..."

What appreciation HE must have had when he started using the cartridge considering the time period.

I'm anxious to read on to see how well it served him on his 1912 safari.
 
Posts: 2122 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Ray, you indeed are younger than that guy...now! Big Grin
 
Posts: 2122 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of dpcd
posted Hide Post
Only amazing to Americans, who were decades behind Europe in small arms development. Such ballistic miracles were in use in Germany, France, Spain, Turkey, and others. when we were fielding Infantry units with black powder rifles.
 
Posts: 13757 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
the only reason I bought my last 3006 was to have another just like the first in cast something happened to the first. both steyr mod. M never looked back.
 
Posts: 186 | Registered: 20 August 2010Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by surefire7:
I have been enjoying reading Stewart Edward White's 'The Land of Footprints' recently about his African safari and came across this line:
"I was armed with the new Springfield rifle, a weapon with 2,700 feet velocity, and with a marvellously flat trajectory."

That line struck me, considering where we are ballistically today in 2021.

It must have been quite the cartridge back at the turn of the last century. It was Teddy Roosevelt's main arm on his 1909-1910 safari, along with his 405 Win. and 500-450 DR, and also the same for Hemingway, Ruark, and even today, Boddington. That spans a few years of time.

What is remarkable, is how common and useful the 30.06 still is over a century later. We have quite a few more 30 caliber rounds that exceed the ballistics of the '06 today, but I have taken the 30.06 to Africa a number of times, and it would still be my choice in that caliber. Today, most might think the '06 as rather slow and pedestrian, but in the day of some of these great hunters, it was truly a hot and flat shooting round.

White did not state what weight bullet was producing the 2,700fps, but I assume it was the 150 gr. back in 1912 when he wrote the book. John Taylor states in his book 'African Rifles & Cartridges' written in the 1940s that the 150 gr. was then traveling 2,700 fps and the 180 gr. at 2,500 fps (British loading). Today, that same 180 gr. is going 2,700 and the HE loads around 2,800-2,900 fps. And, that same 150 gr. of White's day is now going 3,000 fps. or a little more in some factory loads.

Can you imagine what advanced technology the '06 was back in White's and Roosevelt's day? Coming off the age of the BP rounds, it must have seemed flat shooting indeed! And really, it still is today.

What a GREAT cartridge! S.E. White must have been gobsmacked in 1912.


I think President Roosevelt’s Springfield was a 30/03.

The 1:10 twist was set to prevent barrels from burning up when Frankfort Arsenal was designing the 30/06 cartridge. Think about that. This one design modification set the twist rate for generations of cartridges.
 
Posts: 4307 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by dpcd:
Only amazing to Americans, who were decades behind Europe in small arms development. Such ballistic miracles were in use in Germany, France, Spain, Turkey, and others. when we were fielding Infantry units with black powder rifles.


Yes, and White was an American, so as you stated, I'm sure he was amazed!
 
Posts: 2122 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Yeah the 303 Enfield Mark series of cartridges was so advanced.

The good thing about being last is we got the best cartridge and rifle.

Superior ballistics 150 at 2700 spitzer bullet following right behind the Germans
Universal short rifle 24 inch barrel (became civilian industry standard, everyone burg the Brits in WWI is slugging away with long barrel pikes)
A bettered Mauser
A better mag cut off
Ability to cock by hand

The long range ladder portion of the sight was wrong because of our continued tweaking of the cartridge.

I will give the SMLE capacity.

The US may have been last, but in doing so we got to take the best of the collective knowledge.
 
Posts: 4307 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by LHeym500:
quote:
Originally posted by surefire7:
I have been enjoying reading Stewart Edward White's 'The Land of Footprints' recently about his African safari and came across this line:
"I was armed with the new Springfield rifle, a weapon with 2,700 feet velocity, and with a marvellously flat trajectory."

That line struck me, considering where we are ballistically today in 2021.

It must have been quite the cartridge back at the turn of the last century. It was Teddy Roosevelt's main arm on his 1909-1910 safari, along with his 405 Win. and 500-450 DR, and also the same for Hemingway, Ruark, and even today, Boddington. That spans a few years of time.

What is remarkable, is how common and useful the 30.06 still is over a century later. We have quite a few more 30 caliber rounds that exceed the ballistics of the '06 today, but I have taken the 30.06 to Africa a number of times, and it would still be my choice in that caliber. Today, most might think the '06 as rather slow and pedestrian, but in the day of some of these great hunters, it was truly a hot and flat shooting round.

White did not state what weight bullet was producing the 2,700fps, but I assume it was the 150 gr. back in 1912 when he wrote the book. John Taylor states in his book 'African Rifles & Cartridges' written in the 1940s that the 150 gr. was then traveling 2,700 fps and the 180 gr. at 2,500 fps (British loading). Today, that same 180 gr. is going 2,700 and the HE loads around 2,800-2,900 fps. And, that same 150 gr. of White's day is now going 3,000 fps. or a little more in some factory loads.

Can you imagine what advanced technology the '06 was back in White's and Roosevelt's day? Coming off the age of the BP rounds, it must have seemed flat shooting indeed! And really, it still is today.

What a GREAT cartridge! S.E. White must have been gobsmacked in 1912.


I think President Roosevelt’s Springfield was a 30/03.

The 1:10 twist was set to prevent barrels from burning up when Frankfort Arsenal was designing the 30/06 cartridge. Think about that. This one design modification set the twist rate for generations of cartridges.


Yes, you are correct! Roosevelt's rifle was a 30-03. I do not know about preventing the barrels from burning up. I thought they used the 1:10 twist to stabilize the 220 gr. bullet that they had lots of in storage left over from the previous 30-40 Krag, which was the original bullet weight of the '03.

I'm no expert on the '03 or the '06. These are just my impressions...
 
Posts: 2122 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
You are right on twist. This is what happened with barrels and the 150 load.

The initial hope was to bing the 220 grain bullet to 2300 fps. This proved impractical. The 30/03 became a 220 grain, 2100 FPS cartridge from a 24 inch barrel.

The 30 rimless spritzer round was in response to the German spitzer. US started to the experiment with a spritzer load in 1904. This would solidify in 1906 with changes to the case with 150 grain spitter at 2700 FPS. This load was burning barrels at 1000 rounds. DuPont had developed a powder “Pyro Powder” that burned cooler, but rifles had to have barrels set back to correct issues with the spritzer slamming into the rifling off center and hard due to throats of the 1903-1905 rifles being set for round nose bullet.

200,000 barrels had already been done. The fix was to cut two threads and shave off two threads saving the 200,000 barrels.

Without the German Spitzer of 1904, we would not have the 30/06.
 
Posts: 4307 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
LHyem500,

Thanks for the info! Smiler
 
Posts: 2122 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of dpcd
posted Hide Post
We screwed up again when we designed the 1903 Springfield; we copied a 1893 Mauser, and every change we made, was for the worse.
We did not copy a 98 as some think. Most egregious was the two piece firing pin; a self fulfilling prophecy in that it was easier to repair a broken firing pin, and making it two piece insured they broke.
Our metallurgy was primitive. And we still had to pay Mauser $100000 for patent infringement.
If we had adopted the 1889 7.65 Belgian/Argentine, or the 1892 7mm, both Mauser inventions, we would not have suffered one whit.
The 30-06 was a good design; but made good by other designers.
Heym is right about the German impetus.
And of course it is a very useful cartridge.
 
Posts: 13757 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
If you want some good reading find the battle of sights between the Dixon tangent and the ladder sight that was ultimately adopted.

The Calvary won that one because the ladder sight would fold backwards more or less flat if kept up and pushed into a scabbard.

I have sold my 1903 chambered rifle and 1906 chambered rifles. Does the Springfield cock on open or close. I can’t remember.

The US and Mauser worked out a deal for royalties. DWM who controlled Mauser killed that arrangement.

The first version being the 1900 (I think) was a split bridge to clear the third safety lug. That is why the rear bridge is so thin.
 
Posts: 4307 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Thanks dpcd & LHyem500 for some great info and history on our beloved 30-06.
 
Posts: 2122 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of dpcd
posted Hide Post
Springfields have cock on opening; one thing we kept from the Krag. Just a note; another dumb thing we did was put the rod bayonet on them; Teddy saw those when he took office and told the chief of Ordnance that it was the dumbest thing he had ever seen and get rid of it. Which they did. (Some Trapdoors had them which is where the idea came from; for some reason our designers always looked backwards; way backwards) The reason is that we did not plan to fight European armies; we were fighting Indians.
If you have ever seen one, they are flimsy and good for nothing.
I read above something about the Enfields; for sure those were a great rifle, and the Empire used them for 100 years, however, it was not an English invention; it was American. Lee rifles were first made by Sharps, then after they went bankrupt (no more buffalo by 1881), Remington took over. It had a one piece stock, and that was the change that England made (Speed if I recall correctly), put the two piece stock on it. Much stronger. As for the 303 cartridge; nothing innovative about that; there were better designs on the Continent.
But a very successful and reliable battle rifle nonetheless.
 
Posts: 13757 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I think the rod bayonets were changed to knife bayonets in 1905.

DPCD would you, with your technical knowledge, explain to us how the Springfield is a copy of 1983 and not a copy of the 1898?

The 93 was cock on close and chambered for the 7x57. Otherwise, the 93 and 98 are very similar. Dual opposing locking lugs at front. Gas venting, loading/charging, safety, extraction-ejection, recoil lug. The 1898 was a longer rifle at this time on military form.

The 1893 was the rifle the US was motivated by in the Spanish-American War. Other than cock on close, cartridge, and ecstatics the two actions 93 and 98 appear to me to be the same.
 
Posts: 4307 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of dpcd
posted Hide Post
An original rod bayonet 03 just sold at RI actions; a friend here has it. No idea how it escaped conversion.
The 93 and 98 differ in many important ways; come over and I'll show you a few dozen.
We obviously didn't copy any Mauser verbatim, however, we did not copy the 98 at all; we had plenty of 93s from the Spanish American War. The addition of the safety lug in the awkward place, and the lack of the internal receiver breech ring, and possibly the 1.4 inch OD, and the single diameter bolt at the bolt shroud threads, front firing pin safety lugs on the 98 (not on the first ones) are all clues. If we had wanted the copy the 98, we would have certainly used those much improved features. We did rip off the clip guide feature. But also added a magazine cut off, which no 98 had, but the early 93s did; totally different tactical philophsy though. Europeans wanted to load and fire the magazine. We wanted to shoot single shot; Indian war thinking.
We did not copy the cock on closing since we had experience with the Krag, and obviously the features you mentioned are universal. Like dual lugs, safety, overall design. layout.
We added the cone breech, extractor cut and resultant timed barrels; all of which make for more complicated barrel and receiver manufacture and spare part fitting. Mausers are flat breech (Ok the intermediate safety breech was not a success and not necessary) and do not make feeding any less reliable. More cartridge case protrudes from the cone breech; no problem now but with marginal quality brass, it is a problem.
And the controlled round extractor; developed for the Turks; not to improve extraction as everyone thinks, but to prevent double feeding with untrained troops. Even Germany took ten years to adopt it; their soldiers were trained how to use a bolt action rifle. Common misconception.
 
Posts: 13757 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Love it DPCD. Obviously, it was the 93 that was the espouser point, but many good books do not explain the engineering differences between the 93 and 98 stopping at cock on close/cock on open. The CRF as a means of preventing double feeding through short stroking is the purpose of the design.

There is really nothing else to say about the rimless 30 caliber cartridge and rifle development unless we want to heavily get into the battle of the sighs in detail, Chief of Army Ordinance Crozier, or the heat treat issue.

I have read after the heat treat was sorted out barreled actions survived 100k psi proof loads, but the source does not state how pressure was measured.

I will say my reading suggest Frankfort Arsenal was better ran than Springfield Arsenal.

I side with Mannlicher, not Lee, as being the originator/inventor of the detachable box magazine which he patented in 1881.
 
Posts: 4307 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I know a number of Africans that have killed elephant with the combo of 180 gr at 2700, mostly factory ammo so might have been a bit slower..same with the 308s that are used to "cull" elephants. They will kill..and ditch the "stopper shit"..only killing shots count...Am I going to shoot DG with either the 30-06 or 308...Not unless thats the only choice I have and I once had the option of shooting buffalo with a milsurp Mauser mod 95 7x57 and milsurp ammo that had turned green or I could have stayed at the house and played bridge with the ladies..I shot buff with that gun and it fired about every 3rd round, got 9 of the buggers as I recall with only 4 follow ups of which two were dead and two on the fight, but handled by the crew..I like the adaged of "Use enough gun".

IMO the 06 and 308 are good solid elk rifles and PG rifles, DG. usable but not a good option..


Ray Atkinson
Atkinson Hunting Adventures
10 Ward Lane,
Filer, Idaho, 83328
208-731-4120

rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com
 
Posts: 37867 | Location: Twin Falls, Idaho | Registered: 04 June 2000Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Several years ago, John Barsness wrote an article in “Rifle Magazine” about the wonderful attributes of rounds such as the 180gr 30-06 and 160gr 7x57 running at 2700fps. The 140gr 6.5 Creedmoor at 2700fps is nice, too, but for general hunting, your 30-06 load is the cats meow. I recall Fin Aagard commenting (Maybe “Aagards Africa) that such 30-06 loads perform as well as the 375 H&H on most game up to 700lbs.


Matt
FISH!!

Heed the words of Winston Smith in Orwell's 1984:

"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right."
 
Posts: 3123 | Location: Northern Colorado | Registered: 22 November 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of dpcd
posted Hide Post
They used copper crusher method of measuring pressure back then. Of course, a chamber pressure of 100K psi means a direct push of about 13000 pounds on the bolt/receiver. With an oiled case; a dry case will hold a lot of pressure as we know; Ackley showed a cartridge case can hold up to 40K psi all by itself. But that is another topic.
And the USMC used the low number 03s all the way through WW2; they did drill a gas escape hole in them.
Frankford Arsenal was not a maker of rifles.
Springfield Armory and Rock Island Arsenal.
Mannlicher, and a detach box mag? Lee invented his in 1879; an American Patent. Lee himself was Canadian. .
Patent 221328, dated 4 November 1879, the box magazine we are familiar with today. Sharps made the first 300 Lee Rifles.
Back to the 30-06; a great cartridge no matter how you load it. 150 grain at 2700, is M2 Ball, which which we fought WW2. M1 Ball was 173 grains.
 
Posts: 13757 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Dulltool17
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by dpcd:
Only amazing to Americans, who were decades behind Europe in small arms development. Such ballistic miracles were in use in Germany, France, Spain, Turkey, and others. when we were fielding Infantry units with black powder rifles.


Yeah. 7.65 x 53 Argentine, anyone?


Doug Wilhelmi
NRA Life Member

 
Posts: 7503 | Location: Texas Hill Country | Registered: 15 October 2013Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of dpcd
posted Hide Post
Say for a minute you had never seen a 30-06. But had a 7.65 Mauser. You would not be handicapped at all; it is a a long 308. Or a short 30-06.
 
Posts: 13757 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
You are correct, but Frankfort is where the cartridge got developed and produced the ammo. Springfield messed up the sights as the 150 grain spitzer became the cartridge. The sights on the ladder are graduated incorrectly.

150 at 2700 was the WWI load. This used a curio-nickel jacket and flat based. Designated the M1906.

172 Grain load was adopted in 1925 is the M1 Ball.

The 150 grain guilding metal jacket was adopted in 1937. This M2 Bsll.



Lookup Mannlicher’s magazine.
 
Posts: 4307 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of 458Win
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by surefire7:
quote:
Originally posted by LHeym500:
quote:
Originally posted by surefire7:
I have been enjoying reading Stewart Edward White's 'The Land of Footprints' recently about his African safari and came across this line:
"I was armed with the new Springfield rifle, a weapon with 2,700 feet velocity, and with a marvellously flat trajectory."

That line struck me, considering where we are ballistically today in 2021.

It must have been quite the cartridge back at the turn of the last century. It was Teddy Roosevelt's main arm on his 1909-1910 safari, along with his 405 Win. and 500-450 DR, and also the same for Hemingway, Ruark, and even today, Boddington. That spans a few years of time.

What is remarkable, is how common and useful the 30.06 still is over a century later. We have quite a few more 30 caliber rounds that exceed the ballistics of the '06 today, but I have taken the 30.06 to Africa a number of times, and it would still be my choice in that caliber. Today, most might think the '06 as rather slow and pedestrian, but in the day of some of these great hunters, it was truly a hot and flat shooting round.

White did not state what weight bullet was producing the 2,700fps, but I assume it was the 150 gr. back in 1912 when he wrote the book. John Taylor states in his book 'African Rifles & Cartridges' written in the 1940s that the 150 gr. was then traveling 2,700 fps and the 180 gr. at 2,500 fps (British loading). Today, that same 180 gr. is going 2,700 and the HE loads around 2,800-2,900 fps. And, that same 150 gr. of White's day is now going 3,000 fps. or a little more in some factory loads.

Can you imagine what advanced technology the '06 was back in White's and Roosevelt's day? Coming off the age of the BP rounds, it must have seemed flat shooting indeed! And really, it still is today.

What a GREAT cartridge! S.E. White must have been gobsmacked in 1912.


I think President Roosevelt’s Springfield was a 30/03.

The 1:10 twist was set to prevent barrels from burning up when Frankfort Arsenal was designing the 30/06 cartridge. Think about that. This one design modification set the twist rate for generations of cartridges.


Yes, you are correct! Roosevelt's rifle was a 30-03. I do not know about preventing the barrels from burning up. I thought they used the 1:10 twist to stabilize the 220 gr. bullet that they had lots of in storage left over from the previous 30-40 Krag, which was the original bullet weight of the '03.

I'm no expert on the '03 or the '06. These are just my impressions...


According to numerous sources Roosevelt sent his 1903 Springfield sporter back to the arsenal a few weeks prior to his safari and it was rebarreled to 30-06 and in his book on the Safari he claimed he was interested in using the new 150 gr 30-06 ammo on game.
Which would indicate he had returned his rifle as the 30-06 was notoriously inaccurate in the 30-03 chamber.
Their shipping records show they took both 30-03 and 30-06 ammo and had Winchester M 95 rifles still chambered in 30-03

Today, with modern powders it is easy to get 2700 fps with the 30-06 with 200 grain bullets.


Anyone who claims the 30-06 is ineffective has either not tried one, or is unwittingly commenting on their own marksmanship
Phil Shoemaker
Alaska Master guide
CFII
NRA Benefactor www.grizzlyskinsofalaska.com
 
Posts: 3910 | Location: Bristol Bay | Registered: 24 April 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Hi Phil. Hey, thanks for the info on Roosevelt's rifle.

Boddington had stated that when he actually held Roosevelt's rifle, hearing that it was an '06 all his life, he was surprised to find that it was really an '03.

Does this mean it was just an '03 that had really been converted to an '06?
 
Posts: 2122 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
On page 28 President Roosevelt identifies his rifle as army Springfield,30-caliber, stocked and sighted to suit myself.

Page 322 he refers to it as Springfield .300.

On page 190 there is no doubt President Roosevelt is firing the M1906 cartridge, “ I had the little Springfield with me, and was anxious to test the new sharp-pointed military bullet on some large game.”

On page 191 he describes the bullet as little-thinned jacketed, sharp-pointed bullet.

This strongly implies the M1906 150 grain Spritzer chamber and load. It must be.

He does not anywhere specificity tell us what it is. However, the above means his rifle had be firing the M1906 Cartridge. You can fire the M1906 in a 1903 chamber. President Roosevelt does not say what chamber.

However, The Master Guide is right. The cartridge is certainly M1906. He knew that. I just figured I would go back to the primary source African Game Trails.
 
Posts: 4307 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of dpcd
posted Hide Post
Back then Officers and maybe others, could custom order rifles from SA.
The Mannlicher magazine is nothing like the detachable Lee, whose patent date I gave. Not sure your point on that one.
 
Posts: 13757 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Mannlicher had a detachable, Magazine before 1881. I have seen it. Austria-Hungry rejected it. After this rejection, he developed the En Bloc clip.

Lee’s magazine and Mannlicher’s function the same.

Mannlicher had it also.

A guy named Robert Wilson patterned one in 1864.

Here is Mannlicher’s detachable box magazine
https://postimg.cc/Hjnp0QBs

Taken from Mannlicher Rifles and Pistols by
Walter H. B. Smith
 
Posts: 4307 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of dpcd
posted Hide Post
Ok, good info that I did not know. I guess we can say for sure that the Lee was the first one to be placed into mass production and become successful.
I wonder why they even gave Lee a patent when someone else had already patented it?
 
Posts: 13757 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Yes sir, I have to accept that. Mannlicher submitted his magazine to Austria-Hungary trials in 1881. It was rejected. So, he designed the En Bloc clip we see on the 1886/1890/1895.
The first En Bloc clip and magazine he designed ejected the clip from the top like the Garand.

I cannot find Mannlicher tried to patent his Detachable Box Magazine in the US. Mannlicher did patent the En Bloc clip in the US. Lee would unsuccessfully sue Mannlicher over the En Bloc clip.

Lee would unsuccessfully sue Mannlicher over the En Bloc clip.
 
Posts: 4307 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Growing up I shot a lot of 30-06 ammo in a Win. mod. 95 carbine 30-03 caliber, every thing from pin heads to one elk..I had some 173 gr GI bALL ammo at one time, ground the noses to lead, and sometimes they worked and other times they failed and it made no difference how much tip I cut off..

I shot mule deer with the old 220 bullets of the day and opposed to common belief, they were soft as butter and penetration was any better than a 150 or 180 gr. corelokt or silvertip 06..I liked that carbine 95...Ive had several of them over my life time..Today I prefer the Savage 99F in 308, better on a horse..


Ray Atkinson
Atkinson Hunting Adventures
10 Ward Lane,
Filer, Idaho, 83328
208-731-4120

rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com
 
Posts: 37867 | Location: Twin Falls, Idaho | Registered: 04 June 2000Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Again, great info above everybody.

Thanks for all the research and knowledge!
 
Posts: 2122 | Location: Colorado | Registered: 26 May 2010Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of WoodHunter
posted Hide Post
Took this photo a few days ago. Yep, 30-06 cases in the loading block.

 
Posts: 1276 | Location: Running With The Hounds | Registered: 28 April 2011Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of 458Win
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by surefire7:
Hi Phil. Hey, thanks for the info on Roosevelt's rifle.

Boddington had stated that when he actually held Roosevelt's rifle, hearing that it was an '06 all his life, he was surprised to find that it was really an '03.

Does this mean it was just an '03 that had really been converted to an '06?


Unless Craig had a bore scope or recent chamber casts there was no reliable way to tell

The 30-06 case was basically the same as the 30-03 case but had a shorter neck. That meant the bullet had to make at least a .17" jump before contacting the rifling. That caused unacceptable accuracy and The Military sent virtually all the 200,000 of the early barrels Back to the armory to have two threads turned off the breech and then the barrels rechambered for the 30-06. And there is an invoice showing Roosevelt returned his rifle to the armory shortly before his safari.


Anyone who claims the 30-06 is ineffective has either not tried one, or is unwittingly commenting on their own marksmanship
Phil Shoemaker
Alaska Master guide
CFII
NRA Benefactor www.grizzlyskinsofalaska.com
 
Posts: 3910 | Location: Bristol Bay | Registered: 24 April 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
From President Roosevelt’s own writing the use of M1906 ammunition, Spitzer 150 grain, is clear. There is a strong inference to be drawn Rosevelt was using cupronickel full jacket ammo.

The use of spritzer would not be advised today. Yet, was praise worthy.

I wonder when the first commercial, jacketed expanding ammo was offered.

In his 1936 book Elmer Keith was not impressed with any commercial 30 caliber hunting billets except the 225 Peters Belted which I assume was the forerunner to the Corlokt.
 
Posts: 4307 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
"Yeah the 303 Enfield Mark series of cartridges was so advanced."

Yes whats why US adopted the 30-40 in the Krag. The Russians adopted the 30 Russian in the same period and its still in military and civilian use.
 
Posts: 3488 | Location: Sweden | Registered: 02 May 2009Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2  
 


Copyright December 1997-2021 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia