I've been following the debate between the two cartridges. Its pretty hard to compare cartridges to game objectively, in my opinion, because a properly loaded .243 in the hands of a skilled shooter is more than enough to kill anything on this continent with a single shot. (not an endorsement as a one-rifle, battery, just a fact)

So that puts both the 7-08 and 30-06 on pretty much equal footing against game. I think this has been Big Sticks point all along. Same practical uses in a smaller package.

Comparing cartridge to cartridge the following comparison from Nosler #4 gives the 30-06 a consistent 25% more energy at ranges out to 600 yards. And a small trajectory advantage.

This comparison uses Nosler Partitions with identical SD. The 7mm has a slightly better BC.

I chose equal type premium hunting bullets as big game is what this board is about.

7mm 140 gr partition @ 2900 fps mv:
Range, Velocity, energy, trajectory
100, 2686, 2242, +1.7
200, 2482, 1914, 0.0
300, 2286, 1625, -7.3
400, 2100, 1371, -21.3
500, 1922, 1148, -43.0
600, 1755, 957, -74.5

.308 165gr partition @ 3000 fps mv:
100, 2768, 2808, +1.5
200, 2549, 2379, 0.0
300, 2339, 2004, -6.8
400, 2140, 1677, -20.2
500, 1949, 1392, -40.9
600, 1771, 1149, -71.0

So there you have it, only you can decide whether the energy advantage of the '06 or the size package of the 7-08 is the advantage you choose.

I say a well placed shot from either will do the job, a poorly placed shot from either will result in a mess.

One more thing, these figures are from a 26" 7-08, and a 24" 30-06. So in this example, the 30-06 is actually a shorter rifle.

I am a big fan of the 30-06, but trying to show an objective comparison of the two.

MM

MM,
I think you just became John Holmes' best friend...this is the data he's been wanting to see for a long time; me too, I must admit, cuz I just hate to think that my holy grail '06 doesn't have the edge over a 7'08 EVER

------------------
God Bless and Shoot Straight

MM,

That was/is my point. The differences are minimal.

In this instance,it is the Indian,not the arrow,because they are interchangeable for all practical purposes..............

I don't see 25% energy advantage, a 25%+ projectile weight advantage and a larger diameter as a "minimal" difference. You could apply very nearly the same logic to a .30-06 / .338 comparison and be about as wrong as you are here. While you're waiting for an elk to provide that lovely shot presentation that'll place the 7mm-08 on equal footing with a heavily loaded '06, I'll take the shots as they come, break him down, dress him out and cook up some backstraps for lunch.

Where might you start the 140XLC in the 7-08,that it won't reach the "goody",or break bone?

Assuming a whit of common sense and ability with a rifle................

There are at least two falacies in the above conclusion.

1. Similar retained engergies from different diameter bullets cannot have similar effects. The larger diameter will start making a significant wound channel earlier, at a lower velocity and transmit more engery to the target as it will take less energy to expand itself.

2. A poor hit from a bullet with the ability to make a larger wound channel will not be a equal "mess". The larger wound channel is more likely to kill and kill cleaner and sooner. It is also more likely to leave a blood trail than can be followed.

I think you will find this opinion in Parker Ackleys book!

Here is another quote from the "Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders by Parker O. Ackley.
P.72 "Of all the standard case calibers the 30-06 comes closer to being "all around" than any other".

I don't mean to sound rude but WHO CARES!!!

Kent

Regrettably, some of the best data on bullet wounds comes from military records on human targets.

The bottom line is that larger diameter bullets do more damage, all other factors equal. Big bullets crush more tissue to the point of no recovery.

If it were not so, a BB traveling sufficiently fast could kill as quickly as a 45-70. Does that seem realistic?

A 25% difference in kinetic energy is not negligible, either. That is approximately the difference between an '06 pushing 180 grains at 2800 fps and a 300 Win Mag pushing 220 grains at 2800 fps. I don't see many people calling those two "equal for all practical purposes".

Kent,
I also saw that you're getting sick of the 300wby vs 30'06 and 'knock down' power threads....With all due respect, my advice to you...SKIP OVER THEM!!!...so you have it all figured out, good for you...others of us find it interesting, and wish to post on it. These are topics that people wish to discuss and if you don't want any part of them, then stay away, otherwise feel free to join in and tell us your findings.

------------------
God Bless and Shoot Straight

Don,

1) I have not been able to discern on Game,that .024" in starting diameter,is of a convincing advantage. When equal styled bullets,at equal speeds,are weighed against one another.

2) I believe projectile selection,is more important in the 7mm vs 30cal comparison,than the "comfort" the diameter difference would give.

The wound channel is caused by multi criteria,not solely diameter. Projectile integrity,paramount in my opinion.

Parker Ackley and I agree on much,but differ some too.

I really doubt we'd differ at all,if he was privvy to the advancements we currently enjoy.

Re-22(for his maligned 25-06AI,which I love) and X bullets(for harnessing speed,in a predictable manner) foremost in my thoughts..............

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Big Stick:
[B]Don,

1) "I have not been able to discern on Game,that .024" in starting diameter,is of a convincing advantage. When equal styled bullets,at equal speeds,are weighed against one another".

2) "I believe projectile selection,is more important in the 7mm vs 30cal comparison,than the "comfort" the diameter difference would give".
_____________________________________________

In Comment #1 you rely on the equality of componets to make your argument. In Comment #2 you propose selecting "a better bullet" for your 7mm-08 to make your argument, contrary to the rationale of equality utilized in comment #1. Which way do you want it?

Let's stick with your "X" bullets:

140 XBT = SD/.248 BC/.477 Diameter/.284
180 XBT = SD/.271 BC/.552 Diameter/.308
__________________________________________

140 XBT = Vel. 2,800* Energy @ 300yds. 1692
180 XBT = Vel. 2,800* Energy @ 300yds. 2135
_____________________________________________

The .30-06 will drive a 33% heavier bullet of larger size and superior penetrative design at similar velocity. Through prudent
"projectile selection", as you put it in Comment #2, we have also acquired a ballistic coefficient that enables this larger and heavier projectile to shoot right along with the lighter, smaller, but not faster, .284 bullet.
Yet, IMHO, the true forte' of the .30-06 in this comparison lies at elk jungle ranges where its' greater ability to smash bone and drive deep from all angles is telling... assuming one is listening, of course.

*Barnes

[This message has been edited by Nickudu (edited 02-20-2002).]

Nickudu,

1)I like good bullets in everything. That isn't an "arguement",rather it is what I feel comfortable doing business with.

2)I worded the second statement poorly. To clarify. The 284's and 308's are close enough in diameter,that both rely upon pretty good bullets,for tasks performed on critters bigger than Deer.

That,as opposed to larger diameters who have more weight to work with and who's bullets are more geared towards Game,across the board. There are more "iffy" performing bullets in 7mm and 308,than 338 and 375. not everyone can discern the capabilities of a bullet,before they launch them at Game. That can and will,pose problems,were you to use a lesser bullet.

I do not like Ballistic Tips in either and rather like X's in both. Others will find disfavor with that.

I did a poor job of wording my thoughts and you read it out of the context I meant it. I wasn't favoring a superior projectile in one,to a lesser offering in the other,then comparing the differences.

No doubt the '06 and 180X's,will harvest. So will the 7-08 and the 140's. I never could find a 'shroom,with that combo,so penetration is hardly an issue.

Those 140's will break the shoulders of large Black Bears and then exit. It is a very capable combo and has served me well.

I listen and actually miss very little...........

I like them all I shoot a 7-08AI 280AI and 30-06. I feel that the 280AI kills better than the 06 no matter what bullet i use. They both get the job done but on deer, mule deer They drop faster with the 7mm 140 bullet and internal dammage seems to be more also. The advantage of the 06 is use of heavier bullets.

I'll give the 708 equal footing on game up to mule deer size then the 06 does everything else better. Being very willing to tote mauser action sporter rifles then the 7x57 is a better rifle than the 708 especially with bullets seated to 3.120 where I gain a little more than 5 frains over the pup and I can use Sticks vaunted x bullet if I were so inclined. As for the "bastard" thing Stick has going I believe the 7x57 will be around longer than the crippled 708.

A bet on something like that,is a better investment than my 401-K.

The 7mmMauser,is all but dead............

my Lyman manual only shows the 180gr "X" at 2717fps!!! Can you even drive one 3000fps within industry max avg pressure specs, or is everybody hotrodding their 06's?

Mike

------------------
Victory through superior firepower!

The .308" bullet is just not .024" larger it's 17% larger in frontal area.

To Big Stick,

You did not address my point that with marginal hits the larger, heavier and more powerful bullet will produce a larger wound channel and can make a difference between finding the animal or having it hobble off.

At least you are not promoting a .223 or some weak round for game. We are on the same page but just because you have not had a animal get away does not mean that others have not.

I have shot deer with holes in all parts. I have antlers here with a .243 hole in them. Another with a hole in it's ear. I was dragging out a fork horn in PA and watched a trophy buck walk by. It was shot in it's rear leg. It was making it slowly along and it stopped under a softwood tree to hide in the shade. So animals get wounded by mere mortals.

I killed a buck with the .358 Win. (of course) that had it's butt shot off by other hunters (using 30-06's I admit). What a story that is.

The constant mention of Barnes X bullets here has me concerned. As far as I can tell in the real world almost nobody really uses them. I have tried X bullets and found that they foul bores.

Big Stick, since it has been brought up I do wonder why you seem so open minded to trying and using all sorts of different calibers but are very adimint that there is only one bullet to do it all and one powder to launch it with. I do not think that there is any hidden propaganda behind your posts but do find it strange that you can have such an open mind to an assortment of calibers but so closed minded as to bullet and powder selection.

Don,

I don't know a single guy here(SE Alaska),that doesn't shoot the X bullet in most every rifle he owns. I guess we don't live in the "real world"?

In a panic,that they quit making them,I ordered a dozen boxes of .257" 75grX,just a couple weeks ago. I am an unapologetic junkie,of the first order.

I can't comment on anyone else's preferences,experiences,etc. They have proven themselves to me,in a way no other projectile I've tried,for turning out the lights on critters.

They are a known quantity to me,in that I know what is going to happen,long before I do it.

Simplicity interests me,largely because it is often the best approach. The X has no components that rely on each other,for optimal results,as they are homogenous. I can't push them fast enough to fail one(despite my best efforts),can hardly ever recover one and I've never had an accuracy issue with them. I shoot them in 224,243,257,284,308,338 and 375. Most fail to recognize what they are capable of. I'm glad I didn't.

That others have "troubles",baffles me..........

heavy varmint,

I like what has proven itself to me. My quest for great bullets,ended with the X. I've shot nothing that digs as deep and is as capable at smashing bone,while giving great expansion.

That allows one to drop down a weight or two,in a given diameter and gain some speed. That without fear of tearing a bullet up,surrendering penetration,or compromising expansion. Plus being homogenous,they are long for their weight and offer very solid BC's. That is a nice bonus too and compliments the increase in speed.

I shoot a pretty large selection of bullets,for a lot of things. My preference and without hesitation for crunching critters,is the X.

Actually,I have a pretty good selection of propellants on hand,but seldom deviate from Re-series offerings. They produce the best blend of speed and accuracy,in my barrels. That is important to me. Re-15 and 22,my favorites.

If/when something better comes along,I'll be having it. Being open minded is how you learn and I'm all ears,while waiting for the next break through....................

Stick you must work for Enron then. The 7x57 has been around a lot longer than the 708 already. As to present popularity the 7x57 is possibly more common in my area then the 708 if ammo availability counts. I see more 7x57's than either 260 or 708 rifles at the local gun range. The facts are that cartridges not making it to the shelves of Walmart generally do not do well and the 708 directly competing with the 308 in the short action market is going to lose every time. In fact cartridges designed for the short action market have a high fatality rate, 6.5 remington, 350 rem mag, 284 win, 358 win, 250 savage, 300 savage are examples and I predict the 260 rem will follow them. Unlike the 708 the 7x57 has history and class to back it up and a greater number of manufacturers make ammo for it. It is also a more appealing round to make up a custom rifle as itfeeds through mauser actions so well.

Gentlemen,

I'm willing to give the Barnes X bullet a try. I believe the XLC series(blue coating) is the way to go. I have read from several sources it greatly reduces the fouling problem. I will report to all on this forum my findings. I have had bad fouling from Swift Sirroccos(uncoated)in a 7STW so it's not only Barnes. I try to keep an open mind..... sure-shot

Big Stick,
I think I gotta try the X-bullet as well.

*What bullet weight do you think would be best in 308 win for small roe deer to big moose? 150 or 165?

*Will the blue coated X-bullets reduce fouling to normal levels?

As a comment, my boss tried the X-bullet one season some years ago and shot over 20 moose with it. He didn't like it, said moose ran longer than with standard bullets. He said that it might need higher velocity than his was loaded to. he shoots a 9,3.

Big Stick,

You call a X-Bullet simplicity? If my memory serves me I recall mention of some improved cartridges that you load. Is that simplicity? To me simplicity would be shooting factory loads!

I may or not be that the X type bullet performs better or not. In Haralds site he mentions that a wound made by cutting causes bleeding more than crushing so the sharper and harder metal in the X bullet may make a difference but it could be the opposite as the jackets in gilding metal bullets are harder than copper bullets.

I have never shot a animal with a X bullet but I shot a paper carton with a 165gr .308 flat base at 50 feet out of my .300 Win Mag and it lost all of its petals! That's bullet failure. That failure combined with severe fouling, high pressure and low velocity made common sense to me to run as fast as possible from the worst bullet that I have ever shot! Maybe the coated bullets solve the fouling, pressure and low velocity problem. Maybe the loss of all the petals at 3100 fps would happen with other bullets.

About 5% of the population buy the Corvairs and other fashion items. This is fine. You are the pioneers. I tried the X bullets because I shot a pair of does at short range and the 180 gr Speer hit one of them at the base of the neck from the back and a piece of lead got into the wife's venison! This was not a good thing. So I would like to hunt with a non lead bullet too. In the past however Barnes bullets never shot well either.

I could get only 3100 fps with that 165 gr X bullet out of my 26" bbl .300 Win Mag! I don't even push the 180 Corelock at 3000 fps. I wager that the 180 gr. Remington bullet could be pushed faster than the 165 X bullet. Anyway the Barnes data is also very suspect.

As to the statement that everyone in AK uses X bullets I have no way of checking on that but you can search right here or in other forums for any thread that asks what the most inaccurate bullet anyone has ever tried and it's 95% Barnes X bullets!

I wish Barnes Bullets well. They are gun people.

Don, just curious, what bullet do you use?
(I'm heading somewhere w/ this, trust me )

------------------
God Bless and Shoot Straight

rickt300,

I can't comment on your locale. I can comment on Factory rifles being chambered and factory ammo being offered. Plus the 7-08 has a pretty loyal following in some Competitive venues.

Americans have always been a tough sell,in regards to the various 6.5's. I tried a couple 264Winmags myself,and wasn't impressed. I've often contemplated the 6.5-284,as a long range Play Toy,but have yet to do it.

Perhaps someday,I'll take that plunge..........

sure-shot,

I like coated bullets and shoot moly in everything. The XLC coating is my preference,it is good for some extra speed and reduces cleaning intervals. The same as moly.........

PCH,

Try the 150's as an "all arounder". I believe coated bullets in general,to be an aid.

I've not experienced the fouling issues,that I've read about. I shoot very good barrels most the time,but use some factory tubes too. I shoot all of them until accuracy suffers,then clean. All barrels have a personality,in that regard. After a while,you'll have a very good feel for your individual rifle's needs.

I think X bullets get "happier",as speed increases..............

Don,

The X is constructed with the most simplistic componetry. It has exactly ONE part. No jacket,core,partition or heel cups. I like that.

I very much like a wide spectrum of cartridges that are of the typical Improved vein,and others that are more time consuming than that. They all operate with a primer,brass case,propellant and a projectile. Just like everything else. If one doesn't care for forming operations and case prep,those cartridges are available in both component ready to load brass and in some instances loaded ammo.

Factory ammo can't shoot nearly as well on the average. So a man is hamstrung with it. Because you get,what you get. Having a chamber cut to extoll the virues of some high end Factory staples,is "doable",but few opt that. The 308Win Federal 168gr MK offerings,foremost in my mind,as an exception.

I can't comment on the thoughts of another man,or what he might of done. However,I weigh very heavily,those things I've seen and done for myself. Also weigh performance I've witnessed of others. That is concrete in my estimation,the rest speculation.

The X petals whirl in the direction of the rifling,like a true replication of a saw/drill. I recovered one,that had shards of bone pinned beneath it's petals,that couldn't be pulled out with pliers. I actually had to pry the petals away from the shank of the bullet,to remove the bone,so as to get an accurate weight. That seemed to illustrate,the phenomenon I thought went on with them.

As an aside,that bullet was a .257" 75grX,that impacted at over 3500fps on a large Black Bear. That unfired projectile measures .860" in length,as she comes out of the box. That spent bullet,measured .403" in length and the diameter of the expanded petals,is .591"(over twice the starting diameter). That projectile weighed 75.0grs,after I cleaned it of tissues. Stuff like that,very much impresses me. I am able to recover so few,that I seldom get to study them. I'll try to post a photo.

The petals on the X are pretty deceiving,in that they hold a small percentage,of the projectiles overall weight. A couple buddies recovered them out of Brown Bear,up close and personal like,with their 375H&H Improveds. One lost a petal,the other all four. The one that lost all four,still retained over 80% of it's weight. Both smashed a serious amount of skeletal structure(shoulders and hips,as they were both lengthwise pokes,traversing the body),before they quit digging.

Did you happen to weigh the "failed" bullet,in the excersize you mention?

You infer,that the X is a fashion fad. I dispute that. It isn't flashy at all. I find them a working class bullet,that does things that others can't and that on a regular basis.

As mentioned prior,I can't comment on another man's rifle,or his findings,but can mine. All my running mates shoot X's,with the enthusiasm I have for them. None of us have experienced anything bad. They do build pressure quicker than a like weight conventional,but that is not a mystery,nor a secret. You start low,work up and quit where you deem as satisfactory. Same as anything else.

I load X's different than most,as I treat them like a regular bullet,regarding seating depth.

They are without peer,in my estimation..........

I found those test Barnes X bullets!

On 9/10/95 I did this testing at about 25' by firing into water filled 1/2 gal. paper cartons.

The 165 gr .308 Barnes Flat Based X bullet was fired from my Ruger #1A .300 Win Mag.(26" bbl) ahead of 73.0 gr of imr 4350 and Fed. 215's. This is the bullet that "lost all of it's petals" The remaining bullet weighs 124 gr and I still have two of the petals that are little slivers of metal. I believe all of them were in the same carton after the shot.

The remaining bullet still retains a expanded diameter of .460" by .380". This bullet pentrated 8 cartons and blew up 6 cartons.

What is interesting is that I found a 7mm bullet in the same test bag shot on the same day. I had forgotten about it. It was from my Ruger #1A in 7mm Rem Mag (22" bbl") The load was 62 gr. of surplus 4831 and the 215 primer.

What is most interesting to me is the apearance of the 140 gr Barnes flat base X bullet. It has a spectacular look to it. I am sure Big Stick would get all excited just looking at it. The four petals are pealed back to a major diameter of .595" and it still weighs 140 gr!! The look of the metal is a lot different than the .308 bullet which looks like the metal is a lot softer and is "hammered" by just the water.

My darn scanner never got going after I got the new hard drive. Right now I wish it was working. I have to do something about this.

Again the front of the .308 bullet looks like pudding and the .284" bullet looks spectacular. It has definition and looks so deadly.

the 444 shooter,

I will list a couple of bullets I shoot but keep in mind that I use large for the game bullets. The only reason I tried X bullets was as I stated somewhere here that the wife got some lead in her venision! Barnes makes a 180 gr X bullet in .358" so I got interested in shooting non lead bullets. It had nothing to do with bullet performance. I am all set there on the deer and black bear in New England.

.358 Winchester 180 gr Speer Hot Core Flat Nose. MV 2700 fps.

.30-06 Springfield 165 gr Remington Core Lokt MV approx 2800 fps

.375 H&H Improved 300 gr Nosler Partition. Max load.

To answer the question of how a Remington Corelokt would perform vrs the Barnes X bullet I found a 150 gr. Pt'd. Corelokt fired from my 30-06 Improved, 24" bbl, 62.5 gr imr 4350. The bullet has extreme expansion and has a major dia of .866" and a minor of .665. It now weighs 100 grains. It blew up 4 cartons and penetrated 5.

I don't buy the theory at all that "the sharp edges from a monolithic bullet will cut more than smash" therefore creating a more deadly wound. The largest diameter from this Corelokt is the jacket and not the lead core. The jacket is made, I believe, from gilding metal which must be harder than the copper used in Barnes X bullets. The surface area and cutting area of the Corelokt is twice as large as the X bullet and its sharper to the touch.

In conclusion: Some X bullets were made wrong. Good X bullets expand somewhat and seem good for very heavy game. Corelokts look far more deadly.

Don, thanks for the reply, but I actually forgot what point I was going to (attempt to) make...so I guess, nevermind :P

------------------
God Bless and Shoot Straight

Core-Lokts perform very nicely,until impact velocities become elevated. But that is true of most projectiles. I've killed quite a few critters with Core-lokts,but have also seen them fail miserably. The failure was my fault,as I asked too much of them,by shooting them at speeds beyond their threshold.

For the purposes and velocities they were engineered for,they are pretty reliable performers.................

Big Stick,

Perhaps you mean asking Corelokts to pentrate big bones? It seems to me that that 06 Improved 150 gr bullet must have been going 3100 fps at impact and it looks very deadly for killing water. It stayed together very well where the .308 caliber X bullet fell apart. At a longer range I imagine it would still expand very well and pentrate deeper. But it's no 140 Gr 7mm X bullet for deep-deep penetration.

Don,

No,just failed to penetrate very deep at all. I shot 165gr CL's at over 3500fps,and they nuked(30cal). The .284" 140 Core-Lokts aren't any good in an STW either,unless you allow some speed to bleed off(longish range).

Those are rather extreme examples,but they really failed to penetrate much at all. I'm not cussing the bullet,because they are not designed to harness those speeds.

In fact,my understanding is Remington beefed up the .284" CL's for introduction with the 7Ultra. I haven't either a rifle chambered for that round,nor factory fodder to examine. If that is true,I'd say it was a VERY good move.

The 140gr CL's in 7-08,dig deep and do pretty well on bone. That is a pretty good match...............