Take III - Which NON-.308 "full-sized battle rifle" caliber poll thread


Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
July 29, 2009, 06:12 PM
Take III - Which NON-.308 "full-sized battle rifle" caliber poll thread

Last two were flawed/incomplete for various reasons, and there's no reason to limit it to AR10 types. Promise this will be the last one, even if I screw it up.

So, BESIDES .308, which caliber have you already bought, or if not, would you be most likely to buy first, in an AR10, FAL, M14, G3 type, etc.?

See poll. I allowed multiple choices this time.

If you enjoyed reading about "Take III - Which NON-.308 "full-sized battle rifle" caliber poll thread" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
10mm Mike
July 29, 2009, 07:39 PM
I voted for the 7mm-08 and .338 Federal.

Both have an abundance of different bullets available for those that reload, and there are is a pretty good choice of ammo available for them.

July 29, 2009, 07:42 PM
.260-6.5 Norma, I like the 6mm's. :)

July 29, 2009, 07:43 PM
I'd like one of those Ohio Ordnance 1918A3's in .30-06

If you're gonna go heavy, go all the way!

July 29, 2009, 08:15 PM
i had to vote other because mine would be 30-06.

i wasnt sure what you meant by "non 308 caliber" because technically the 30-06 is in fact 308 caliber, but then again so is 300 rsaum and other 300 short mags and you had them as options so i figure im good choosing the 30-06, except that i didnt see it on the list.

so i voted other, and my favorite full sized battle rifle is the m1 garand in 30-06.

im sorry if that messes it up, but i figured that i should put it since its true for me.


Kind of Blued
July 29, 2009, 10:13 PM
"Battle rifle" implies shooting bad guys to me, and whether true or not, it makes me think "semi-auto". While something like the .375-08 is intriguing in a less cumbersome hunting rifle, I think that lighter and faster makes more sense for human targets.

I chose .243 and .260, but my choices would be different if some of those 6mm and 6.5mm cartridges were more widely used. If I were to buy a semi-auto MBR, I would want it chambered for something which can be either purchased or reloaded on the cheap, because you know it'll be tons of fun to shoot at the range.

July 29, 2009, 11:41 PM
Had to pick the 250 Sav since it was listed. Great little cartridge, accurate, low recoil & if you can hit what you want every time it's alot better than a cannon you can't hit anything with.

July 30, 2009, 12:04 AM
I believe its a flawed premise when there are so many 308 battle rifles such as the FAL, M1A, G3, Ar10, Saiga, Galil,

The one non 308 I can think of is 30-06 as in the M1 Garand.

July 30, 2009, 12:06 AM
.260 Rem how about the .276 Perderson!

July 30, 2009, 12:15 AM
Theirs the new .300 OSSM (.300 Olympic Super Short Mag)

July 30, 2009, 01:08 AM
7x57 Venezualean FN-49 baby!!

July 30, 2009, 04:57 AM
good ol' 8mm mauser

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
July 30, 2009, 10:38 AM
I believe its a flawed premise

It's not a "flawed premise". It's a "question". And I don't think it could be much clearer. However, for the benefit of those who don't yet understand the question, I'll try to clarify.

*IF* you have bought a semi-auto "EBR" in a non-.308 caliber, then which one was it? If you have not bought a semi-auto "EBR" in a non-.308 caliber, then which one, if any non-.308 caliber, do you want, plan to buy, or would be most likely to buy, first?

If you didn't know, DPMS, DS Arms, and several others make non-.308 "EBRs" or "battle rifles".

If the answer is none, don't vote. Don't choose "other" for .308 - that's not the question.

Guys, you cannot pick 8mm mauser, .30-06, 7x57 mauser, or any other "long action" caliber. This question is intended to be limited to "standard" length calibers that will go into existing magwells/platforms.

July 30, 2009, 10:57 AM
I agree with FlyinBryan, make mine .30-06 or leave it .308

If you start a poll with "other" as a choice you have to expect all
sorts of answers that you may not want or agree with. That's life.

July 30, 2009, 10:59 AM
am i correct in presuming that when you say "non 308 caliber" that you mean non 308 winchester cartidge firing?

if you mean non 308 caliber then my choice would have to change.

i figured you meant non 308 winchester cartridge firing because you actually have a couple of 308 caliber cartridges listed.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
July 30, 2009, 11:43 AM
Yes, I mean "non-.308 win". Which I thought was obvious by my inclusion of .30 T/C and .300 RSAUM in the poll.

H2O, in my post immediately above yours, I specified that it needs to be short action cartridge, and specifically that .30-06 is not a valid choice. Thanks.

July 30, 2009, 11:47 AM
my apoligies, i had already posted 30-06.

since its excluded i would pick the 338 federal so instead of being 8 votes it would be 9.


July 30, 2009, 11:54 AM
in my post immediately above yours, I specified that it needs to be short action cartridge

I was still typing my response when you posted your revised specifications.

I feel that your never-ending polls are not valid because you have not yet
been able to focus your attention on what it is that you are looking for specifically.

Good luck with poll number 4.

July 30, 2009, 12:02 PM
I'm confused by the fact that only one person has picked 6mm Rem, but several have picked .243 Win. 6mm is roughly the same size cartridge, exact same projectile, and has more umph.


July 30, 2009, 01:20 PM
M1 Garand, 30-06 is mine

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
July 30, 2009, 02:43 PM
I feel that your never-ending polls are not valid

Define "valid". Is it any more or less "valid" than the thread I just posted in that said "Man I sure wish CZ would make a revolver", with other people saying "yep"? But you are correct about the never-ending part. If I post a couple of polls per month consistently through the next coming years - well, all I can say is......the horror - THE HORROR!!!

because you have not yetbeen able to focus your attention on what it is that you are looking for specifically.

No, you are quite incorrect. It is focused on exactly what I want it to answer. How would you know what I'm trying to answer? And what would make you think it's something different from what I actually asked? The ONLY way it doesn't answer what I want it to answer is when people don't read the question or make up their own question, and respond to that, as some have done.

Good luck with poll number 4.

As I said clearly above in my post #1, this is the last one no matter what. Guess maybe you were posting your post at the same time I was posting post #1 too - perhaps you have a slow computer.

July 30, 2009, 02:50 PM
It would sure help if you'd read the thread.
He's just frustrated that you didn't give him a legitimate reason to post yet another picture of his beloved M1As. :)

I decided that my final choice was 358 Win. If I'm going to carry the weight of an AR10 instead of my AR15s, it better do something that my AR15 can't do. Since I can have 6.5 Grendel, 6.8SPC, 7.62x39, 458 SOCOM, and other such AR15s, I decided that only the 200+ yard bigger bore options really differentiated the AR10 platform from the smaller one.

I would define my use for this platform as sporting use, field carried, shots taken inside of 400 yards, suitable for any two or four-legged critter smaller than bear.

July 30, 2009, 03:08 PM
I love my 7mm-08's, especially my 18.5" 788 Remmie

Float Pilot
July 30, 2009, 03:44 PM
Hmm lets see.

1. Battle rifle, ie military use. So all the big bore hunting cartridges need not apply. Unless you were talking about an all around survival type rifle.

2. Battle rifle implies more than an assault rifle (intermediate) round.

So we have some factors to review.

A. There is no set rifle action size so we can come up with anything and then build a rifle around it.

B. Reliablity, it must work in a semi auto action and load all the time.

C Weight of ammunition is a prime concern. This is a battle rifle and not a bear hunting rifle. You need to haul around a real battle load in field conditions all day every day. Not see how much you can pose with in your mom's basement.

D.Recoil. You have to figure for all sorts of different size troops.

E Space. How much room the ammunition consumes in magaziens and ammo cans.

F Anti personnel /material effectiveness. The ballance of what your troops can carry and fire versus what effect it has on the enemy. While an exploding 458 Win Mag does lots of damage, it is not practical. Just as a troop could also carry 2,000 rounds of 22lr ammo without being much of a major threat on the battle field. So the best round for killing is not going to be the best round to carry.


***22-250. Basically a 250 Savage case necked down. A great varmint cartridge but is rough on barrel life and would not lend itself to anti material work unless it was slowed down and loaded with heavier bullets. Then you end up with a 5.56mm again.

***6x47mm, also known as the 6mm x 222mag, About the same as a 6mm x223. While slightly better than a 5.56mm, it probably falls into the intermediate cartridge group.

***6mm Rem aka 244 Remington. While slightly betetr than the 243 Win. it has a longer case.

***243 Win and 260 Rem. 6mm and 6.5mm. Both based upon the 308 case. Better for weight considerations but about the same in space consumption.
Both have good downrange trajectory and enough impact damage for 250 pound living targets.

***250 Savage also known as the 250-3000. This case is 48.56mm long (1.912 inches) Generally a good all around cartridge that was years ahead of it's time. Would offer some weight and size advantages over the 308 based cartridges. Would not have the long range performance of the 6.5mm weapons but would offer more power then a 5.56mm.

*** 7mm-08. Another round based on the 308 case with a 51.18mm (2.015 inch) long case. Not different enough from the 7.62 NATO to bother spending any money on mass produced military rifles. May offer some slight savings in weight.

***7.62 NATO, (308) seems to work just fine, but space and weight considerations have been working against it for 50 years.

***30-06 and larger, too big and too much recoil for military purposes only. There is a reason they invented the 7.62 NATO.

*** Dual use hunting: The 338 Federal and the 358 Winchester. Both these offer a large game hunting edge in a 308 size package. The 358 Winchester having the edge with heavier bullets. Both are good cartridges out to 300 yards. Ammunition weight now becomes a major concern.

22-250 or .22 Middlestead.......... Nope
.243 Win............ good
6mm Rem..........nope
.250 Savage......good
.260 Rem...........very good
6.5 Creedmoor........Nope, not good in shorter barrels
6x47mm Lapua.........why bother?
6.5-.284 Norma..... too big in diameter, short barrel life
.270-08 wildcat.......just get a 7mm-08
7mm-08...........not as good as the 260 rem
.284 Win........Too big in diameter
.30 T/C.............not in an auto loader
.300 RSAUM or other .300 short mag... not good for auto loaders, too big in diameter.
8mm-08 wildcat.......why get a .323 bullet when you can get a .338 Fed.
.338 Federal......Ok for game critters.
.358 Win..........very good for game critters.
.375-08 wildcat.... nope.
.450 Marlin..... being attacked by zombie bears? this would be rough on weight and on the rifle action.

July 30, 2009, 04:18 PM
ask any ww2 vet if their rifles were too powerful.

***30-06 and larger, too big and too much recoil for military purposes only. There is a reason they invented the 7.62 NATO.

ya, and there is a reason that trojan makes an ultra slim fit too but that doesnt mean they are right for all of us.:neener::neener:

Float Pilot
July 30, 2009, 04:41 PM
ask any ww2 vet if their rifles were too powerful\\

I have. They did.

ya, and there is a reason that trojan makes an ultra slim fit too but that doesnt mean they are right for all of us.

Hmm. The real reason the Shrinks make big bucks when not needed, while gunstores sell big bores when not needed. Caliber envy.

July 30, 2009, 04:46 PM
Ok so the question begs...what rifles in the above calibers ARE semi-auto?

I can see most of them being bolt guns, but that would'nt be considered a "Battle Rifle," would it? Unless you are considering a Moisn or a Mauser or something along that line.

I have always been under the impression that a true Battle Rifle was larger caliber (.30+) and at least semi auto.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
July 30, 2009, 04:49 PM
If there is one major flaw in the current poll, it's that 6.5-284 and .284 are included. These cases are 55mm long, some 4 mm longer than the .308, so I don't know if they will really fit into a standard magazine/platform size. I only included them because that one custom maker of AR10 showed .284 Win on the website. But if they are possible, you'd probably have to load the bullets kinda short, not to mention turn the mag into single stack - but talk about some real performance! The reality though, is that a lot of case capacity is going to be compromised once you shove those bullets down deeply enough. But, OTOH, there is a LOT of case capacity to go around with .284 based cartridges!

.450 Marlin however, makes sense, as it's a 53mm case, and loads short stubby bullets. Sounds quite doable, if the bolt thrust can be handled.

July 30, 2009, 10:36 PM
Winslow, you're just a tad sensitive about your polling ain't ya?

July 30, 2009, 10:55 PM
What is the purpose of trying to "replace" the 7.62x51 (.308)? What will anything else do in the standard size gun (FAL, AR-10, M14, etc), that the original round won't do, on the average, better? You just can't make a wheel any more round than it is.........OR, if it isn't broken, why try to "fix" it? I guess my rationale is, when considering a new round, are you going to totally replace the .308/7.62 for general use, or now have TWO cartridges that are maybe even going to get mixed during extreme conditions if both are in use? If we are talking civilians just putzing with semi-autos for their own use on the homefront, I guess any choice is fine.

July 31, 2009, 12:34 AM
Why no .270?

July 31, 2009, 12:49 AM
Gimme a SOCOM16 in .358 Winchester and I'd be a happy camper! Or a Garand in .35 Whelen! That'd be a whopper-stopper!

August 3, 2009, 12:58 AM
If I had to pick any battle rifle that i had to lug in your list it would be an Ar-10 in .338 Federal. Ide like to be able to turn that brick wall the towelyban is hiding behind into rubble. :D Trojan makes an ultra slim fit? :confused:

August 3, 2009, 01:15 AM
303 lee enfield

August 3, 2009, 01:16 AM
I would never choose any of the calibers listed so I chose other. If I wanted a non-308 battle rifle (semi-auto), I would choose 30-08 or 8mm mauser.

I have zero interest in any of the more specialized calibers listed. I understand that they are awesome for various reasons, I just have no interest in them. I like calibers that are easy to get ammo for and have very widespread reloading availability. I like used brass that is easy to get and under 50 dollars for 500+ used pieces. None of the listed calibers meet those expectations for my needs.

If you enjoyed reading about "Take III - Which NON-.308 "full-sized battle rifle" caliber poll thread" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!