.338-06 vs .30-06 for a Bush Gun.

KansasTrapper77 said:

This idea is a little less deer drive rifle and more you can only bring one rifle on the bush plane. Mortally reliable action with controlled feed.

I have a nice Marlin Guide gun in 45-70 for my deer drives but its more for those 100 yards or less shots.

This rifle I’m envisioning is capable of 300 - 400 yard shots if necessary but wieldy enough if you spook Mr. Griz on accident. If Ruger made their scout rifle in long action I wouldn’t even have to bother.

Click to expand...

ANY THING that will kill game cleanly at 400 yards will do exactly the same thing AND MORE at 100 yards.

KansasTrapper77 said:

Well now it’s just waiting to find a rifle to start with. I’d like to find a Bubba’ed M1917

Click to expand...

Why not a k98? I love the Springfield, and the P17, but k98's are so much easier to find. ?

I haven't felt truly undergunned with 30-06, though have to agree if you are going to go through the cost and work of modding a rifle best to go with biggest round which can be reasonably handled in the magazine using the same bolt face and a replacement barrel. I would be (and occasionally have) looked hard at 9.3x62. Maybe not as popular here in the US but it's truly on level with African big game and certainly more than enough umph to get the job done with anything walking in North America at brush gun ranges.

KansasTrapper77 said:

I love a good argument about “brush busting” guns but those are best had over beers where you can see my sh*t eating grin as I tell you my 45-70 cuts down full grown oaks (and mills them afterwards ) while still killing the deer on the other side, not over the internet.

Click to expand...

Yah, brush busting. That bear I shot with my Jeager, I hit it a bit too far back, gut shot it, she dropped and bawled a bit, then rolled over, got up and took off, and I had to dive into the heavy brush after it. Now when I caught up with her I was close and could see her sitting up, through the brush. I've never bought into the brush-busting thing, but being so close I figured it would not throw a big old hunking .600" ball over a bucket full of Swiss off very much. Two clean misses later I walked up and finished it off. One would think that if anything could get through brush, it would be a .62 with a heavy charge. Nope. So that would be my "argument".

Captcurt said:

It would be interesting to do some penetration test. Take the 200gr of the same make in 30-06, 338-06, and the 338 Federal, and see which one penetrates the deepest. I would nearly bet on the 30-06 just because of the better SD. What do you think?

Click to expand...

I've already done that test, the 200NP out of a 30-06, out penetrates many of the bigger calibers I see guys drooling over.

AND, those that brag on how deep their bullet/load will penetrate, forget all about an important part of the equation! That would be, that the bullet must ALSO expand fast, BEFORE penetrating deeply, to give quick kills.

DM

Jack Ryan said:

ANY THING that will kill game cleanly at 400 yards will do exactly the same thing AND MORE at 100 yards.

Click to expand...

EXCEPT that, there are bullets that perform good at 400 and do NOT perform good up close. The reverse is also true...

DM

illinoisburt said:

I haven't felt truly undergunned with 30-06, though have to agree if you are going to go through the cost and work of modding a rifle best to go with biggest round which can be reasonably handled in the magazine using the same bolt face and a replacement barrel. I would be (and occasionally have) looked hard at 9.3x62. Maybe not as popular here in the US but it's truly on level with African big game and certainly more than enough umph to get the job done with anything walking in North America at brush gun ranges.

Click to expand...

I have used (and still own) the 9.3x74R too, same bullet at close to the same speed as the 62. The 286NP's are pretty good, but that's about the only 9.3 bullet I care for...

I really prefer a little more speed than the 62/74R gets with the heavy bullets.

DM

Jack Ryan said:

ANY THING that will kill game cleanly at 400 yards will do exactly the same thing AND MORE at 100 yards.

Click to expand...

Even deader!

DM~ said:

EXCEPT that, there are bullets that perform good at 400 and do NOT perform good up close. The reverse is also true...

DM

Click to expand...

ah huh what ever

KansasTrapper77 said:

Do you mean a true K98 or just a military Mauser action? Like an Argentine copy?

Click to expand...

I'm thinking German k98.

My solution was that I picked up a used Ruger M77 Hawkeye African in .375Ruger.

Most of the bush type planes I’ve seen and/or flown would have no problem accommodating a rifle in a case up to a 24” bbl. The super cub I flew had a Kolpin case mounted to the wing struts (bungee cords) so most any scoped rifles (not AR’s) would fit.

Ammo would be my concern. I had my MkX returned to .30/06 from .338-06. Between Finn Aagard anc John Barsness and others, I’d be inclined to go with a .30:06 and either 200gr NP or Swift A-frame.

My observations on Alaska cartridges is that residents carry .30/30’s .30/06, 7.62x54R, .45/70 and .308’s. Guides, outfitters, non residents carry MAGNUMS. Visiting the Walmart’s in Anchorage and Talkeetna was enlightening. Saw lots of .375H&H, .458winmag! 11varieties of .45/70. 1 or 2 varieties of most Weatherby magnums. Crates of .30/30, .30/06, and 12ga.

Unless I had access to an available action at bargain price and likewise barrel, Ect, I’d just buy a used bolt action .30/06 and cut barrel to 20” and replace front sight.
Or do as I did and buy a lightly used heavy hitter.
I have $425 in for the .375Ruger. $200 for a Savage 110 in .300RUM, and $250 for a Weatherby Vanguard.257! Nobody wants to pony up for the Ammo!

If you do decide on a 98 Mauser action (or variant) pm me. I have a A&B 24”.338-06 bbl, Lee dies, brass and bullets I’d consider letting go of.

Wow, the Goose got ya covered!! I still understand why a .338-06 is desired over a .375, .358, etc. And although I'd prefer a 22" barrel over a 20" for beating around the bush, I understand the desire for a 20". I think you are thinking in terms of the overall package, which is good. Sure, even a 26" barrel would still fit in the Super Cub, and really would not be that un-handy in the bush, but that's not the point. !!

Anyhow, finding a Ruger77 in any caliber, and just re-barreling it would save a lot of time, money and hassle. I prefer the tang-safety models, and have one with a 20" ER Shaw barrel in .350RM. It's a sweet handling, short and stubby light rifle. Crazy accurate. I "wish" it had a 22" barrel, but I lose no sleep over it.

Having said all that, I'd jump on the Goose's barrel and accoutrements, and find me a Mauser. The Mauser does make an elegant sporter when worked over and done right. And again, more easy to locate than a Springfield, (cha-CHING!$$$$) and less work than a P17, which has to be trimmed down quite a bit.

Ugly Sauce said:

Having said all that, I'd jump on the Goose's barrel and accoutrements, and find me a Mauser. The Mauser does make an elegant sporter when worked over and done right.

Click to expand...

Which would point me to a Howa action.

I guess them days is gone. And I appreciate a DIY over a factory rifle. I'm pretty sure finding a Bubba'd Springfield would be difficult, as any Springfield would be sought after as long as the action is good. I can't imagine on laying on a gun-show table for long. Should still be a few Mausers around at somewhat reasonable prices. I don't know enough about the Mauser to say, but perhaps a 1909 Argentine would make a good rifle. I think one could find a 1909 or at least an action without too much expense. ? Also don't know if the barrel shank/thread size would be the same as a k98. ? There's the "large ring" and "small ring" thing that always confuses me.

Sight radius (long) is always a good thing to have, but for me I kind of like the rear sight set rather forward and with an oversize notch for snap shooting. Doesn't seem to hurt much as far as carefully aimed shots.

KansasTrapper77 said:

The reason I even consider the .338 is a little heavier bullet and the possibility of getting a little better powder burn in the 20” barrel than the .30 cal.

Click to expand...

I say .338-06, just because it's cooler. And the shorter barrel will affect both the same for all intents and purposes.

KansasTrapper77 said:

Found a sporterized M1903 today after work.

Click to expand...

NO WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! way? That would be like the holy grail. Or a pound of unobtainium.

I would not slow down on a Springfield action. That be like the ultimate. Of course, if the owner figures it worth it's weight in gold, might have to pass. But any reasonable price, considering the current state of affairs...snag it.

Goosey said:

I say .338-06, just because it's cooler. And the shorter barrel will affect both the same for all intents and purposes.

Click to expand...

I’d think the .338-06 should do better with a shorter barrel than .30-06. Larger bore with about the same amount of powder means the gas will expand faster and pressure will drop faster. This allows the use of faster burn rate powders and/or shorter barrels. Dividing case volume by bore area yields 713 gr per sq in for .338-06. .308 win is 752, .30-06 is 915 and .300wm is 1152. You’ll often see a .300wm with a 24” barrel, sometimes a 26” and very rarely a 22”. Most common for .30-06 is 22”, occasionally 24” and less common, but not rare 20”. .308 is most commonly offered in 20”. Anyway, there is clearly a correlation. Since the .338-06 ratio is lower than .308 win and 20” barrel is most common for .308 but not .30-06, I’d expect .338-06 to be happier in a 20” barrel than .30-06 would be.