Winchester Model 70 Alaskan- which caliber?

Well for punching paper, and the 2 choices you gave, definitely the ‘06 makes more sense. And there isn’t an animal in Alaska that cannot be downed with an ‘06 either. Someone will probably come along and turn this into a caliber debate that will involve Moose, Grizzly, penetration, distance, ft/lbs of energy and what not. And they’ll make good points. The 300 is more powerful. But the ‘06 will do the job just fine. And as you stated, you’re primarily punching paper.

The new Alaskan in 300 Win mag. The stock is a better design, for using a scope.
The 300 can be down loaded in velocity to 06 levels.

Factory Managed Recoil ammo is available, if you don't reload.

.30-06, the larger calibers are going to kick hard for range use, and the .30-06 is an excellent hunting round

.30-06

Cheaper, softer, but can still take anything in North America. Only thing I would feel that I "need" something bigger than an -06 is against big brown bears... but again... -06 can still do it.

As far as classic caliber for a classic gun, what's more classic in America than a good ole .30-06? It won two world wars... it's like Willy's Jeep and Apple pie.

.30-06 is far more versatile. There's no game in North America that needs a magnum of any kind to kill. A 165 grain bullet out of an '06 will kill any game you care to hunt.
"...The 300 is more powerful..." Not by much. Higher velocities and slightly higher recoil(a whole 5.9 ft-lbs. out of 8 pound rifles) with like bullet weights(180). Still no need for a magnum anything.
There's really no big time advantage to a pre-64 Win M70 except to a Winchester collector.

Robert said:

Neither. 375H&H. Will take any game in the world, has pretty much the same poi at 300y as the 06 with a nearly 100gr heavier bullet and doesn't kick nearly as bad as the 300. It will do everything the other two will do and then some. It tends to be accurate across a wide range of bullet weights and can be found almost anywhere.

Now, of the two listed, 30-06.

Click to expand...

I'd pick the 30-06 too. There are many who will disagree about .300 WM recoil being worse than .375 H&H.

igotta40 said:

I'll mostly shoot at the range, so intended use aside, Logic tells me the .06 is the classic caliber in a classic rifle, but to be truer to the name, would not the .300 Win Mag chambering be better suited to Alaskan game?

Click to expand...

If shooting at the range was the most important thing, I'd get the 30-06. But here's the thing - you said "Logic tells me the .06 is the classic caliber in a classic rifle," and while that's sort of true, neither the 30-06 nor the 300 Win Mag are "classic" chamberings for the Model 70 Alaskan.
I have a 1962 Winchester Catalog sitting in front of me, and it shows that back then, the Model 70 Alaskan was only chambered in .338 Win Mag and .375 H&H. Of course the catalog lists a bunch of other Model 70s too: the Featherweight, the Standard, the Westerner, the African, the Varmint, and the Target. And they're chambered for calibers from the .243 to the .458 Win Mag, but the 1962 Model 70 Alaskan was only chambered in .338 Win Mag and .375 H&H.
Oh, BTW none of the 1962 Model 70s were chambered for the 300 Win Mag either (I don't think it had been introduced yet). There was a couple of 1962 Model 70s chambered for the 300 H&H though.
Anyway, like I said, if I was going to buy a Model 70 primarily for shooting "at the range," I'd probably get the 30-06. But if I was buying a Model 70 Alaskan in a classic chambering, it would be a 375 H&H. But then again, I'm fond of the 375 H&H anyway.

cdb1 said:

There are many who will disagree about .300 WM recoil being worse than .375 H&H.

Click to expand...

That's for sure. the .375 kicks a LOT harder. I have Pre-64's in both calibers and there is a BIG difference.

Good luck in finding a pre 64 in 375 H&H. That is a hard caliber to find. It would take anything in Alaska. I do have a pre 64 in 300 H&H . I am pushing a 190 grain bullet just at 2900 fps, that will put a world of hurt on most anything. The 300 H&H is one of the best feeding cartridges. It has a lot of taper so it feeds very smoothly. I think I can get four in the magazine, I would have to check. I don't think it will fit five.







This is a picture of me "fire forming" new 300 H&H brass at CMP Talladega. I lube the cases and the bullets. Greasing the outside of the case prevents the case from adhering to the chamber upon firing. This is something Bench Rest National Champions do when firing forming. For me, it prevents case head separation which is a financial consideration. Belted magnum cases run at $2.00 a case, I want them to last as long as possible. I end up with a perfect stress free fireformed case just like the National Champs.



300 yard groups at CMP Talladega with my 300 H&H Magnum. The rifle and the round is very accurate.



100 yard group for zeroing purposes.



I am not a believer in three shot groups to determine accuracy. Three shot groups don't prove anything about inherent accuracy or consistency. Three shot groups are the "Gold Standard" for gunwriters primarily because they are trying to reduce the time and expense of producing their articles. They get a flat fee for their articles, (about $400) so to lessen time at the range and the cost of their shooting components, they heavily promote three shot groups as an accuracy standard. If you understand that accuracy requires big group sizes, you can parse out the nonsense in their data, such as half MOA 30-30 lever actions, with cast bullets! I only have ten shot groups in these pictures, largely because I don't have to prove anything to anyone but myself, and these things kick! I am satisfied with a 5 3/4" ten shot group at 300 yards with a vintage hunting rifle. Both the rifle and cartridge are fine for most any application on this continent.

30-06 is available almost any where, and that includes any where in Alaska.

igotta40 said:

I need to buy less and shoot more, huh?

Click to expand...

That’s one way to look at it. But having more flavors isn’t a bad thing either. I like variety. But a new rifle, that’s not a collectors item, that’s just sits in the box or safe? That’s not my cup of tea. All my rifles are shooters.

I have several pre 64 Model 70's in 30-06 and even though I own other Model 70 rifles in 25-06, 270 Winchester and 338-06, the 30-06 rifles are the love of my life. I will admit that it took me several years to find the loads that worked best but when I did I never looked back. When I think of it I have been shooting Model 70 rifles in 30-06 for over 40 years. One day I realized that every time I went hunting I was carrying a 30-06 and it came as sort of a surprise. My favorite loads with the 150 grain bullet are 57 grains of Reloader 17 and 51 grains of IMR 4064 with a magnum primer. For the 165 grain bullet I have had great success with 57 grains of IMR 4350 and I have taken many deer with that load. For the 180 grain bullet I have always used 55 grains of IMR 4350. I now prefer the featherweight version of the Model 70 because it is so easy to carry and handle. But when the chips are down and I have a long range shot to make I go back to the standard grade with a 24 inch barrel and a long range scope. You won't be sorry in buying that 30-06, just make sure it has a good recoil pad. I usually shoot 20 rounds at every practice session and that is about enough with a rifle that weighs a little over 8 pounds.

Slamfire, that 300 H&H is one pretty rifle. I have handled those at gun shows and it was hard to put them down. I like everything about your rifle. The stock, the recoil pad, length of pull, and the barrel without sights are great. Those gold colored dense walnut stocks are the cream of the crop. That Pachmayr F325 field pad works great on a rifle with recoil because it is wider than a Decelerator pad. I have the same pad on a Model 70 338-06 and I have intentionally kept the white line recoil pad on it so I won't get it mixed up with a 30-06.

Most people living in Alaska wouldn't choose the "Alaskan" version of the 70. Too long, too heavy, and not really suited for Alaskan conditions. But it is a pretty rifle. The 25" barrel would be a handicap getting into and out of boats, planes and maneuvering through swamps while hunting big stuff that can eat you or stomp you into the mud. An 8 1/2 lb rifle once scoped would be closer to 10 lbs. No reason for that either.

The 300 and 338 magnums hit a LITTLE harder at extended ranges compared to 30-06. At under 100 yards there is no game animal on the earth that would know the difference between 30-06, 300 WM or 338 WM. As much as I want to say 30-06, in this rifle 375 is the only way to go. In a rifle that heavy recoil is manageable and 375 is the only cartridge that offers any advantage over 30-06. And this rifle is too big for 30-06.

In a smaller, more compact rifle, I'd have probably suggested 30-06.

There are very few times where most of us can justify 375, but this is one of those times. Of all the big magnums capable of the largest African game, the 375 is also versatile enough for deer size game. And it's trajectory is very near 30-06 out to 300 ish yards making longer shots possible too.

......I just don’t know anyone who has a 375H&H primarily for a range rifle (although eastbank might). Talk about an expensive range session. And if you’re reloading, the ‘06 makes much more sense as well. However, the OP didn’t state if he was a hand loader. But if he simply wants the classic cartridge, then according to that 1962 catalog, it should be 338 or 375.

I love my pre-64 30-06 in all its bigly Made in America greatness!

I'd pick the '06 for general usefulness and ammo availability.

The new Alaskans are fine rifles. There's not a fit or finish difference I could tell between the ones made in SC a few years ago versus the ones now made in Portugal, but if that's important to you, that's a difference. It is to me, so I promptly sold my Alaskan I thought was made in the US, but wasn't.

The price of a 98% condition pre-64 in 30-06 according to the Blue Book is near enough to the price of the new Alaskan, I'd search for a pre-64, but don't pay anyone's asking price - most people have imbibed substantial amounts of pre-64 koolaid and think their 30-06 standard rifle is the same price as a more rare 375 HH model...

So, if you could find a 95% pre-64 in 30-06, you're looking at around a $1,000. That's a solid shooter rifle. Same condition pre-64 gun in 300 Win Mag is $3,000, so the better value might be the new Alaskan in that caliber.

When it comes to buying a pre 64 Model 70 it's all about the condition of the metal. A good stock can be purchased for less than $200 on eBay. I would never buy a rifle because I liked the stock. I install a Pachmayr recoil pad on every rifle, and I change the trigger to a Timney if the original trigger has any creep. The size of the group and the enjoyment in shooting the rifle is directly proportionate to the selection of the scope, recoil pad, length of pull, trigger, bullet and powder.

If it were me, New Alaskan and I'd get it in 30-06.

New because you just can't replace that new gun smell.

30-06 because it will do the job, I load everything I shoot and it's components are ubiquitous.

I'd like to get a new M70 and have it rebarreled to 300 H&H. Not practical but I've always been fascinated by the cartridge while the .300 WinMag holds no appeal to me.