30-06 as a long range round?

[hps1]

Jeff56:

What about under 600 yards? And the reason science isn't based on anecdotal evidence is because everyone has had different experiences and they very often conflict.

Didn't do too much group shooting, but here are a couple of "targets" that I did retain that were shot at 600 and under w/the '06.



This is a 3" spotter disc placed in each successive shot during a 600 yard stage of an NRA HP match w/Mod 70 '06 fired from prone position, iron sights, no artificial support:



First off, it would seem to me that we are both making the same point. As stated, IME, the '06 will do everything the 308 will do +.........beyond 600...

Here is the page from that same site that details the history of the development of the Sierra 168 gr. International bullet and it's use in the .308 in the early 60's and how it dominated competitions.

Very interesting article, thanks, I enjoyed it. The 168 gr. SMK was, indeed, made with the 7.62 in mind, and IMO was, indeed responsible in large part, for the success enjoyed by the 7.62 NATO cartridge in competition. The 168 SMK works equally as well in the 30-06, however, as opposed to, say 190's & up which are hard to drive fast enough in the .308 at 1000 IMO.

We have someone who has been involved in NRA shooting events involving the two calibers. I'd like to hear more details than were given. Is the .308 still the most accurate caliber under 600 yards? Because my information is that it has been for a long time. Let's hear the whole story.

I defer to the article written by German Salazar. He has much more experience than I, but, as stated, I have shot both in competition.

Brief personal history. I have shot HP competition starting in the early 50's with an issued M1 Garand (30-06, of course), was TDY w/an Army Post AMU in '61/'62. Young family precluded competition shooting on separation from the service but in 1983 started up again, as a civilian, w/personal (30-06) Garand and a newly acquired 1903-A3. Was hooked all over again. Between 1983 and 1999, when I was forced to retire from competition due to arthritis in neck, I had built, or owned one NM M1 and one 40XC in .308, two match grade M1's & 3 NRA match rifles in 30-06, Made high master classification in 1996 shooting the 30-06's. Shot out three barrels in the 30-06 bolt guns in the process, so I do have a bit of experience w/the two calibers, and I can't see anything the .308 will do that the 30-06 will not, again, IME, the '06 will do so with a bit more authority beyond 600.

When I shot out my first 30-06 Mod. 70 Target rifle in the mid '80's and had Mark Chandlin re-barrel it, we had a long discussion as to whether to go w/.308 or '06. His reply was, "I can build you a 30-06 that will shoot just as well as any .308 I can build." I went w/the '06 and never looked back, as I also owned the 40XC in 308 at the time and shot both, never finding the '06 lacking. Side by side, the '06 held up it's end of the bargain & the 308 couldn't beyond 600.

Now, as you stated,

science isn't based on anecdotal evidence is because everyone has had different experiences and they very often conflict.

, this is just my experience and is worth just what it cost you, YMMV.

35 Whelen:

I intend to stay with the '06, but I thought it was interesting that a man who in shooting competition, accomplished what most High Power competitors only DREAM of...and did it all with a 30-06, recommended I use the 308.

I'm sure he has his reasons, but if you want an '06, go for it; you won't be disappointed.

As stated above, I shot out several barrels in my mod. 70's. Had a 1903 A3 w/shot out barrel so put the action in a stock I built to duplicate the feel of my mod. 70's and had one of the shot out mod 70 barrels cut off to remove the worn throat, threaded to the A3 and re-chambered (to 30-06, of course ), Used it as a practice rifle, mostly for offhand. The slower lock time of the A3 (as compared to the mod 70) resulted in a shot one ring outside my call. That is to say, if I called a 10 @ 3 o'clock, the shot would be a 9 @ 3. This was not a problem for a practice rifle but would not have worked in an offhand match. For sitting and prone, however, it shot on call & was not a problem; saved a lot of wear and tear on my match rifles. It made a pretty nice rifle:



Enjoy your 03; it's a great rifle, and was built to be a 30-06 !

Regards,
hps

 

[snake284]

I believe that this is splitting hairs, but the .308 is just a hair more accurate. It's shorter and they claim that in short brass the powder burns smoother, thus making it more accurate. It's not by much but it is a bit more accurate. And at long range the difference in the 308 and 30-06 really begins to show up.

 

[UnTainted]

^ the powder burns more uniformly, I believe is the result.

 

[BrocLuno]

Yeah, but powders are evolving and so are bullets. Burns rates, pressure peaks and pressure wave shapes, time to sleep are all changing from then till now. More case capacity must make for more options with the wider range of components available now vs a few years back?

The SMK is a slightly dated design. Very close to the G7 standard, but are there better choices? I'm sure there are LR shooters out there working up their own mix & match scenarios that will enhance the 06 dynamics as the sport evolves.

 

[hps1]

I understand it was designed with the .308 in mind but do you happen to know why it wasn't adopted to the .30-06 in the early days? You sound like you were in the shooting game at the time it was developed.

I do not know why they did not use the 168 in the '06, but suspect that they opted for heavier bullet in order to get higher charge density in the larger 30-06 case w/slower powders used w/the heavier bullets (the very trait that made the 168/308 a match made in heaven).

I'm remembering now that a lot was made of the space between the powder of the .30-06 and the bullet as opposed to the case of the .308 which allowed the powder to be much closer to the bullet.

I think this is why the 190's work so well @600 & beyond in the '06. My pet load using H450 was probably 99-98% density depending upon seating depth as I increased COAL as throat eroded in my barrel(s). I believe a full case of powder is "inherently more accurate" (there's that phrase again ) than a less than case full.

My previous post only took into account target rifles, not the hunting rifles. In addition to the target rifles, I have owned 1 hunting rifle in .308 and a number of hunting & mil-surp 06's. Fact is, I built the first .308 in our area (in 1951 or 52 IIRC) when the 7.62 NATO cartridge was still known as the T65. That experience probably helped me form my preference for the 06 early on. First, I used a surplus Browning water cooled MG barrel that was brand new w/beautiful bore, but which was not a very accurate barrel as it turned out. Second problem was there was no factory brass available at the time so had to form my brass from M2 ball '06 brass which reduced case capacity, so had to reduce loads to keep pressures within an acceptable range, therefore did not get decent velocities (This was, of course before affordable chronographs were available, but suffice it to say performance was lacking).

What was it you said about

And the reason science isn't based on anecdotal evidence is because everyone has had different experiences and they very often conflict.

Another point they made, which I touched on earlier, is that large caliber rifles dominated target shooting for a while simply because a bigger bullet gives you a better chance of hitting that next ring up.

NRA took this into account and changed the rule (in favor of the mouse guns IMO) in rule14.3 mandating a .30 cal flanged scoring plug be used "to score all targets and caliber's".

Like the Ford/Chevy debate, doubt this argument will ever be resolved; personally I like 30-06's and Chevys .

Regards,
hps

 

[o Unforgiven o]

Wow, when I started this thread I had no idea that it would get this big.

Thanks to all you guys who posted, I think I have found the answer to my question.

 

[KSDeputy]

30.06 as a long range round

I asked a fellow deputy, who knows more about guns than anyone I have ever met. He told me to get a 30.06. I have a 7400 semi-auto carbine, and a few extra magazines. Since Remington had a rectal cranial inversion when they designed it without provision for a sling, a loop type shotgun sling works quite well. I bought a case of ammo as well. I have not put a scope on it, have not decided yet. It is a long range round to be sure.

 

[marksman13]

The '06 worked just fine for Carlos Hathcock.

 

[Art Eatman]

See Post #115.