30-06 as a long range round?

[USSR]

"the way I understand the history" , "I wasn't there but I have read this stuff"

"I don't know how accurate that claim is but I've heard it many times"

"Maybe what I just said is old information but I have read it many times"

"You can find a lot of this information on this web page. There are others like it around the web"

"Again I didn't write this stuff but apparently the guy who did really knew the subject"

In a court of law, this would be inadmissible as hearsay. There is absolutely nothing here detailing any personal knowledge gleaned by, oh I don't know, perhaps experience reloading and shooting both cartridges? Individual rifles are or are not accurate, not cartridges.

Don

 

[Howard Roark]

Well, here are a few facts about the winners of the the NRA long range national championships for the last 5 years:

2006 Kent R. Reeve 1436-73X
2007 John L. Whidden 1241-68X
2008 John L. Whidden 1239-65X
2009 SPC Sherri J. Gallagher, USA 1245-62X
2010 John L. Whidden 1243-75X
cite: (http://www.nrahq.org/compete/nat-trophy/tro-099.pdf)

All of the above except Kent won shooting the 6.5x284. Kent shot a 300 Win Mag. They of course all shot a .308 Palma for the Palma portions of the match.

The .308 doesn't seem to be the favorite unless it's being shot in a match that requires it (Palma).

 

[Otis is DaMan]

The Sierra Manual from 15 years ago said it best:

The difference between the two is negligible until bullets heavier than 180 grains are considered.

That's it folks. That's all there is.

 

[essayons21]

USSR,

Who posts 3 shot groups these days? I mean really, who does that?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.




I really need to try out RL22 it seems.

 

[CB900F]

Essay;

It's a pointless question. He did it, there's your answer as to "who". However, that's not really what you're asking, is it? And, I strongly doubt that he rushed right out & shot that group just to post it in this thread. Given that, until you know the purpose behind the target, your question remains pointless.

I can think of several situations that have valid reasons behind them for a three shot group. Even these days.

900F

 

[USSR]

I can think of several situations that have valid reasons behind them for a three shot group. Even these days.

My reason? Initial load development with my brand new Krieger barrel, and didn't want to spoil it.

Don

 

[UnTainted]

I love the 30'06 and .308 threads.

 

[essayons21]

CB900F and USSR, I guessed my sarcasm didn't come across on the internet very well.

Jeff56,

Please at least quote me correctly. I wrote:

I believe that article is a good example of the myth that correlation = causation

The order is important. Causation does in fact usually equate with some sort of correlation. I.E. a more inherently accurate cartridge (the cause) will equate to a correlation of better performance.

The reverse is not true. A simpler way of saying it is that you are reversing cause and effect.

Better groups coming from shooters using the .308 in the 60s and 70s is the effect, or correlation. To say that the cause is a more inherently accurate round is a hypothesis, and a weak one at that. Lots of other things happened surrounding competition shooting during that time period, including better firearms and ammunition materials and manufacturing techniques. Also, shooting technique became more scientific and refined.

While some cartridges have design features that make them more inherently accurate, all that does is compensate for faults in the gun it is shooting from, and faults with the shooter. I'm sure that the master smiths that put together some of the high end benchrest guns could get them to shoot one hole groups with any cartridge. In fact I know so, because my heavy barrelled 30-06 was put together by a smith who has made a few national championship winning BR guns, and holds around .5-.75 MOA with 40 year old Korean Surplus M2 Ball ammo.

So yes, calibers do not make acccuracy, rifles do. Calibers at best compensate for inaccuracy in the rifle.

6.5s ARE a more inherently accurate cartridge, and nobody disputes that. They are also drastically different from the .308, where the difference between the 30-06 and .308 is relatively minor, and in ways that do little to effect inherent accuracy. And of course coming to a .308 vs 30-06 thread and talking about how great 6.5 shoots is kinda pointless.

 

[USSR]

I love the 30'06 and .308 threads.

Yeah, about the only thing better is barrel break-in threads.

Don

 

[blackops]

Not really. Lyman's 49th Edition Reloading Manual lists a 60.5gr load of RL22 behind a 190SMK - I use 60.7gr to reach 2900fps

Let's not forget to mention that this load is being shot out of a fully custom beast that can eat walmart 20 dollar ammo and put 3 shots behind a quarter with it. I would be hesitant to push this load in just any rifle before working up to that velocity. Common knowledge for some, but not all.

essay,what kind of velocity are you getting w/IMR4064? I shoot GMX's (165gr) and can only produce 2800fps from 50 grains even.

 

[essayons21]

Jeff56, I have been nothing but polite in my responses.

I wonder why you call me a troll, especially since you made this statement only a few posts earlier:

I guess there's no excuse for bad manners

blackops,

46.7 gr IMR4064 behind 168 Nosler Custom Comps is my standard paper punching and range load. Seated .002" off the lands, velocity averages around 2750, which is about 100fps higher than most published data. This is also from a 22" barrel. It is extremely accurate from 100-300, but gets pushed around by the wind a bit much further out. This is a very mild load, so its to be expected.

I have been developing a better long range (<500m) load using 180 and 190 SMKs, but haven't been able to get the same accuracy using 4064. I've been working with other powder, mainly 4350, but with the results USSR has posted RL22 looks very promising.

 

[gamestalker]

With hand loads it can do very well for long range. A .308 probaly has more options to load for than any other bullet size out there. Other than the neck, the case is dimensionally the same as the .270 win, and 25-06. You can load it to perform very well, for just about any purpose intended. Personally I prefer a .270 win., but that is just me.

 

[Jim Watson]

The thing is, while the .30-06 will do anything it ever did and more besides with newer powders and bullets, there are other calibers and cartridges that do better.
The .308 is more popular among target shooters largely because there are several events that require it, like F-T/R*, Palma, and Service Rifle*.
The venerable (Don't you just love that word?) .30-06 has to compete with anything on the market, from 6mm Whatever to .338 Lap.

*.223 also allowed but nothing else.

 

[DammitBoy]

I'm gonna go with "in 1000 yard matches the .308 beat the 30-06 consistently" for $500 Alex...

 

[jimbeaux82]

If you are shooting competition grade match rifles you might see a little more accuracy (smaller groups) with the 308 than the 06. But if you are talking hunting rifles, I doubt you will see any. If you want to shoot deer at up to 500 yards with an 06, by all means go for it as it can be reliably done, particularly with the new range compensating strata scopes like the Burris Ballistic Plex, Swarovski TDS, etc.

The key to long range shooting is practice and using consistent ammo, either high quality commercial ammo or good handloads.

In truth, not much difference between a 308 and a 30/06

 

[300wsm Wisconsin]

Match or Hunting or Sniping

My grandfather shot .30-06 for about 15 years as a match round and eventually converted to .223 because of cost and recoil. But that was ranges out to 1000yds.

I would choose a weapon with recoil near .308 or less for better trigger control over time.

 

[300wsm Wisconsin]

.308

If there is wind, which there will be. And for cost.

 

[BoilerUP]

308 if there is wind?

Wouldn't the exact same bullet moving a few hundred FPS faster from an '06 buck the wind just as well, if not better?

 

[Maverick223]

There is no such thing as an inherently accurate cartridge...there are those loaded properly with the best components and worked up meticulously, and there are those that aren't. Within the confines of practical range a match grade .22LR will best a .338LM with poor consistency every single time. The same holds true for the .308Win. vs .30-06Spd. argument. The '06 isn't a bit less "inherently accurate", just has a bit more oomph for a little less drop/wind drift (particularly with the heavier projectiles). OTOH it has a bit more recoil so some folks may not be able to shoot it quite as accurately, but that is not a limit of the cartridge/chambering. The same holds true for the big belted magnums like the .300WM, mine will easily hold better than 0.5MOA if I do my part. That has nothing at all to do with the cartridge (other than a load that was worked up properly) and everything to do with the equipment (mostly the Krieger bbl) & shooter.

If you want something that has less recoil than a .30-06Spd. but similar performance then look no further than the 7mm-08Rem. Properly handloaded, it makes good use of the high BC bullets that are available. If you want something even better (but with fewer choices for complete rifles) then the .260Rem. is another great option...even less recoil and the trajectory is nearly as good as the .300WM!

Wouldn't the exact same bullet moving a few hundred FPS faster from an '06 buck the wind just as well, if not better?

Um, yeah. Loaded with the same projectile the '06 outperforms the .308Win. in every way, every time.

 

[ridgerunner1965]

im a 06 man myself but the 08 will do basically the same thing with less powder because its a higher pressure round.

 

[willypete]

For those of you who tout the ".308 is inherently more accurate than .30-06" line, I would recommend looking into articles related to load density and cartridge efficiency.

A firearms cartridge is essentially a brass gasket that seals a mechanical void against pressure leaks produced by expanding chemical gases. The volumetric efficiency of the powder charge and bullet combination is more important than cartridge shape and size.

 

[Maverick223]

If cartridges didn't matter everyone would use the same design because you could save a huge amount of money by sticking with the popular choices. I'm not saying cartridge design is the be all and end all of shooting. Anyone with a brain knows that the barrel is the key ingredient to accuracy. But no difference at all for cartridges? That does not make sense. There's no such thing as no difference at all.

Purely from the standpoint of accuracy (not trajectory, wind drift, recoil, et cetera), and within the confines of effective range (generally considered to be just short of the trans-sonic region), I am convinced that cartridge design doesn't make a bit of difference. There is a tiny bit of difference with action length due to stiffness, but other than that the difference is primarily the shooters capability and the equipment being utilized.

 

[hiawatha]

I just watched a YouTube of an 84-year-old WWII sniper vet making 3 head shots on a metal silhouette at 1000m. Or maybe 1000 yd., but pretty impressive, anyway. He was shooting 7.62x51 (.308) in a Remington 700 the AMU let him use. He also hit a gong first shot out with a 03A4 at 300 yd. shooting '06. He said he had never shot at 1000 before. The '06 cartridge is also capable of the 1000 yard accuracy he got with the .308. Unless you can shoot better than he did, it won't make much difference which cartridge you're using!

 

[BigN]

I find that friends and neighbors own a 30-06 because they heard they're cool. After they get them, they complain about the recoil. I never cared for them and have never owned one but shot many. The 308 is a better round because the ballistics are very close, recoil is substantially lower, and ammo is cheaper to reload. I think the 30-06 is over rated. If I was going to shoot at 1000 yards, I'd use a 7mm Mag. Use the right reloads and recoil is lower yet you'll still get an easy 1000 yard accuracy out of her...

 

[essayons21]

For those of you who tout the ".308 is inherently more accurate than .30-06" line, I would recommend looking into articles related to load density and cartridge efficiency.

A firearms cartridge is essentially a brass gasket that seals a mechanical void against pressure leaks produced by expanding chemical gases. The volumetric efficiency of the powder charge and bullet combination is more important than cartridge shape and size.

Most .308 loads have much better load density than most 30-06 loads. Especially with the powders available in the 60s and 70s. Its really the biggest difference between the two cartridges. In 2011, that is no longer the case.