scythefwd
Member
Which is the worse? I have started thinking that I want a rifle that will be accurate to 600 yds that will take down a good sized white tail. Those two are pretty much what I am thinking of, with maybe a 270 in there as well.
.308 vs 30-06 recoil
- Thread starter scythefwd
- Start date
- Status
TCB in TN
Member
Oh my gosh, get ready for the argument of the century. LOL. The 30.06 will have a little more recoil, but not just a lot. Shooting identical bullets out of the same size/weight gun, say an 8 lb rifle with 150 gr. bullets the .308 will generate about 16 lbs of recoil at about 2700 fps muzzle vel, while the 30-06 will run about 17 1/2 lbs at about 2850 fps. Not a great difference but enough to notice. The other advantage is the shorter action, which typically results in a slightly quicker follow up shot. Now the 30-06 does have a couple of things in its favor also. The cost of 30-06 surplus ammo is still much less than the .308, and in spite of the protest of some here, it is quite easy to find a wider range of 30-06 factory ammo than there is in /308. Both are great cals that can seriously get the job done.
351 WINCHESTER
Member
All other things being equal the .30-06 kicks more.
mljdeckard
Member
The '06 kicks more, but only a little. It has never been enough to sway a decision one way or the other.
You may well want to consider the .270 if recoils is a concern. My go-to rifle for a few years now has been a medium-weight rifle in .270. It is so close to the '06 in actual performance, most shooters can't make any discernible difference, and it does have a touch less recoil.
I have and use all three.
You may well want to consider the .270 if recoils is a concern. My go-to rifle for a few years now has been a medium-weight rifle in .270. It is so close to the '06 in actual performance, most shooters can't make any discernible difference, and it does have a touch less recoil.
I have and use all three.
I own both. Garand vs. M14 (M1A).......maybe it's all in my mind but, for less kick.....I'd take the M14 (M1A).
Sometimes, I wonder how tough those GIs had to be, to lug the M1 and fire it. They surely had a real tough time (compared to an M16A1). I happen to be watching the movie, "Go For Broke," and those Japanese Ameicans aren't the biggest of USGIs.
Aloha, Mark
Sometimes, I wonder how tough those GIs had to be, to lug the M1 and fire it. They surely had a real tough time (compared to an M16A1). I happen to be watching the movie, "Go For Broke," and those Japanese Ameicans aren't the biggest of USGIs.
Aloha, Mark
Float Pilot
Member
I have both calibers in similar bolt action rifles. The 30-06 generally generates a little more velocity with the same weight bullet and has more recoil. Even if you hand-load the 30-06 down to 308 levels, there is still slightly more recoil because you have a longer column of powder. During the initial ignition you are pushng the powder column as well as the powder.
Most people do not notice the difference, unless you are super recoil sensitive. My oldest son (30) is one of those,,,,(I need to have his DNA checked) He snivels when firing a M-14.
My youngest (23) son you could hit it the shoulder with a 2x4 and he would not notice...
There are a few recoil calulators on the web. Try to find one that takes in account the amount of powder.
http://www.handloads.com/calc/recoil.asp
But, also remember that the design of the rifle's stock has a LOT to do with how much the recoil seems to hurt.
Most people do not notice the difference, unless you are super recoil sensitive. My oldest son (30) is one of those,,,,(I need to have his DNA checked) He snivels when firing a M-14.
My youngest (23) son you could hit it the shoulder with a 2x4 and he would not notice...
There are a few recoil calulators on the web. Try to find one that takes in account the amount of powder.
http://www.handloads.com/calc/recoil.asp
But, also remember that the design of the rifle's stock has a LOT to do with how much the recoil seems to hurt.
Samuel Adams
Member
When you're firing at a deer, you don't notice the recoil.
jpwilly
Member
06 slightly more recoil but much better selection of factory hunting loads. 308 has a good selection of Match / sniper loads and okay selection of hunting loads. If you handload then either one will do. It's long vs short action and added versatility with 30-06 really. Remember a 30-06 can be loaded to near 300 WSM velocities.
I grew up shooting 30-06, and have done so until recently. Since my teen-age years, I've also hunted with .308. Today, .308 is my primary hunting round.
I've frankly never really noticed a difference in felt recoil.
That said, I think that there is no question that -- all other being equal-- 30-06 will kick more. After all, .308 was designed to have the power of a WWII era 30-06 in a shorter cartridge using modern propellent. Now, with the 30-06 using the same modern propellent (if using the same grains as used in WWII) it would be more powerful again.
But I wouldn't let felt recoil between the two be a factor in my decision-making process. Seriously, I don't think you'd notice.
-- John
I've frankly never really noticed a difference in felt recoil.
That said, I think that there is no question that -- all other being equal-- 30-06 will kick more. After all, .308 was designed to have the power of a WWII era 30-06 in a shorter cartridge using modern propellent. Now, with the 30-06 using the same modern propellent (if using the same grains as used in WWII) it would be more powerful again.
But I wouldn't let felt recoil between the two be a factor in my decision-making process. Seriously, I don't think you'd notice.
-- John
I really can't tell the difference in recoil between the two assuming loads that feature the same bullet weight and velocity. I think it might me more a case of rifle stock design and fit. Both are great choices. The '06 may be a tad more versatile. Nothing wrong with the .270 either. But it takes a good rifle/load/scope combo to produce consistently at 600 yards.
scythefwd
Member
Personally, I am looking at a bolt gun, and I am not very recoil shy. When I am wearing my poly pros out hunting, I dont feel the kick. I think the mosin nagant is barely more than a stiff kick, and the sks is pure delight (besides the factory sights which I abhor, looking to tech sights right now). My 12 GA kicks like a mule, but I wasn't wearing anything more than a fleece jacket and I was firing slugs.
For the money, as I am not looking to spend more than 450- 500 on the rifle, what would some of your recommendations be for each caliber? 270 is on the list if it will do the job at 600. I will most likely be looking at a bushnell or loupold scope when the time come. Yall did answer my question, about the kick at least, so lets get into the nitty gritty of the differences, Ill take fanboys on both sides because they will have all the correct information on their specific load and possibly less accurate info on the other loads. Lets bring the 270 into this as well. I'm not looking to start a flame war, just a full all out, break out the jello mold, this is the trajectory, this one shoots flatter, etc. compairison.
For the money, as I am not looking to spend more than 450- 500 on the rifle, what would some of your recommendations be for each caliber? 270 is on the list if it will do the job at 600. I will most likely be looking at a bushnell or loupold scope when the time come. Yall did answer my question, about the kick at least, so lets get into the nitty gritty of the differences, Ill take fanboys on both sides because they will have all the correct information on their specific load and possibly less accurate info on the other loads. Lets bring the 270 into this as well. I'm not looking to start a flame war, just a full all out, break out the jello mold, this is the trajectory, this one shoots flatter, etc. compairison.
Regolith
Member
Right now....I'd say it'd be best to go with the .30-06. Greek surplus ammo for it is fairly cheap atm. 7.62x51* surplus on the other hand has gone up in price, for various reasons.
However, once the Greek .30-06 dries up, then that's it. As far as I know, there aren't any countries still fielding .30-06's. 7.62x51 is still a NATO standard, however, so there will be milsurp for that for some time to come.
As for the rifle: for under $500, you're looking at Savages, Stevens, and Remington 700 SPS's, The Stevens are probably the best value; they're nearly identical to the Savages, just without the Accutrigger, and IIRC they're under $300 or so.
The AccuTrigger on the Savage 11/111's are pretty nice, and allow you to adjust for the trigger pull weight. These are more expensive than the Stevens, but less than the Remington.
The Remington 700 SPS has the advantage of having the most aftermarket accessories available. These are a bit more expensive than the Savage, and lack an easily adjustable trigger. I bought one in February for about $480.00, chambered in .30-06.
All three are probably just about as accurate out of the box. Many Savage owners claim that they're more accurate, but I haven't really seen any comprehensive testing to verify that claim.
My suggestion is to go to a store and handle all three. It was the handling characteristics that made me go for the Remington over the Savage. However, what I think a gun should handle like is a personal preference, and I tend to go towards heavier and more tightly built rifles as opposed to lighter, somewhat "looser" built ones.
*7.62x51 NATO is nearly identical to .308 Winchester, and can be fired in any firearm chambered for .308 Win.
However, once the Greek .30-06 dries up, then that's it. As far as I know, there aren't any countries still fielding .30-06's. 7.62x51 is still a NATO standard, however, so there will be milsurp for that for some time to come.
As for the rifle: for under $500, you're looking at Savages, Stevens, and Remington 700 SPS's, The Stevens are probably the best value; they're nearly identical to the Savages, just without the Accutrigger, and IIRC they're under $300 or so.
The AccuTrigger on the Savage 11/111's are pretty nice, and allow you to adjust for the trigger pull weight. These are more expensive than the Stevens, but less than the Remington.
The Remington 700 SPS has the advantage of having the most aftermarket accessories available. These are a bit more expensive than the Savage, and lack an easily adjustable trigger. I bought one in February for about $480.00, chambered in .30-06.
All three are probably just about as accurate out of the box. Many Savage owners claim that they're more accurate, but I haven't really seen any comprehensive testing to verify that claim.
My suggestion is to go to a store and handle all three. It was the handling characteristics that made me go for the Remington over the Savage. However, what I think a gun should handle like is a personal preference, and I tend to go towards heavier and more tightly built rifles as opposed to lighter, somewhat "looser" built ones.
*7.62x51 NATO is nearly identical to .308 Winchester, and can be fired in any firearm chambered for .308 Win.
krimmie
Member
Here's a comparison from Remington's site. They are compared with Core-Lokt 150 grain soft points...although I would use 140 grain with the .270. You might have to zoom a little.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Given the problem with holdover and wind drift when you're talking about ranges beyond 350 to 400 yards, I wouldn't plan on 600-yard deer when I was looking at a rifle.
The guesstimate is that some 90% of all deer are shot within 200 yards, anyhow.
Beyond 300, I'd say it's more the skill of the shooter than the qualities of the cartridge...
The guesstimate is that some 90% of all deer are shot within 200 yards, anyhow.
Beyond 300, I'd say it's more the skill of the shooter than the qualities of the cartridge...
Tony Williams
Member
The formula for calculating the recoil impulse generated by a cartridge is:
(bullet weight x muzzle velocity) + (propellant weight x 4,000 fps)
4,000 fps being the typical escape velocity of gun gas from the muzzle.
As the .30-06 has more case capacity than the .308, it can be loaded to higher velocities (other things being equal) and will kick harder. However, a heavy-bullet .308 loading may well kick harder than a light-bullet .30-06.
That's only part of the recoil calculation, though: the other main element is the weight of the gun. If you have two guns firing the same ammo, one of which is half the weight of the other, then the light gun will recoil at twice the velocity, which will generate twice the recoil energy. A muzzle brake can reduce recoil, at the cost of more blast experienced by the firer (which may give the impression of more recoil).
Finally, there are the more subtle factors which affect perceived rather than actual recoil. The shape of the stock can make quite a difference, as can a padded butt.
(bullet weight x muzzle velocity) + (propellant weight x 4,000 fps)
4,000 fps being the typical escape velocity of gun gas from the muzzle.
As the .30-06 has more case capacity than the .308, it can be loaded to higher velocities (other things being equal) and will kick harder. However, a heavy-bullet .308 loading may well kick harder than a light-bullet .30-06.
That's only part of the recoil calculation, though: the other main element is the weight of the gun. If you have two guns firing the same ammo, one of which is half the weight of the other, then the light gun will recoil at twice the velocity, which will generate twice the recoil energy. A muzzle brake can reduce recoil, at the cost of more blast experienced by the firer (which may give the impression of more recoil).
Finally, there are the more subtle factors which affect perceived rather than actual recoil. The shape of the stock can make quite a difference, as can a padded butt.
Ghost Tracker
Member
If I handed you the exact same rifle except for caliber (brand, model, stock, etc.) and asked you to shoot, one after the other, a .308 & 30-06 with generally the same load...unless you looked at the length of the action (short = .308 vs, long = 30-06) you wouldn't be able to tell me which one was which.
EVERYTHING in this argument is subjective regardless of the stats and figures. I own an M1A Super Match and an M1 Garand. What I was told by some buddies who are military snipers is that the 308 was chosen over the .30-06 because it's neck length was shorter than the 06 and thus there would be more powder in the body than in the neck right under the projectile. This meant more even burn rates and thus more predictable accuracy. Remember accuracy, too, is something very subjective but this was the opinion of the experts: The round met military needs for accuracy & potency as well as logistical reasons since the 7.62x51 (.308) is already a NATO round. The folks I've spoken to said accuracy was more consistent than recoil being a factor. Muzzle brakes can lessen felt recoil considerably. This is one reason for the incredible success of the Barrett M82A1 sniper rifle. It uses a NATO round as well: .50 cal. At least I think the 50 BMG is a NATO round. Even if it's not, the military will always be able to lay hands on supplies of the round. Maybe not match quality but close enough for ummmm government work. Same for 308. If match sniper ammo runs short in an AO then medium machine gun rounds can be de-linked for the short term and passed on to the snipers until supplies can be received.
- Status
