308 VS 300 wm

[saturno_v]

1858

The data I reported for the 300 Win Mag are for the 190 gr. Sierra Match King at 2900 fps MV.

http://www.snipercentral.com/300.htm

The 208 gr. evidently is able to conserve energy significantly better because of its better BC.

The 550 ft/lb for the .308 Winchester is for the 175 gr. Federal Gold Metal Match at 2600 fps MV

http://www.snipercentral.com/308.htm

 

[MCMXI]

Mav, is that a benchrest record that you posted?

The F-Class TR national record for 15 shots at 1000 yards prone is as follows:

10/4/08
Danny Biggs
149-8X

So definitely NOT 1 MOA (10.470") and could be much worse. This just goes to show how tough it is to shoot MOA at 1000 yards, particularly when you're not using a bench. The TR class use rifles that are closer in weight to a hunting rifle but still with a significant advantage being something like twice the weight of a typical hunting rifle. Also, the front and rear of the rifle is supported ... not your usual hunting scenario.

The 208 gr. evidently is able to conserve energy significantly better because of its better BC.

Yep, it's a great bullet for sure.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

don't know how we got on hunting elk at 1000 yards, but given field conditions, that would be more in the dream category, no matter how much energy is retained. My load is with a 200 grain BTHP @ 2830fps, and my PACT Pro chronograph gives me options at different zeros. For hunting, I feel a zero of 300 yards is practical, and the mildots can take care of adjusting impact out to 500-550 yards, probably my practical range on a stationary animal under field condtions. Yeah, the gun can shoot father, and kill farther, but I would limit myself. As others have stated, stalking is part of the game, not proving how far you can shoot. My rifle is a slightly modified Remington Sendero with 24" barrel. The barrel has been reset 1/4 turn, still using the factory stock, an adjusted factory trigger,, and carries a 6.5-20x40 Target Leupold, that is set on 12x when using the mil-scale. When target shooting at 1000, I sight it in at 100 yards to be 29" high, and I am on the target SOMEWHERE at 1000. I have gone for record after sighting in with two shots on one occasion at Camp Perry, so I know the charts are better than theory. When I want to be "tactical" (don't we all hate that word by now ), I reset my zero to 700 yards to make full use of my mil scale, as mentioned before. Same method, only setting the prelim sight in at 100 yards to 17 inches high. If I have to grab the rifle, it's set to utilize the mil-dots, with a card on the stock for all range hold over or under's. Not for everyone, but this is the system that works for me. Having lived in NW Colorado, I have seen most everything used on elk, but the 7mm & 300 mags are usually the ticket. Most common rifles used in that area of Colo? Per the wildlife officer I knew (this was some years ago), .270, 7mm mag, and .30-30. This reflected the most frequently encountered guns, many by the locals, not necessarily the BEST for the job. I shot a muley at 350 with a .308 one year, not a bad hit, but I had to track for over a mile, and then someone else achored him, and thus, took him. A similar hit with a .300 mag probably would have dropped him sooner........

 

[Maverick223]

Mav, is that a benchrest record that you posted?

Yes sir, it would be pretty hard to get that otherwise, and don't get me wrong it is not a typical hunting rifle/stance/distance just saying that the record is a bit better, and with a 17lb rifle no less (light compared to many, some howitzers weigh less than some of the bench guns).

But, before we get back into hunting ethics lets just agree that 99.999% of hunters should not take a shot at any game animal at anywhere near 1000yds under any normal (non-survival) circumstances.

 

[Polar Express]

Short answer: between just those two, choosing only one? 300 WM

Long answer/opinion/personal situation and current plan:

I'm in kinda the same boat you describe. I already own a M1A, and I have no plans to get rid of it, I just finished building it. So, I already belong to the .308 club. Would I take it hunting? Configured the way it is, no, I don't plan on it. But I could, its just kinda heavy to lug around the mountains if I don't have too. Besides, I'd actually feel a little irrisponsible if I didn't own a bolt gun that was capable of shooting the same .308 I have for the M1A. (I know, a little goofy)

A few weeks ago, I posted a thread asking about .308 vs, 30-06 or bigger. If I was only going to have one, well the '06 would likely be my choice, but I already have a .308, so i'll have brass, and dies do build them any way I want. And, as others have said: with todays materials, you can come pretty close to the '06 with the .308. So, for me, that made my choice. i'll be getting a .308 bolt gun to go with my 'evil black gun'. (I don't plan to run hot loads in my M1A, just standard NATO loads) But, I'm willing to upload the hunting loads for the bolt platform.

Now, since I decided to go with the .308, and as some have mentioned, when we hunt occasionally, shot placement may not be that perfect, so having a bit more gun can be nice. Especially if the shot you want to take is a bit farther out. It's proven that .308 will punch paper a long ways out, but dropping large game is different than punching paper. It'll be nice to have that extra energy that a larger cartridge can offer. So I'm considering adding a belted magnum to the 'stable'. I am leaning towards the .300 WM. Why? I believe it uses the same .30 caliber dia bullet that I would use in the .308s. Same size, i can mix and match for different results. I still have to confirm this though.

But, then enters the 'other' argument that makes a lot of sense to me: isn't it a good idea to have "ONE" hunting gun that you are very familiar with, and be just dead-on with? I see the value in that approach. But, I also believe in the idea of a 'back up' rifle, in case you trip, and break your stock, or scope, or ??? Your day may be done, but not your whole hunt trip.

I guess to sum it up, i'd rather have too much gun that I can load down, than not enough gun and I already loaded it up to its max.

 

[Polar Express]

oops, apparently I double posted. then I tried to figure out how to delete my second one. Im such a retard when it comes to this kind of thing...

 

[Bart B.]

For what it's worth, the .308 Win. trounced all the .30-06 match records it held by the late 1960's. And the .308's much easier to shoot accurately in hunting environments than both the .30-06 and .300 magnums because the rifle moves in recoil less while the bullet goes down the barrel.

I doubt one could tell much difference between the .308 and .30-06 in hunting game at ranges up to 300 yards. Darned few people shoot good enough to take game easily with one shot any further than that. Impact differences due to the slightly lower muzzle velocity of the .308 is insignificant. Bullet placement is about 8.4 times more important than a 5% difference in striking velocity.

Here's what a decent .308 Win. can do at 800 yards accuracy wise:



No .30-06 has even come close.

 

[Uncle Mike]

For what it's worth, the .308 Win. trounced all the .30-06 match records it held by the late 1960's. And the .308's much easier to shoot accurately in hunting environments than both the .30-06 and .300 magnums because the rifle moves in recoil less while the bullet goes down the barrel.

What????
Ever wonder why all those .30-06 records have been broken by the .308....

It is, in the United States anyway, common for the masses to migrate towards anything the great military machine is using and adorn it repetitiously.

That said, IMHO, if the ol' -06' was still chucking ball as often as the .308 was, then I think we might see different record holders in the cartridge world.

No concern... In the distance/power line-up... 300 Win.Mag., 30-06 and the 308. Given all factors the same, bullet weight, atmosphere, barrel length, ect...

Simple physics dictate that, for a given weight, the faster you move that weight,(for greater distance and energy) the more recoil(opposite reaction) you will produce.

Layman... If you would like more speed, flatter trajectories, greater energy at the target... you are going to have to put up with more recoil on your end...


Peace

 

[ArmedBear]

That said, IMHO, if the ol' -06' was still chucking ball as often as the .308 was, then I think we might see different record holders in the cartridge world.

More egregious example...

The .270 is not known as an accurate round.

This has nothing to do with its potential inherent accuracy, which has never really been explored. It has to do with the fact that people don't build target rifles in .270 Winchester, and the round isn't used for serious target shooting.

 

[1911shooter]

To the OP go with the 300 win mag, Unless you are willing to move to the 30-378 weatherby the 300win will do everything you need.
As to hunting Elk at 1,000yrds yes it is possible but the farthest shot i know of is 800yrds in that neighborhood.
And that was a video from Berger bullets web sight. www.bergerbullets.com.
my son uses a 300win and it is the only rifle he grabs for deer, Elk, Pronghorn and his sheep hunt. its all about choosing the right bullet for the job and shot placement, shot placement, shot placement.
And to shoot anything past 200yrds you need to burn alot of ammo and alot of time at the range and not just shooting from the bench.

 

[Uncle Mike]

The .270 is not known as an accurate round.

+1 Armedbear...+1
HAHAHA... that reminds me... My friend, the late B♦ll Perry, 1980, 600y table top match, eastern U.S.... this guy shows up with a Bell custom in.. yep, none other than the .270 Win.... long story short... the rest of us were buying the beer and breakfast for the whole week!

Absolutely whipped everyones(60 competitors) arses with that stupid rifle... yea Bill, if you can hear me... I said STUPID rifle....hehehe

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

In that situation (one rifle for combo 600 yard paper puncher and elk hunter), my caliber of choice would be the 7mm Remington Magnum; honorable mentions to .280 rem, .270 win, 6.5x55 swedish, 7x57 Mauser, .284 Winchester, & 6.5-.284 norma. The two you listed are not BAD choice by any stretch, but inferior to this one for this purpose, IMO, and not even among my top 5 choices for that specific combination of purposes. Why are we limiting ourselves to those?

But if you must limit it to those, that's a very tough call, but I'd lean toward the .300 win mag; about a wash, however - lots of good to be said about the .308 win as well.

HAHAHA... that reminds me... My friend, the late B♦ll Perry, 1980, 600y table top match, eastern U.S.... this guy shows up with a Bell custom in.. yep, none other than the .270 Win.... long story short... the rest of us were buying the beer and breakfast for the whole week!

Absolutely whipped everyones(60 competitors) arses with that stupid rifle... yea Bill, if you can hear me... I said STUPID rifle....hehehe

Hee hee, like that story.

 

[ArmedBear]

Why are we limiting ourselves to those?

That's why I pictured Snidely Whiplash dangling the OP over the Snake River canyon, and telling him he had to decide, .308 or .300 WinMag, or else.

See? It all adds up.

+

=

The only real explanation for this thread.

At the very least, I'd say split the difference between the .308 and .300, and just get a .30-06.

7mm Rem Mag does sound good, too.

 

[Maverick223]

The more I think about it the more I think that 7mm RM is the way to go, because the OP reloads so ammo cost is not a big factor. The 7mm will outperform all of the aforementioned .30s with less recoil and nearly as much energy as the 300WM.

 

[Uncle Mike]

.300 Remington Ultra Mag.

There is no other-








......... and IF were ever attacked... you'll have a light armor and materials weapon.... Rhinos at noon.... elephants at dusk... no problem...

 

[Bart B.]

For what it's worth, a minute of angle in the shooting sports ain't the same as one in trigonometry. About a hundred years ago, it was standardized with both scope and aperture sights as 1/3600th of the range. There's 3600 inches in a hundred yards. Scoring rings on both .22 rimfire and 30 caliber target rifles started out spaced in even inches out from the center.

Those old Sidle, Litchert, Unertl, Lyman, El Monte and even the Remington externally adjusted scopes had their mounts spaced 7.200 inches apart. With each MOA on their adjustment threaded 40 tpi moving them 4 clicks (.0005 inch each) or .002-inch. That equals 7.2/3600; moves impact exactly 1 inch at 100 yards.

Standard sight radius from front to rear was 30 inches. 30/3600 = .008333 inch. Aperture sights had their adjustment lead screws also threaded 40 tpi and 1/3rd of a turn moved the aperture .008333 inch, one full turn was 3 MOA. Each 1/4th MOA click moved the aperture .0020833 inch. Common with Lyman, Vaver, Redfield, Clerke, Warner and other old and recent aperture sights. One exception is Anschutz rear sights for their rimfire match rifles as one click moves them 1 or 2 millimeters at 50 meters.

This is not well known and is why so many folks use the trig functions for an angle of 1/60th of a degree to see what it is. Same issue with mils used in military spotting for targets; there's 4 different standards in use around the world for how many mils there are in a circle.

 

[Bart B.]

UncleMike's comment:

Ever wonder why all those .30-06 records have been broken by the .308.... It is, in the United States anyway, common for the masses to migrate towards anything the great military machine is using and adorn it repetitiously.

It's very common that the masses migrate to anything new. But 'tain't the reason the .308 beat the .30-06 records.

A few top 'smiths catering to the high power competitors began building chambering their rifles for the .308 Win. A good friend of many of them tested Sierra Bullet's products and knew early on how accuracy from a .308 case was better than from an '06 one. When .308 chambered match rifles began being used in matches were equal quality rifles and people used the '06 and won handily, the message was made clear.

In about 10 months beginning in early 1963 when the changeover began, the .308 clearly showed its advantage. Three years later, the 100-year plus scoring ring diameters had to be reduced; too many unbreakable ties during the previous two years between folks shooting the .308 with all shots inside the smallest ring.

 

[Polar Express]

Interestingly enough to me, I just stumbled on an article the other day, where a 105 lb lady, who knew nothing about hunting was started from zero, and went on a Guided CO elk hunt a few months later. She is/was a writer, and open minded about firearms and hunting. A few city folks thought it would be an interesting story. Havent finished the article yet.

I bring it up, cuz in the article she is listed at 105 lbs. The gun she was trained to hunt with was a .300 WM (it had a shortened stock and was borrowed from another lady) The author weighs exactly HALF of what I weigh, and so far, she hasn't griped about the recoil.

So, I'll toss that out to all of the 'men' out there who get worked up over the recoil differences. We all better check and see if our man card has an expiration date.

 

[Bart B.]

Polar Express, good post about the lightweight and her hard-kickin' rifle.

Most folks don't realize that 95% of the recoil isn't felt until after the bullet leaves the barrel. But the remaining 5% that happens while the bullet's going down the barrel is what makes hard-kickin' shoulder arms difficult to shoot accurate.

'Course at the other end of the recoil spectrum is in rapid fire international matches at 25 meters and .22 rimfire short semiauto pistols are used. Their barrels are vented at the top and set low in the frame well aligned with the shooting arm so the recoil from those tiny cartridges won't take long to recover from. Three 5-shot strings are fired in time limits of 8, 6 and 4 seconds. High scoring ring's about 4 x 6 inches. You gotta tame the recoil if you're gonna win.