7.62x51mm vs 30/06

[tmaca]

Having been in love with the M14 since Basic Training in 1967, I finally got one, or the nearest available thing. It's an all USGI component rifle, built in the early '70s around an receiver manufactured by Federal Ordnance, designated an M14A, SN 3400, and mounted on an original M14 stock. All marked parts seem to be either HRA or TRW. I paid $975, which I think was a pretty good price for a rifle that is in absolutely excellent condition.

I'm going to be using it for hunting Elk, which usually means some pretty long shots. Does anyone have any real knowledge concerning the performance of the 7.62x51mm cartridge as compared to the 30/06, which is what I used to use? By the way, I'll be using Federal Premium Vital-Shok cartridges, which have a 165 grain Nosler Accubond bullet. It's pretty much a match grade hunting cartridge.

 

[308sc]

there about the same. The only difference the .30-06 has is the ability to shoot heavier bullets, and little bit more velocity. I could be wrong?

 

[SimpleIsGood229]

Thanks for your service, and welcome to THR!

With 165 gr. bullets, the difference is about 200 fps, or so. 7.62x51 will serve you well.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

I'd say they are close enough that an elk probably won't notice the difference.

If you use the compare tool on Federal's site using their 165gt 30-06 loadings, you're looking at about an inch difference in drop at 300 yards, with about the same energy/velocity.

 

[tmaca]

Federal Site

Thanks, didn't even know Federal had a comparison thing on their site, I'll go look at it.

From my experience, 300 yds IS about a typical shot for Elk around here. I'm using a Nikon Monarch Club Primos 3-9x48 scope with a bullet drop indicator in the reticle, and I THINK there may be something someplace in the instructions about using it with different cartridges, but I'm not sure I can find those instructions anymore.

By the way, does anyone know if $975 was in fact a good deal for this rifle? As I said, it's in excellent condition inside and out, literally everything except the receiver is original USGI from one of the original M14 manufacturers (the receiver was made in the early '70s by Federal Ordnance, SN 3400, and they call it an M14A instead of an M1A or M1A1), and the stock is actually an original M14 stock.

 

[Shadowangel]

Sounds like a good deal to me.

 

[elmerfudd]

With bullets 150 grains or less, the .308 will do as well or a little better, but as the bullets get heavier the 30-06 has the advantage. Since presumably you'll be using heavier bullets for elk the 30-06 would be slightly better in that regard.

 

[goon]

The '06 usually gets a little more steam on bullets above 150 grains but at 165 I'd say you would be hard pressed to tell the difference.

 

[Slamfire]

I know folks who use the 308 all the time for deer and elk hunting. The basic reason is that it works, and does not kick hard.

You can get a scope mount for your Fed Ord receiver, and a scope will aid in picking your aim point on the animal.

Unlike the M1 Garand, which should not be shot with commerical ammo, the M14 gas system is much more tolerant of higher pressure ammunition. As long as you are shooting 165's, you should not have any troubles with standard commerical ammo.

 

[4Low]

As others have previously mentioned, I've heard the 30-06 hits a bit harder at longer distances. I think with a well placed shot, an elk wouldn't know the difference.

 

[Speedo66]

Are the .308 Hornady Light Magnums w/ 165 gr. (2870 fps) the equal of 30-06s?

I use them in my Browning lever gun and they work well on Whitetail.

 

[elmerfudd]

165 gr. at 2870 fps is above most of the max loads listed in my Speer Reloading Manual and that's for both .308 and 30-06.

 

[W.E.G.]

You can look at the velocity charts from the ammo manufacturers.

If there is less than 5% difference in reported velocities for a particular bullet, I think anybody would be hard-pressed to call that a meaningful difference.

Either round should be quite adequate for Elk.

 

[Speedo66]

Elmerfudd,

The figures I gave , .308 165gr. @ 2870fps, are what's printed on the Hornady box. They also show 2980fps for the 150gr. load.

I would have to assume their loads do not exceed industry pressure standards.

The recoil with the relatively light Browning lever action isn't too bad either.

 

[benEzra]

I make no claim at all to be an authority on M14/M1A style rifles, but do be aware that commercial .308 is a bit hotter than milspec 7.62x51mm, IIRC. Loads that push the upper limits of SAAMI pressures may cause function problems in an M14-style rifle, though the only person I've known personally to have problems had a National Match M1A with a tight chamber. Just be aware, and watch for signs of cycling problems.

If you do have trouble with hot loads, a gadget like this may be helpful:

http://www.creedmoorsports.com/store/product.php?productid=16363

 

[elmerfudd]

I wasn't trying to imply that they did, (although common sense says that those probably are high pressure loads), just pointing out that they were faster than most 165 gr. 30-06 loads, so you're at no disadvantage there.

 

[SFvet]

.308 Win, .30-06 - pick your poison - they both put meat in the freezer

 

[tmaca]

Actual Ammunition

I'm using a Nikon Monarch Club Primos 3-9x40 scope with a bullet drop compensator reticle. (I may have mentioned the scope before, but with a typo in it) One nice thing I discovered that I didn't know before is that the scope mount, at least the Weaver style, for an M14 is designed so that the bottom of the mount is high enough above the action that you can still use the iron sights, without having to get any of those special high rise scope rings.

To zero the scope, and for hunting, I'm using Federal Vital-Shok ammo, with a 165 grain Nossler Accubond bullet, with a velocity of 2730 fps, and 2730 ft. lbs. of energy, at the muzzle. As best as I can find out, that 2730 ft. lbs. at the muzzle is what's recommended as ideal for the M14. At 200 yards, this ammo drops off to 2360 fps and 2340 ft. lbs., and at 300 yards to 2190 fps and 1755 ft. lbs.

This ammunition is nearly identical to Federal's best match grade .308 cartridge. The only difference is that this stuff has a tip made from some type of plastic or teflon or something, where the match ammo is fully copper jacketed. That tip is what lets this bullet expand when it hits, and is also why the bullet is lighter than the match ammunition, which is 168 grains.

Naturally, this stuff is expensive as heck, so I got a bunch of just plain jacketed .308 made in India or some such place that is only $0.50 per round for just killing paper at the range for fun.

I still haven't had time to look at the Federal site, but I'm going to check to see what their 30/06 has for energy at 300 yards with a 165 grain bullet. I'm hoping it doesn't turn out to be too big of a difference. Up until now I'd been using a Parker Hale 30/06 (built on a Mauser 8mm action) for Elk, and I know how well that has always worked.

 

[goon]

tmaca - you sure it's Indian surplus ammo?
What is the headstamp?
Some indian stuff is OK but some is BAD!!!

IMO, stick with South African, Lithiuanian, Lake City/Federal, or Portugese for surplus ammo.
Last week I shot a 7/8" group at 100 yards with my FAL and SA surplus ammo so I'd suggest that if you can lay hands on some of that ammo, go for it.

Also, that polymer tip should be enough to help keep your ammo from getting deformed during feeding.

 

[nyggis]

As many people say, the elk won´t feel the difference, but the chance is that you will shoot better with a .308 because of the slightly lighter recoil.

Another good thing is that in .308 bolt action rifles, (if you some day want one in the same calibre as the M14), you get a shorter mechanism. This enables faster reloading from the shoulder, since you don´t have to "dodge" the back of the bolt moving for your eye...

In automatics, however, the extra powder load could make the rifle more reliable if its not cleaned properly, or if its really cold outside. But Sir, since you have been in the military, lack of proper gun care will not be an issue for you...

Go for the 7.62x51!

And thank you for your effort to keep the free world free!

/Erik

 

[tmaca]

The upper arc says "OFV 02" and the lower arc says "7.62 M80" I don't remember the model designation used by the US for the 7.62x51, which was used in both the M14 rifle and the M60 LMG, so it might well have been M80. However, this stuff is NOT US military ammo, I know that much. The gun shop I got it at sells it in 10 round clear plastic envelopes (or pouches, or packs, or whatever you want to call them) for $5, and he says he's getting it from India. I'm not too worried how good it is, I'm only going to use this stuff for plinking at the range, I have the good stuff (that unfortunately costs about 4 times as much) for hunting. Kind of like I normally have the 3 mags for my Beretta Mod. 96 loaded with Winchester .40 cal. semi-jacketed hollow point, but have cheap completely jacketed ammo by Independence that I use for target shooting. And something else nice about the M14 is that, compared to the Mattel toy M16, it seems almost like it hardly ever needs to be cleaned at all.

And, hey, SFvet, am I right in thinking you're in San Francisco? Did you realize that the Supreme Court's June 26 decision kills SF's no handguns law? (I'm assuming they still have it - I left SF in '99.)

 

[Art Eatman]

Unless an '06 has a 24" to 26" barrel, there's not enough difference between it and a .308 to care about. Handloading the '06 with a 26" barrel makes a good bit of difference.

The Hornady Light Magnum loads and the Federal Premium High Energy loads for the .308 are regularly reported to chronograph as advertised. SFAIK, for the '06, also. I have no idea if it's some breakthrough in powder chemistry or a duplex loading.

The deal with Garands and M14s and operating problems is that civilian loads have a different pressure curve, from slower burning powders, and can overload the operating rod if used regularly. Probably much less of a problem with the .308, though, compared to the Garand.

For either, shooting with GI loads, then sighting in with commercial and killing a deer or elk, and then switching back shouldn't hurt anything.

 

[Snapping Twig]

No doubt a comparison of .308 to 30-06 parallels the comparison of 30-06 to .300WM. A larger case gives more power, a smaller case is more efficient.

Another important point previously mentioned is the powder used in a bolt vs. semi auto and barrel length.

Faster powders are needed to operate a semi auto action, this at the expense of acceleration over time - more velocity with slower powders. Gas diverted for an op-rod while minimal is measurable, further reducing the potential of a charge.

Barrel length is critical for efficient use of slow powder charges. Short barrels don't have the dwell time to completely accelerate the bullet.

So, you have a 30-06 semi auto (like my Rem 740) and you load it with a fast powder like IMR 4064 to properly operate the action and you get something like a long barreled bolt action .308 loaded with IMR 4350.

So many variables.

.308 is a fine cartridge and if you do your job and put the bullet where it needs to go, you'll fill the freezer.

 

[Water-Man]

They're close with a slight edge to the .30-06. Nosler Partitions and Barnes are also good for your application.

 

[Water-Man]

The Federal High Energy ammo was not recommended for semi-auto rifles. Just bolt actions.