Down side to 30-06 ?

[Kentuckiana rifleman]

"The .30-06 is never a mistake". -Col. Townsend Whelen

 

[Haxby]

"The only downside to the .30-06 is that once you have one, there is little excuse to buy another big game rifle"
I have said that myself, more than once. I can't say it here because mbogo already did.

308 if you're looking for a lighter gun or one that kicks a little less. 270 would work, too.

 

[Liberty1776]

these words don't belong in the same sentence. There is no downside. except for like Haxby said - then you don't need anything else...

 

[elktrout]

I agree with the posts about picking the rifle first. But, I will add to points to consider:

1. Bullet placement is critical on the bigger critters. Even a magnum round will result in lost wounded game if the placement is wrong.

2. Bullet performance is equally critical.

I would not worry about the slight difference. I have a 30-06 and a 7mm Wby mag. But, the .308 is good round, if used to properly place a bullet properly matched to the game.

I once hunted with a guy who shot a bull elk at a laser measured 300 yards with his .308 and killed it with one shot, properly placed.

Good luck and don't second guess yourself.

 

[A Historian]

I am looking to buy my first rifle. I have been told by a few guys that I know what I can't go wrong with a 30-06. One other guy is a fan of the 308 (military background), but in all of my research, the 30-06 can just out do a 308. This will mostly be for deer, and maybe elk (I live in Washington state, so there is a little bit of everything here).
So, is there any downside to the 30-06? Other than having the long actions (costing a very small weight increase), I am unable to find a reason not to get a 30-06.
Anyway, I am hoping to just get a general idea from all you with experience.

I know, opinions are like @ssholes, everybody has one... I just want to know what your opinion is.

This is kind of a tough one to answer to; one has to be (walking on egg-shells) careful with their reply lest they add fuel to the fire, or restart the whole 30-06 vs .308 Winchester debate. But, it's all good, and really it just boils down to preference anyway - that's pretty much why we have such a huge selection to choose from when it comes to firearms, right?

Anyway, I vouch for the 30-06. It's a great round and will do anything you want it to. From a general standard point, other than size and recoil, there are not any downsides to it.

From a handloading perspective... There's enough to split hairs about to point out differences. Someone already mentioned that the 30-06 will handle the heavier bullets better - at least, in terms of velocity. This is offset by how the 30-06 generally consumes a bit more powder. It may only be just a few grains, but they add up - and often there can be a degree of diminishing returns for this. If you're lucky enough to get 200 feet-per-second out of the extra powder used, good for you, but that isn't the general case. The upside to this is that the 30-06 generally isn't operating at as high of pressures to obtain its velocity - but generally is the operative word. There's plenty of data out there that directly contradicts this with both maximum and minimum loads. This means only so much though, because the rifle you get could be completely different.

So, uhm, yeah. Rambling with half-facts aside, they're two different cartridges that are to be enjoyed separately as such - however similar they may be.

But you always have to love the original.

 

[readyme]

Thank you all for the great insight.

I am going to have to simply go to the LGS and handle a lot of rifles.

 

[Art Eatman]

If you don't handload, there's probably not a nickel's worth of difference in hunting performance between a .308 and an '06. Six of one, half-dozen of the other.

As far as the '06, I've found no downside, these last sixty years of messing with one.

 

[mshootnit]

There is no downside to the 30-06. A relative of mine fought his way all the way through France with thousands of desperate folks trying to gun him down. If it worked well for him, it will suffice for whatever domestic task you ask of it. And yes 30-06 beats 308 any day.

 

[jpwilly]

Ought Six! No downsides especially if elk is on the menu.

 

[Geckgo]

I think you had it from the beginning, Readyme.

.308 is a 30-06 short. They use the same bullets and the same powder measures. For me, I can't find .308s on the shelf in tiny or heavy weights. The only ones I see are 150s, 160s, and 180s. I can go to Academy and get any size from 125 to 180 and sometimes they have 220 as well, though I don't really need them in Louisiana for anything. Even in Washington, 180 should get the job done with proper placement, but if you want to go big you should be able to find some 220 s for them pesky elk critters

If you change your mind later, have the gunsmith shorten the mag and put a .308 barrel on and you have a .308. Happy hunting.

 

[elmerfudd]

I've got rifles in both and prefer the .308. It's a little shorter, which means a shorter action and a slightly shorter overall length. That doesn't really add up to much though. What I do find somewhat more important is that the longer action requires a longer scope. Still, choose the right length scope and this isn't an issue either.

The other thing I notice is that the recoil on my '06 is stouter than the recoil on any of my .308's. I could probably fix that with a good butt pad, but I haven't done it yet. As it is though, I can shoot the .308's comfortably for as long as I feel like it, but after about 20 shots I'm done with the '06.

As far as the cheap surplus ammo argument goes, forget about it. It's mostly gone and it's no longer cheap. Fortunately however, rifles chambered for these cartridges were produced in such massive numbers that there is plenty of reasonably priced new ammo out there.

 

[supercalvin56]

30.06 with 165 grain or heavier bullets recoils too much for the average shooter. that is why we have 270s and 25.06s. manageable recoil is better than flinching.

 

[Geckgo]

Maybe my remington 700 is different than some others, but I notice less kick from 180 gr bullets than I get from a 12 ga shotgun. I stopped buying into the 06 "kick" issue when I started shooting one.

 

[TXdave]

My first rifle was a .22, but my first rifle was a .30-06

I agree with the kick, try a .45-70 for some fun kick and noise.

Once you buy the rifle, you'll likely forget about the ammo, and start thinking about your next rifle.

 

[oerllikon]

My first rifle was a .22, but my first rifle was a .30-06

I agree with the kick, try a .45-70 for some fun kick and noise.

Once you buy the rifle, you'll likely forget about the ammo, and start thinking about your next rifle.

Youre right, its a hopeless addiction that I have no intention of trying to treat. 30-06 is the undisputed hunting caliber, but I would personally go with a 308 because of cheap ammo, among other reasons. Thats just me though. Im not a huge fan of long actions

 

[GooseGestapo]

There is a "down side" to the .30/06.

It's BORING!

It's been around 105yrs, and anything that can be killed with it, has been, and if it can be loaded and shot from a .30/06 it's been tried.

But, then again BORING can be good. Such as predictable performance (it works), just like the sun coming up this morning.

RE: Recoil from the .30/06. Not a big deal! The design, and construction of the stock and the total weight of the rifle make a huge difference in the percieved recoil. ie: My MkX Mauser I purchased in 1975 with a Leupold 2x-7x in Leupold base and rings weighed just a tad under 10lbs. With average loads had a noticeable recoil and on more than one occasion drew blood on my eyebrow (usually when field shooting from an awkward position). On the other hand, my Colt LtRifle at 7lbs feels to kick noticeably less with loads that are as much as 100fps faster than similar loads fired 30yrs ago from the heavier rifle. The straight comb and synthetic stock takes the "sting" from the firing, and rifle muzzle dosen't rise causing the scope to swing back and upwards into the eyebrow......Nowdays most newer scope designs have rubber padded eyepieces. Even my .300RUM dosen't "cut" like the Leupold on the Mauser did. ----It just tears the skin from the rubber "grabbing" the skin as the recoil is dissipated against your forehead..... Now that is a kicking rifle... 3x the recoil of the measly "little" .30/06

The .25/06, .270 ect. ect. were developed because the .30/06 was........."boring!" Not because of miniscule differences in recoil, ect....
FWIW; the .30/06 from a 24" bbl gets the same speed from a 150gr bullet as does the 7mmMag~3,000fps. Just thought you needed to know.......

 

[HM2PAC]

ball3006 wrote:
The M1 Garand shoots 3006. The 3006 won the Great War and WW2. The cartridge is over 100 years old. If there was anything wrong with it it would not be still here. I can't wait to use my M1D for deer next season

Let's not forget that Jaws was done in by an M1 chambered in '06.

Really, what can't this combination do?

 

[28lx]

Ask yourself this question. If I want a rifle to shoot Deer and an occasional Elk maybe a Hog hunt or perhaps a Moose what would make more sense than a 30-06 with 180 grain bullets.

 

[TCB in TN]

Locally we have a better bullet selection in the 06 than in .308. If you want bigger heavier bullets then those are usually in stock in the 06. I have owned and shot both and really there is little difference in the two. I have heard that their is supposed to be a difference in recoil, but in the same rifle, using the same gr bullet there really isn't (the laws of physics agree with me on this).

I happen to have an old 1903 springfield and so as I have changed over the years I have gotten down to where I don't want as many cals, moving back to just having the 06. But really one could go either way and the average shooter would not know the difference. Find the best deal on the rifle that you like and enjoy.

 

[Legionnaire]

The .30-06 edges the .308 a bit on the high end, especially for a reloader. But they are so similar up to 180 grains that the difference isn't significant. I have rifles in both .308 and .30-06, and I like them both. So I agree with the posters who said "pick the rifle." If you want a shorter, carbine-length rifle for carrying around in the woods and hills, the .308 has the edge, as it can be had in short-action rifles. Other than that, not much of an advantage.

 

[Ky Larry]

I own both (CZ-550 in .30-06, CZ-550 Varmint in .308). Toss a coin between the .308 and the .30-06. I would not hesitate to use either on any North American game except the great bears. If you reload, it opens up a whole world of options for both. Wally World Federal 180gr ammo shoots 1' groups at 100 yrds in either caliber.

 

[d2wing]

I love these posts. I like the 7MM, and 308. Both great rounds. But my favorite is the 30-06. It's the no hold barred king of hunting cartridges. In the deer woods it's a great tradition in your hands. But I am not so emotionally attached that I don't like the others. The .308 was a lifesaver for me in the service. My best rifle is a 7MM. All good. All do a great job.

 

[supercalvin56]

The .25/06, .270 ect. ect. were developed because the .30/06 was........."boring!" Not because of miniscule differences in recoil, ect....

Nope, you are wrong. Both the 270 and the 25.06 were wildcats based on the 30.06 case with the intention of getting higher velocities with less recoil than the old 06. It had NOTHING to do with the boredom levels of the wildcatters. Maybe it is you that is bored with the 06?