Kachok
Member
I don't agree that there is a direct relationship between case volume and speed/energy. The tiny 308 is more powerful then the much larger .30-03 for example, and the small 6.5 Rem mag outperforms the larger .264 win mag.
Gonna start a war, but this is a serious question
- Thread starter armoredman
- Start date
- Status
I dont think those were valid comparisons. The loads were too different .308 vs .30-03. The original 06 load of a 150 at 2700ish would be a better comparison, but still not reasonable as (as you have stated) were comparing an old load with a newer load.
Ive also never seen a top end load from the 6.5 that tops the .264 unless barrels pretty bloody short? The 6.5 can come surprisingly close tho, but personally i believe the .264 is way overbore...not way, way overbore, but pretty bad. Stick 26-28" tubes on both and i wonder what would happen.
The .308 Norma, and the .300 WSM would be a closer comparison, both are just over 80grns of water (i believe).
My major thought on the whole .308 vs .30-06 is what other folks have said....depends on the gun you want
Ive also never seen a top end load from the 6.5 that tops the .264 unless barrels pretty bloody short? The 6.5 can come surprisingly close tho, but personally i believe the .264 is way overbore...not way, way overbore, but pretty bad. Stick 26-28" tubes on both and i wonder what would happen.
The .308 Norma, and the .300 WSM would be a closer comparison, both are just over 80grns of water (i believe).
My major thought on the whole .308 vs .30-06 is what other folks have said....depends on the gun you want
Kachok
Member
According to Nosler #6 the 6.5 RM edges out the 264 win, both were tested in 24" 1:9 twist barrels. The 6.5 RM also burns less powder in the process (no supprise)I dont think those were valid comparisons. The loads were too different .308 vs .30-03. The original 06 load of a 150 at 2700ish would be a better comparison, but still not reasonable as (as you have stated) were comparing an old load with a newer load.
Ive also never seen a top end load from the 6.5 that tops the .264 unless barrels pretty bloody short? The 6.5 can come surprisingly close tho, but personally i believe the .264 is way overbore...not way, way overbore, but pretty bad. Stick 26-28" tubes on both and i wonder what would happen.
The .308 Norma, and the .300 WSM would be a closer comparison, both are just over 80grns of water (i believe).
My major thought on the whole .308 vs .30-06 is what other folks have said....depends on the gun you want
130gr Accubond
6.5Rem mag 59.5gr RL22 3170fps
264 Win mag 61gr RL22 3166fps
120gr Ballistic Tips
6.5 Rem mag 60.5gr RL19 3323fps
264 Win mag 64gr RL19 3309fps
Since they both like the same powders this is an exellent example of efficient case design, case volume is not everything. These are not isolated examples, the 6.5 RM is more efficient across the board.
Last edited:
Kachok
Member
It supprised me too, the 264 has a much larger case (68gr vs 84gr volume) but with the same barrel length the RM cleanly wins, now with a 28"+ tube and more slower burning powder, no doubt the 264 would have an edge, but nobody wants those super long barrels in the field anymore.
But that is besides the point, my point is that some cases are simply more efficient in their combustion, now that difference might just be a few fps faster with 3gr less powder, but it is that a real difference none the less, and if I were to build a custom mountain rifle i would go 6.5RM over the 264 anyday.
But that is besides the point, my point is that some cases are simply more efficient in their combustion, now that difference might just be a few fps faster with 3gr less powder, but it is that a real difference none the less, and if I were to build a custom mountain rifle i would go 6.5RM over the 264 anyday.
mortablunt
Member
A 30-06 won't work in a 7.62NATO battle rifle. A 308 Winchester also is a bit less useful for long range sniping.
Kachok
Member
Another good example is the 270 WSM vs the 270 Wby. In this case the larger case does have SLIGHTLY higher performance in some bullet weights, but only with the benifit of a longer barrel and burning alot more powder. Again these two also seem to like similar powders except in the 150gr class.
270 WSM 24" barrel 270 Wby 26" barrel
WSM 130gr bullet 65gr RL22 3396fps
Wby 130gr bullet 73gr RL22 3458fps
WSM 140gr bullet 69.5gr Magpro 3237fps Faster with less powder
Wby 140gr bullet 74gr MagPro 3162fps
WSM 150gr bullet 61gr RL22 3155fps
Wby 150gr bullet 70.5gr IMR7828 3207fps
This is a no-brainer, by my math the WSM would at leased match the WBY in every bullet weight with the same 26" barrel, and does so burning alot less powder. There does appear to be some truth to the short action efficiency.
270 WSM 24" barrel 270 Wby 26" barrel
WSM 130gr bullet 65gr RL22 3396fps
Wby 130gr bullet 73gr RL22 3458fps
WSM 140gr bullet 69.5gr Magpro 3237fps Faster with less powder
Wby 140gr bullet 74gr MagPro 3162fps
WSM 150gr bullet 61gr RL22 3155fps
Wby 150gr bullet 70.5gr IMR7828 3207fps
This is a no-brainer, by my math the WSM would at leased match the WBY in every bullet weight with the same 26" barrel, and does so burning alot less powder. There does appear to be some truth to the short action efficiency.
I would have to agree with you. I think they ARE a bit more efficient, not enough to override personal preference LOL, but there is truth to what is said about them. I DO personally like long barrels, 24"s is as short as i want, so a number of the larger magnums, and the .30-06 , really appeal to me.
, really appeal to me.Kachok
Member
I don't mind longer barrels on magnums, when I am hunting in the brush I don't use magnums anyway, a 20-22" 6.5x55 or 308 work just as well as any magnum within 200 yards heck even at 300. Now when hunting a wide open field or pasture that is when I whip out the long guns, no branches or other snages to worry about out there. I wish someone mad a sporter weight 26" 270 WSM, that is a hella fine long range gun, best I have ever used in fact.
Last edited:
BigN
Member
Whichever one you grab, I think you'll be happy with it. I've got 257 Weatherby Mag, 7mm Mag, 308, and 300 WSM, so I have no need for an 06 but if you're looking for a 30 caliber addition to your arsenal, either an 08 or 06 would be a good choice.
Elkins45
Member
308 advantages:
short action rifles
current military surplus ammo and casings
greater inherent accuracy for those 0.01% of shooters who can realize the difference
30/06 advantages:
100 years worth of production rifles, including classics like the 03A3 and M1 Garand
ability to fire heavier bullets at greater velocity
most popular sporting rifle round in history, so most common ammo
short action rifles
current military surplus ammo and casings
greater inherent accuracy for those 0.01% of shooters who can realize the difference
30/06 advantages:
100 years worth of production rifles, including classics like the 03A3 and M1 Garand
ability to fire heavier bullets at greater velocity
most popular sporting rifle round in history, so most common ammo
OP
OP
armoredman
Member
Gee, I'm glad I didn't ask which was better, 9mm or 45ACP...
Thanks for all the replies, gents, appreciate it!
Thanks for all the replies, gents, appreciate it!
What everyone except CZguy is missing is...the .30-06 does it with more panache!
The imagery of the .308 starts with M14’s/M1A’s and ends with short stubby cartridges shot out of tactical boltguns with short stubby barrels and short stubby actions. There is nothing wrong with this. The .308 is no doubt slightly more efficient in almost every measurable capacity, and is THE choice of an autoloading rifle in a major caliber and a precision rifle in a non-magnum caliber. For these tasks efficiency reigns supreme.
The imagery of the .30-06 starts with the ’03’s and campaign covers and extends to the glorious heyday of sporterized springfields carried by men who drive old pickups, wear red wool coats, smoke pipes and carry knives with the blades worn down from sharpening on oilstones. There is nothing wrong with this either. The .30-06 is THE choice for a hunting rifle in a bolt action. For this task, nostalgia and panache reign supreme.
In point of fact, they are very similar in most measurable aspects of performance. Yes, the ’06 will handle slightly heavier projectiles and do it a bit faster. Yes, the .308 will recoil less, use less powder, and can be fired from short actions that are a bit stiffer. The real differences are found above.
The imagery of the .308 starts with M14’s/M1A’s and ends with short stubby cartridges shot out of tactical boltguns with short stubby barrels and short stubby actions. There is nothing wrong with this. The .308 is no doubt slightly more efficient in almost every measurable capacity, and is THE choice of an autoloading rifle in a major caliber and a precision rifle in a non-magnum caliber. For these tasks efficiency reigns supreme.
The imagery of the .30-06 starts with the ’03’s and campaign covers and extends to the glorious heyday of sporterized springfields carried by men who drive old pickups, wear red wool coats, smoke pipes and carry knives with the blades worn down from sharpening on oilstones. There is nothing wrong with this either. The .30-06 is THE choice for a hunting rifle in a bolt action. For this task, nostalgia and panache reign supreme.
In point of fact, they are very similar in most measurable aspects of performance. Yes, the ’06 will handle slightly heavier projectiles and do it a bit faster. Yes, the .308 will recoil less, use less powder, and can be fired from short actions that are a bit stiffer. The real differences are found above.
So is a M16................
sage5907
Member
I have shot and owned several 30-06 and 308 bolt action rifles. One thing I have noticed about the two calibers that no one ever mentions is recoil. Although the written word is that a 308 winchester has less recoil than a 30-06 just try a 308 in a light poorly stocked rifle. They will knock the crap of of an un-suspecting shooter. My analysis of the two cartridges is that you can get higher velocity from a 30-06 when shooting 150 grain bullets and less recoil by choosing the right powder. A 308 winchester when loaded to 30-06 velocities can be a real jumper. BW
HarcyPervin
Member
Another example of why proof-reading is important. Hunting game is one thing. Hunting shooters is an entirely different hobby.
Beagle-zebub
Member
LOL, I'm with HarcyPervin, especially because of the whole "Hunter of Gunmen" term among Marine snipers.
cougar1717
Member
To give backup for the velocity difference that others have mentioned, I've cherrypicked the top velocities of both from Hodgdon's website and rounded. Although not listed here, other hodgdon publications show both use 24" barrels to measure velocity.
http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp
150's 3070fps vs 2975fps difference 95fps
165's 2970fps vs 2840fps 130fps
180's 2840fps vs 2680fps 160fps
220's 2470fps vs none
What you can do with the velocity difference, depends on the shooter.
Googleplex
Member
I think it's a moot argument. When you get to heavy bullet weights, the .308 is at a disadvantage, but not enough of one to make much difference with proper shot placement (which is required regardless). The .30-06 is still slightly anemic for big bears and moose. You tick one of them off and you'd better have something closer to a .45-70. Get whichever one you want. The practical difference isn't much. Though in an '03 or a garand, the .30-06 is the only real way to go.
Arkansas Paul
Member
That's what I thought. The difference isn't as much in the lighter bullets, but as the bullet weight goes up, the .30-06 starts pulling ahead more and more.
I will say that in my personal experience, the on game difference is nil at ranges inside 150 yds. DRT is DRT. Of course this experience is with whitetails only. If elk or moose were on the agenda, then there may be an on game difference. That extra 150 fps may help on a quartering shot where max penetration is key. Then again, maybe not.
To me it depends on the rifle you chose. If buying a standard size rifle I see no reason to buy a 308. The velocity between the 2 is so close that it doesn't matter most of the time. Where the 308 shines is in the scaled down rifles built around the 308 family of cartridges such as the Remongton 7 and Kimber 84. These rifles will be considerably lighter and more handy than would be possible in a 30-06, or even in a standard size short action rifle in 308.
It is not the velocities that are causing the problems, but a poorly stocked rifle. When loaded to equal velocities the 308 will have less recoil because it takes considerably less powder to get those velocities from a 308 case.
I could load each hotter, but the best compromise in speed and accuracy with my 30-06 is 57 Gr of IMR 4350 with a 165 Gr bullet. I'm getting 2825 fps with that load. My 308 shoots the same bullet only 85 fps slower (2740 fps), but only needs 45.5 gr of RL 15 to do it. The 30-06 needs 20% more powder to get 3% more speed.
If you run the numbers on a recoil caculator program the 308 will have around 16 ft lbs of recoil vs 19 for the 30-06 if both rifles weigh 8 lbs. That is a 15% recoil reduction, for 3% less velocity. If I shoot that load through my lightweight 6 lb Kimber the recoil will be almost the same, even though the rifle is 25% lighter.
It is not the velocities that are causing the problems, but a poorly stocked rifle. When loaded to equal velocities the 308 will have less recoil because it takes considerably less powder to get those velocities from a 308 case.
I could load each hotter, but the best compromise in speed and accuracy with my 30-06 is 57 Gr of IMR 4350 with a 165 Gr bullet. I'm getting 2825 fps with that load. My 308 shoots the same bullet only 85 fps slower (2740 fps), but only needs 45.5 gr of RL 15 to do it. The 30-06 needs 20% more powder to get 3% more speed.
If you run the numbers on a recoil caculator program the 308 will have around 16 ft lbs of recoil vs 19 for the 30-06 if both rifles weigh 8 lbs. That is a 15% recoil reduction, for 3% less velocity. If I shoot that load through my lightweight 6 lb Kimber the recoil will be almost the same, even though the rifle is 25% lighter.
Kachok
Member
Either way you slice it you are splitting hairs, no deer, elk, pronghorn or yote can tell the difference. Trajectory is so close you are not likley to notice a difference out to 400 yd and those 220gr bullets that the 06 throws are really only usefull for game that the 338 win mag claimed as it's own a long time ago. Sure they make the 06 more versitatile then the 308, but are far from ideal on large dangerous game. 150s -180s are the home of the 30 cals and the 308 makes great use of them.
USSR
Member
I have loaded both for 1,000 yard competition with the 190gr Sierra MatchKing. Loading them both with the same powder would not be fair to one or the other of the two cartridges. For example, if you use the optimal powder for the .30-06 (RL22) in both the '06 and the .308, the .308 will suffer greatly with a powder too slow for it's case capacity. And if you use the optimal powder for the .308 (N550) in both the .308 and '06, the '06 will reach maximum pressure with a charge weight that does not take advantage of it's greater case capacity. However, using the optimal powder for each cartridge results in a 200fps difference in velocity in favor of the '06. Both rifles have 26" barrels, and velocities reached were 2700fps for the .308, and 2900fps for the .30-06. My testing with 178gr Amax bullets (same 26" barrels) resulted in essentially the same 200fps difference. YMMV.
Don
FlyinBryan
Member
kinda comparing apples and oranges there with 2 different powders aint ya? for instance 41 grains of imr3031 gets me 100 more fps than 48 grains of h414 in the same cartridge.
edit: covered above
- Status
