Poll: .300 Magnums VS. .30-06

[TK73]

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:

Depending on your preference for big game hunting (non-dangerous animals) please choose either one of the aforesaid .300 Magnums or the .30-06.

Question to hunters who happen to have used both on game: Do you notice a difference in the animal's reaction when being shot by either a .300 Magnum or the .30-06 (identical bullet configuration and weight)?

Thank you.

 

[ranburr]

Anything that you can kill with a .300 can be killed just as easily with a .30-06 and your shoulder and ears will thank you. I will give the .300 the edge at extreme long ranges. But I will not take a shot past 400 yards and the closer to 100 yards the better as far as I am concerned.

ranburr

 

[tc300mag1]

Voted 300 win mag becuse its my pet caliber,,, Have used both a lot but havent shot anything other than deer with them no real change in how fast they drop etc etc all in shot placement

 

[RCL]

I voted for the .30-06, it's all I've ever used. However, the only place I've ever hunted with a rifle was in Pennsylvania.
If I lived out west, I may have chosen a different cartridge (I've always wanted a .300 H&H), but more than likely would have gone with a .30-06 with a two or three inch longer barrel.

 

[TK73]

Dear RCL:

Like most British cartridges developments the classic .300 Holland & Holland Magnum is the most elegant cartridge mentioned on above list. It's usefulness in the hunting field is open to debate in comparison to the other, more modern .300 Magnums (and the .30-06!), but I think it's very sad that the .300 H&H has fallen from favour among shooters and hunters. As far as I know, factory rifles chambered for this fine round are rarely encountered in these days whereas some ammo choices seem to be available, though.

Kind Regards!

 

[Art Eatman]

TK73, there are a couple of problems when comparing the .300 H&H with the '06: The H&H ain't that much better, ballistically, and the ammo's always been a good bit more expensive. If you reload, you face the belted-case-bulge problem. (New die design now obviates this latter problem.)

Back around 35 years ago, I did some studying on comparing the '06 and the .300 WinMag. Most .300s came with a 24" barrel. I bought an '06 with a 26" barrel. My joke is that by my "cheating", I get nearly the same ballistics but with less powder and less recoil.

Art

 

[Lee Woiteshek]

Guess I'm the only one on the board with a 300 Weatherby. Never owned a 30-06. Real happy with mine.

 

[TK73]

Dear Art:

Yes, you're correct, of course. I was aware that the .300 H&H doesn't give a hunter much better performance than the .30-06 can provide. Still, like the bigger .375 H&H, the .300 H&H is an elegant round that reminds me of the hunting days of economically sound British career officers. (Of course, the .30-06 is a couple of years older than the .300 H&H, right? ).

Thank you, guys, for your comments so far. I hope, some additional information will come soon...

Regards!

 

[Matt G]

I've killed deer with both the .30-'06 (out of several rifles) and a .300 Win Mag. I will have to say that I clicked on the '06 here. Not one animal have I shot with one where the other would have really changed the situation.

That said, let me say this: with a given bullet weight and with a given barrel length, the .300 Win Mag can simply do things that the .30-'06 cannot.

The beauty of the .300 Win Mag is that it is so very flat-shooting. I have a load that I can use to hold dead-on out to 375 yards with, and never rise above nor drop below 5" from P.O.A. At about 200 yards it retains as much velocity and energy as the '06 does at the muzzle. My one and only .300 Win Mag is a 26" Sendero, which I bought specifically for stretching my range over long brush cuts or wheat field shots. Funny thing is, I've never shot any game animal with it as far away as even 150 yds!

Typically, '06 ammo is more easily found, is cheaper, and is found in a wider variety of loads. It recoils a little softer, has a little less blast, and is every bit as accurate --if not more so-- as the .300 Win Mag. All of this translates into a cartridge that you're more likely to shoot and practice with. There is not an animal on this continent of North America that I wouldn't take with a .30-06 with appropriate loads. (Although I'd for damn sure choose my shots on some creatures like Alaskan brown bear and Alaskan moose and polar bear.) Like so many things with hunting-- it's not the kitchen, it's the cook.

Anecdote:
I took my wife deer hunting the first year we were married. She used a .257 Roberts shooting a lightly-handloaded 100g Nosler Ballistic Tip (~2600 fps) to drop a doe in her own tracks at 90 yards. The next day I shot two large does with my .300 Win Mag loaded with hot 180g Game Kings (~3100 fps). Both were shot at just under 100 yards, and both ran 40 yards into the brush before piling up. I laughed at the time, saying that I had "proven" that the down-loaded .257 Roberts was a superior deer cartidge to the hot-loaded .300 Win Mag!

 

[one-shot-one]

300wsm

i have both. i voted for the 300 wsm, in my rifles felt recoil is less and fps/flb. are + 100 or more. accuracy off the bench is better, reloads easier.
does the game animals know the diff.? i dout it.

 

[Art Eatman]

The thing about such as the .300 H&H magnum is the elegance of the rifles for which it was more commonly chambered.

Think of the old Model 70 Super Grade, or some of the English-made rifles. Slim lines, an overall graceful appearance. Fine-line checkering.

Many of them were engraved to some extent, as well.

I got to thinking about this sort of thing today when a buddy brought a German drilling by for me to see. Beautiful engraving, and all the screw-heads engraved: And all the slots aligned with the bore! All of them! (It was a twin 16-gauge, over a slim 7mm barrel which was chambered for a rimmed, long, straight-taper case.) The checkering looked like some 36 lines per inch!

Art

 

[Matt G]

16ga over 7mm. Ooooh. Talk about a Texas fall hunting special. Deer? Sure. Quail? You bet. Turkey? Don't mind if I do.

Now, if those Drillings weren't so dadgummed heavy! (And fancy-Dan pricey!)

 

[BlackCat]

I just want to add that most all of the .30-06's potential can be realized with a 22" barrel, any longer than that is pretty much overkill.

 

[Larry Ashcraft]

I just want to add that most all of the .30-06's potential can be realized with a 22" barrel, any longer than that is pretty much overkill.

Depends on the powder used. With the slower burning powders, a longer barrel will give higher velocity.

 

[Art Eatman]

All through the 1940s and on into the 1960s or so, about every ten years somebody at NRA would re-test to find out how much velocity loss there would be per inch of barrel from the then-standard of 26". The cartridges tested varied...

Anyhow, for the '06, it runs about 75 ft/sec per inch of barrel. For such as the 7mm maggie, around 90 to 100 ft/sec. For the .308-sort of cartridge, around 50 ft/sec.

I say "then-standard" because the factories used to give away counter-top pads with a listing of cartridge, muzzle velocity and muzzle energy for all their loads. For the centerfires, it usually was from 26" barrels except for those cartridges commonly used in lever actions.

Note that the '06 and its offspring and the .300 H&H are a bit overbore, but nowhere near as much as the big maggies. The CAD .308 is closer to "just right".

, Art

 

[HSMITH]

The magnum chamberings with common bullets like the core-lokt and the PSP are dismal failures waiting for a hunter. The premium line bullets in the magnums are natural born killers. You comprare apples to apples using cheap ammo and the 30-06 and 300H&H are head and shoulders above the magnums on game animals, bring premium bullets into the mix and the magnums outclass them by a good margin. Comparisons are hard to make, and bullet choice is the #1 factor in determining which way the balance tilts. I want a 300 WSM M70 classic featherweight to load premium bullets in, so that is what I voted for. Give me any decent -06 and I will be fine though.....

 

[hps1]

Question to hunters who happen to have used both on game: Do you notice a difference in the animal's reaction when being shot by either a .300 Magnum or the .30-06 (identical bullet configuration and weight)?

Voted for the 30-06.

Have used two different 300 Win Mags to take quite a number of deer and several rifles chambered in 30-06 (both calibers w/165 gr Nosler Partitions) on about an equal number of deer plus wild hogs and nilgai cows. The '06 drops 'em just as well as the magnum. The magnum's advantage IMHO is that it shoots flatter, adds about 75 yards of point blank range.

My current 300 WM is the only rifle I own that will not shoot moa groups so usually reach for the '06 (or 338 Win Mag), both of which shoot sub moa.

Regards,
hps

 

[H&Hhunter]

A .300 doesn't give one that much more "hit" than a standard .30. I have both a .300 Weatherby and a couple of .308's.

I find the Weatherby to be just to rough on small game and if i need more punch than a .308 I go to a .375. The big .30's just don't fit into my repretoire very well.

Every ten years or so I go through a zippermagnum phase, shoot a couple of critters with a .300 mag get disgusted by the amount of bruised and meat damage and go back to a good old .308 win or a .30-06.

The .308/.30-06 will do anything I need out of a .30 cal rifle no questions asked. If you ewant more horsepower go with a larger diameter, heavier bullet at reasonable velocity. The only place a big .300 starts to shine is past reasonble game shooting ranges. So it's kind of a mute point to me.

 

[TK73]

Thanks everybody for the comments so far!

H&Hhunter - Great to hear from you again.

I find it the shared information and current poll results very interesting, but it doesn't surprise that the .30-06 is the most favourite by a wide margin.

Keep it coming...

 

[stevelyn]

I voted .30-06. It can do anything that needs doing in North America and most of Africa. Ammo availability is not a problem wheverer you go. It has probably the widest variety of commercial loads available of any caliber.
If you need extra horsepower you can get it with Federal Vital-Shok High Energy or Hornady Light Magnums. Both loads put the '06 in the .300 H&H performance territory without that infernal belt.
The Federal loads are loaded with premium bullets such as the Nosler Partition, Trophy Bonded Bear Claw, Speer Grand Slams and I believe the Barnes Triple Shock is now available.
Hornady loads their own BTSP, Interlock, and SST. If you handload you can do can do even more.

 

[Yooper]

I chose the 300 Winchester Magnum because I handload. The larger case capacity allows some performance gains over the 30-06, if wanted. If you analyze the trajectory data for the 300 v 30-06, you don't gain a whole lot with the 300, maybe a few extra yards of point blank range, but that yardage is way out where distance estimation is difficult without a rangefinder. The higher velocity can also result in less penetration with expanding bullets in some cases. What it boils down to is that you gain some range with the 300, but I doubt that a critter hit with either will know the difference.

 

[g_gunter]

I have a lot of repsect for the 30-06. My brother in law has one with 24" barrel and he is able to routinely hit 6 in. gongs at 400 yds. with it. Very impressive (gun and shooter). He says that its not until you use a 24" + barrel that you begin to realize the full potential of the round. I tend to agree.

g_gunter

 

[Aubrey_W_Bogard]

YMMV. My personal opinion is that most hunters will be best served with a primary rifle of the .270/.280/7mag/30-06 class for deer and medium-sized game and something in the .338/.375 class for the big stuff (i.e., big bears, moose, elk...). You can certainly kill the big stuff with the lighter rifles; good bullets, good shot placement, and reasonable ranges help. Guides have told me that they have seen more wounded elk with 7mags than anything else. I don't know if this is truly a reflection of the shooter or the cartridge...

 

[Larry Ashcraft]

Guides have told me that they have seen more wounded elk with 7mags than anything else. I don't know if this is truly a reflection of the shooter or the cartridge...

Both, I would say. Almost all my friends who hunt, but don't shoot much, choose the 7 mag because it sounds like the best all-around killer cartridge. In reality, I like to say, the 7 mag duplicates .270 Win. ballistics using only 50% more powder, except for the slight advantage when using a 175 gr. bullet.

Hunters who shoot less than a box of ammo a year seem to always pick the 7 Rem Mag., and they are the ones who are wounding the most elk.

 

[H&Hhunter]

Larry,

I am so glad that someone else see's the light on the 7MM. It has been my personal experience that more game gets wounded with a 7MM than any other rifle on the planet.

I don't like 7MM's. I think that people try to make them into something they aren't. And that is a long range elk/moose/mule deer/bear gun.

I've said it a thousand times before and I'll say it again right now. A 7MM will not do anything that a .30-06 can't do and the 06 can do some things better. The 7MM is the most redundant useless round on the planet as far as I am concerened. If I wanted a flat shooting .277Cal rifle I'd go with a 270Weatherby. But once again it won't do anything I can't already do with an 06.

Basically the 7MM is a belted over bore .270. I have never understood this round.