Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why is a Short-Action Cartridge a Big Deal?

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Kind of Blued, Oct 7, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kind of Blued

    Kind of Blued Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    3,676
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    I understand it mainly from a military standpoint in that it could be:

    Carried slightly more easily in large quantities.

    Cycled more rapidly through a machine gun.

    Loaded more efficiently, and consequently, more inexpensively.

    But I don't really understand why something such as the movement from the 30-06 to the .308 was such a seemingly "necessary" thing (excluding NATO regulations), or why having a long-action cartridge is a "bad" thing.

    Is it an effort to get to the launching of a .30 caliber projectile as efficiently as possible? Couldn't we have figured that out a long long time ago?
     
  2. ArmedBear

    ArmedBear Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    23,171
    I have a nice full-size .30-06 hunting rifle. With its 24" #2 barrel and its high-comb Weatherby walnut stock, and a 3-9x40mm scope on it, all around nothing excessive, it's pushing 9 lbs. empty without a sling. It's about 44.5" long.

    It shoots great, but carries not so well.

    A .308, with a smaller amount of faster powder, will hunt with acceptably-similar performance in a rifle that's 40" long and weighs a tad over 7 lbs. with a carefully-chosen scope. The shorter, lighter action and magazine, a skinnier stock and a shorter barrel all contribute to the reduction in bulk and weight.

    That's why I'm looking at a .308.

    The military, though, has other reasons. If you're going to ship around hundreds of thousands -- maybe millions -- of rounds and tens of thousands of rifles, size and weight REALLY add up.
     
  3. Sunray

    Sunray Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2003
    Messages:
    11,378
    Location:
    London, Ont.
    "...the movement from the 30-06 to the .308 was such a seemingly "necessary"..." That was to take advantage of the then new powders that allowed .30-06 ballistics in a shorter case. The U.S. military was looking for a replacement for the M1 with FA capabilities at the time too. The slightly shorter case of the .308 was more efficient on FA. Mind you, training conscripts to use it well enough proved difficult.
     
  4. younganddumb

    younganddumb Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    281
    Location:
    pasadena md
    I thnik the reason was 308 rolls off the tounge a little better :)
     
  5. ArmedBear

    ArmedBear Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    23,171
    .30-'06 rolls off better with a drawl, however.
     
  6. SimpleIsGood229

    SimpleIsGood229 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    934
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    When I saw the title, I thought you would be talking about some short magnum. My answer would have been, "Because Remchester's marketing department says so." :neener:

    Just as ArmedBear mentioned, the military switched to 7.62x51 because, with the new (at the time) powder, it matched the .30-06. It's also worth noting that more 7.62x51 rounds can be carried than .30-06 rounds.
     
  7. MechAg94

    MechAg94 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    4,748
    A long action requires the action to cycle further to effect loading and unloading. The receiver becomes smaller (lighter). The magazines are smaller. Etc..

    I think a lot of the original idea was to make a lower power cartridge that would make it easier to operate a lightweight rifle at high rates of fire, but still be effective at typical combat ranges. At least that is the reason the Germans did it as I understand it.
     
  8. younganddumb

    younganddumb Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    281
    Location:
    pasadena md
    agree with you 100% but don't have a southern drawl so it sounds preety bad one I say it wish I had a drawl though ......
     
  9. elmerfudd

    elmerfudd Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,463
    To start with, you can make the action about an inch shorter, (double the length of the difference in cartridge length, once for the cartridge and once for the bolt throw). That saves weight and also allows you to use shorter, more compact scopes.

    These might not be earth shaking improvements, but they are real ones, so as I see it why go with what is in many ways an inferior cartridge? Now, I own a 30-06 myself and it's an accurate rifle that's powerful enough to take any game in the western hemisphere, so there's nothing really wrong with the 06, but as I see it, there are better cartridges out there now. What the 30-06 really has going for it is popularity. You can buy cartridges for it nearly anywhere and that's something you can't do with a .270 WSM.
     
  10. Auburn1992

    Auburn1992 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    1,015
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Usually it'll reduce recoil and will make the gun lighter due to smaller parts. Also, on bolt action rifles, you have a shorter bolt movement; which will help you stay on target.

    Aside from this, it also helps in semi-auto guns. The magazines don't have to be as long as if it were the length of an '06
     
  11. TCB in TN

    TCB in TN Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,938
    Location:
    Middle, TN
    Lighter parts don't reduce recoil. In fact they typically "increase" felt recoil, if the rest of the package is the same.

    You do have a shorter bolt movement which is a boon for full auto, and a very slight improvement for those manually cycling the action, and again you have a slight weight savings from the shorter mags, But unless you are putting a LOT of rounds down range, or you are in a situation where you are carrying A LOT of mags, you are talking about a very minimal difference!
     
  12. skinewmexico

    skinewmexico Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,621
    Location:
    West Texas
    Marketing. if an inch of reciever makes that much difference, you have something else going on.
     
  13. Vaarok

    Vaarok Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,887
    Location:
    Varies
    Militarily, space is second only to weight when considering equipment. Compare a BAR mag with a FAL mag.

    Commercially, it's Something New And Exciting they can shill at you.
     
  14. CWL

    CWL Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Messages:
    6,505
    Everyone's numbers are way too low.

    When planning for war (WWIII), MBR expenditure would be in the billions of rounds. Saving a little bit in length & weight of one round means a lot in total commodity cost, storing and moving. Also saves unknown $ & weight in weapons design, not just for MBRs but automatic weapons from squad-level to fixed weapons on aircraft, vehicles/AFV etc.
     
  15. BobOfTheFuture

    BobOfTheFuture Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    142
    TCB, its a minamal diffrence till you have to ship a million rifles overseas, and keep them fed.
     
  16. elmerfudd

    elmerfudd Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,463
    It's not a big deal if you already have an 06, but if you're buying a new rifle why not get one with an extra inch of barrel rather than an extra inch of receiver? Especially when that extra inch of receiver limits your choice of optics.
     
  17. CB900F

    CB900F Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Messages:
    4,717
    Kindofblued;

    From the civilian perspective, there is no practical difference.

    For those who state that the short action is "more accurate", I reply: prove that you are able to outshoot the capability of a good long action gun.

    If weight is a make it/break it proposition, there are many ways to level that field. It's perfectly possible to obtain an ultra lightweight synthetic stock for many long actions for less than the cost of buying and equipping a new short action gun just to save ounces. Or simply go to a 22" barrel with your .30-06.

    As for the cartridge difference, the .30-06 is the standard by which all the others are measured. There are more than enough old threads hangin' around here that quantify the difference. Suffice to say that the .30-06 is everything the .308 would like to be if only it could grow up.

    900F
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page