Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 30-06 vs 300 H&H

What are your thoughts on 300 H&H vs. 30-06? Want to hear opinions.

I much prefer the .30 Whelen to either one.

FC

I've owned three .300 H&H's. It's a nice round, especially if you want to a traditional .300 magnum. But right now I don't own one, and probably wouldn't own any .300 magnum if I didn't have to for professional reasons.

The 30-06 is the more practical round of the two and also an excellent all-round hunting cartridge. However, I really like the grand old 300 H&H, especially in a pre'64 Model 70 Winchester. Who says that shooters have to be practical?

I have one H & H in a number 1.. I really like it.. It will be my hunting rifle in the years to come, when I want a light weight rifle...
When I was a young fellow fifty years ago, repeated some of JOC's drivel about the H & H being little more than an 06.. I told this to an older Camp Perry shooter.. Who used BOTH extensively.. He explain there is quite a difference in the two.

Like Mule Deer I have several .300's and several 06's.. But if the 06's had not belonged to my relatives, they would be long gone.

Not a gunwriter, but I just started playing with a .300 H&H in a pre-64 and so far it is working out. Recoil isn't much heavier than a .30-06, but I tend to think the '06 and .300 Win Mag are close in recoil, too, which drives my preference for .300s. My H&H is shooting OK so far.

If your gun is big enough to handle the H&H that is the better round. I have one now and have had another. I also have 4 or 5 30-06s which I really like too. I have both in pre-64s. I like the extra zing of the magnum-especially with heavier bullets. I carried my 300 on Kodiak. I never felt undergunned- maybe that would have changed had I had to face a bear charge at 10 yard but that never happened. That H&H case sure feeds nice.

Sweet !

Awesome!! What more could you ask for? Good shooting D...

Do you think that the H&H feeds smoother than the -06 in the pre-64 action?

Feeds smoother than just about any other cartridge I use..

Very nice to see that coming out of a pre-64!

And to think you tried to pawn that POS off on me!

I've shot cartridges from guns that feed poorly and finicky. The 30-06 isn't one of them. In fact, I can shoot an '06 in a 700 as fast as I can work the bolt. I don't try to feed empties. I don't understand how it would matter that empty brass feed well. Given that 30-06 causes no feeding issues, it doesn't make sense to use that as a criterion to use a 300 H&H over an '06. No offense to fans of the round. I have never felt the need to shoot one. If others have had feeding issues with 30-06 bolt guns, that is another story.

Hands down 300 H&H�its just plain cool, and dead sexy�..

And it's just as effective as a 30-06

Or more so�There was a devastatingly handsome writer that did the piece on the 300H&H for Barnes #4 Manual��

That's a telling statement:

"I don't own one, and probably wouldn't own any .300 magnum if I didn't have to for professional reasons."

Les Bowman promoted the 7mm RM because as a guide he found that many hunters did not shoot the 300 magnums well.

It is one of those inherently accurate rounds that shoot tight groups with a variety of bullets and powders. The 6.5 X 55 Swede is another.

Everybody that shoots one loves it. Takes a long action, but unless you are trying to convert a standard length Mauser, it's not an issue. As mentioned above, smooth feeding.

The .30-06 is a benchmark. Nobody can throw stones at it. Another round might be faster, another might shoot heavier bullets, the third is slower, etc. but everyone knows the .30-06 is an effective round on nearly everything that won't eat or stomp you, and has done a good job on most of them over the years.

Don't know who you're talking about,but that's a nice Gemsbok!