Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game "The 30-06 is obsolete!"

Never seen that pic before, must be from this week?

My observation: you throw out a lot of technical jargon, which sounds impressive. But you jump to conclusions based on qualitative concepts, not quantitative data.

Have a good day. I'm perfect happy to agree to disagree.

Case capacity increases the attainable energy/velocity, no question. It's not linear - if you increase your case capacity by 10%, you don't get a 10% increase in muzzle energy even though you can put in 10% more powder and thus 10% more chemical energy. You might get a 5% increase in muzzle energy depending on a variety of factors. In other words cases get less efficient as they get bigger, even as they become more powerful.

Now we come to the .30-06. It's inefficient shoulder, low MAP, and the extra barrel length consumed by the longer chamber (barrels are measured from the breach face, which makes sense from a weight perspective) all work against it relative to the .308. What you will find when you do the math is that most of what the .30-06 gains due to extra case capacity is lost back due to poor design. All that remains is a trivial difference that only manifests in a very short list of powders, none of which have been named by the .30-06 advocates, possibly because their load data is as out of date as their cartridge.

As far as coyote, his behavior in this thread is so poor that at this point anything other than calling him ignorant is a waste of time. If he want to come back, admit he knows next to nothing about interior ballistics, and is willing to learn we can try again. But as it stands I will say nothing respectful to him as respect is earned and he hasn't. I have no problem engaging with others on the topic, but ignorant boy has proven that dealing with him is a waste of time.

"What you will find when you do the math is that most of what the .30-06 gains due to extra case capacity is lost back due to poor design"

Ok, I don't want to get dragged into this, but how is the 06 "poorly designed " relative to the 308?

The only apparent difference is a 17.5 degree shoulder vs a 20 degree? Or I guess being longer is a design flaw, too?

MAP...judicious handloaders have been working with this "poor design " for a long time, just as they have with their modern bolt actions in 7x57 and 257R.

My observation: you throw out a lot of technical jargon, which sounds impressive. But you jump to conclusions based on qualitative concepts, not quantitative data.

Have a good day. I'm perfect happy to agree to disagree.

Simulations don't give reliable chronograph readings nor do they kill anything, except perhaps some of your time

If y'all want to believe that there's something wrong with the simulation, that's fine.

It's not just the shoulder angle, it's also the shoulder diameter. The .308 has the same diameter as a .30-06 AI, not a .30-06. The wider, steeper shoulder reduces powder movement down the barrel, which increases efficiency.

You know, I was nice enough to actually run ballistic simulations demonstrating the concepts I was describing so that people would have hard numbers in terms of velocity and pressure. That's about as quantitative as it gets. But I understand. Y'all want to have a circle jerk over the .30-06. Facts just get in the way of that sort of thing. Carry on.

Yeah, OK. The whole science of ballistics is wrong, and you've got it figured out. Sure.

Nah, I'll just call you what you are: an utter fool.

Is that what passes for rational discussion in your world? No facts, just name calling?

Ballistic science? Your quick load simulation model is nothing more than a hypothesis, until it is proven by empirical data.

Is that what passes for rational discussion in your world? No facts, just name calling?