Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 30-06 vs 308 argument finally settled!

I like your way of thinkin’.

30-06 verses 308 = both are very fine cartridges here`s a little history 30-06 was yes bigger ,cost more and kinda heavier and it was problem when used in machine guns. 308 was smaller ,kinda was lighter to carry ,cost less to produce and did work better than the 30-06 did in a machine gun.
now here`s another small history fact why the 308 win got the nod to be the standard military round at that time it was all political pressure from Washington , many military experts and gun experts at that time wanted the 300 savage which was a better machine gun cartridge than both the 30-06 and 308 , the 300 savage was accurate and powerful enough yet a little smaller than even the 308 win. but Washington politics help Winchester arms get the U.S.A. military contract with its 308 Winchester. I do all 3 cartridges and to be honest the 300 savage is another very fine cartridge and very over looked too, just think if some one would have made a 6.5 -300 savage cartridge ?

It gets a bit scrambled in there sometimes. So thanks for clearing that up for me.
😀

I have nothing against the 308.
S A doesn’t mean anything to me so....

I have an 06 and don’t know ONE reason to want a 308. When I think about another rifle or cal/cartridge.. 308 doesn’t enter my consideration.

I have a 6mm Rem in a Model Six pump and
A 6.5x55 in a Win M 70

So I don’t own a S A in anything. I have 270s, 7 RMs, 06, 300 WM etc etc you get the idea.

Jerry

The original SA magnums...

Oh yeah, I forgot. I have a 284 Win in a 98 so...

Thanks for reminding me. GRIN

Actually, the .308 did appear before the .30-06. Or rather the .308 Rimmed did, in 1892, when the U.S. Army adopted the cartridge that came to be known as the .30-40 Krag.

The case capacity of the .30-40 is very similar to the .308's, so it can do the same things--when loaded to the same pressures. But it couldn't, not just because of the weak Krag-Jorgensen action but early smokeless powders.

Which is why the military developed the .30-06. Even with the relatively primitive powders of the day, it could be loaded to noticeably higher velocities than the .308 Rimmed--though the original .30-06 ballistics were closer to the .300 Savage than the .308. (The .308 could be loaded to approximate .30-06 ballistics when it appeared in the 1950's, but only because of advancements in smokeless powder over the previous half-century.) No so, if the .308 Winchester existed before the .30-06, the .30-06 would still have appeared--or something like it--because of the limitations of early powders.

It's always interesting reading statements about, "If such-and-such cartridge would have come out first, then so-and-so cartridge would never have been invented." Almost always, such comparisons are based on a faulty knowledge of firearms history, and the technical limitations that resulted in the original cartridge.

I know this is counter to everyones experience, but I have never been able to get the accuracy from my 308s, a pre 64 featherweight, a remington 700, and winchester classic that i can get from my 3006s, a remington 700, and two model 70 classics. Loonyism at its best ( or worst).

I've got three 30-06s; a Bansner stocked Model 70, a Garand and an 03A3. My Model 70 is accurate with several different bullet weights and the best fitting, for me, all around hunting rifle I've ever owned. I've had a couple of 308's, an early push feed Model 70 and a Remington ADL that were also plenty accurate. I don't think you can go wrong with either cartridge in a hunting rifle, it gets down to the rifle you like best.

I own and like both rounds

Works quite well for me also, tho I do lean slightly to the Springfield....

Mine have been about equal.. My .308 Ruger American only weighs 6lbs and shot most .308 factory ammo as well as two old Varmint weight Rem m700s... With handloads all were basically .75 to 1 MOA. The 9lb Rems got sold..The light little Ruger has stayed..:)

The three '06 rifles I have owned were all equally as accurate. My current 1949 made Winchester m70 standard wt. 30-06 pokes three 168g Berger VLDs into .5" groups @ 100 yards.AND that is with a Weaver K4-60B scope aboard..(I cheat by precisely quartering White 9" paper plates with its crosshairs ..:) Apparently, the chambering does not hold that old m70 back one bit..

I have long felt that if during the last 50 years all the BR/Target accuracy nuts had built the same quality rifles in 30-06 instead of .308 ,and fed them the same quality ammo, they would find that the old warhorse 30-06 shoots pretty damned well...

shucks, i thought one of the reasons for the 308 was enhanced feed reliability in machine guns. I cut my teeth on the M14 and not the M1. And my son owns an M700 in 30-06. Since i own an M700 chambered in 30-06 Ballistics Improved (280 Remington) and since my son has a 30-06, I have to roll with the 308.

Why is it that the same yay-hoos who think the 6.5 Creedmoor is better than the .260 Remington because it can shoot longer bullets ignore the 1:12 twist vs. 1:10 in the 30-06?

And then there are those who think the .458 Winchester bounces off ground hogs and you need a .458 Watts, even though at equal pressures the Watts only goes 70 fps faster. Oh yeah. Short actions are the cat's meow but don't pay attention to the longer Watts rounds! You're 30-06 might weigh two ounces more. Hard to carry when you're 40 pounds overweight.

Facts are the 30-06 is just a LITTLE BIT BETTER for ANY PURPOSE than the .308. Just a little bit. If you don't care, then chuck the .308 and shoot a .300 Savage. The 30-06 recoils more because the velocity is more. Load it to the same velocity and it doesn't. Oh yes, accuracy. As Warren Page showed in the 1970 "Gun Digest," accuracy is better (all things being equal) when recoil is lower because there is less leaping torquing and blasting to create vibration.

And the "American Hunter" article the OP posted is incorrect in claiming that 1000 yard target shooters prefer the .308. 1000 yard service rifle matches require the service rifle, and that would be the M14 (M1A) vs. the M1 Garand. The M14 is more accurate because it has a shorter operating rod clanging around, not because of its cartridge. (In case you're wondering, one could also shoot an AR15, but the 5.56mm or .223 is a joke insofar as bucking the wind at 1000 yards is concerned.) Another long range target sport, Palma, requires the .308 with a 155 grain bullet, which is a poor weight for that range, but "them's the rules."

Actually the 308 shot more accurately in the SAME M-1 Garands that used to shoot 30-06. They sleeved the chambers to be able to fire the 308 and on average the 308 Garands were more accurate than the 30-06 Garands.

There's also a reason that Bullet manufacturers tend to use some calibers over others to accuracy test their bullets. In hundreds of thousands of rounds fired it has been conclusively proven that some Rounds tend to be somewhat more accurate than others. 308 is one of them................DJ

I just do not understand how you can put the 6.5 quifemoor in the same category as anything 30 caliber. As far as the .308 vs. 30-06 fight. Settle it now, and buy a 300 Winchester Magnum. Just my opinion.

Run the ballistics between 6.5CM and 308 and you'll see..

.30-06


.308


.308 is lighter, that's about all I know.

The 308 is required to be fired in ft-r and Palma . Does not make it better. .