Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting 308 vs 30-06 vs 300wm - theoretical accuracy

Hey there - new to the campfire and hoping you guys can answer a question for me (no real experience past 300 yards).

People are using 308's for 1000 yard shooting with good success, and that cartridge is much more popular than the 30-06 for long range shooting. The more efficient case and/or shorter action are generally cited as reasons for slightly better accuracy, but then the 300 win mag is also used with regularity when going long. The ratio of diameter to case length is much closer to the 30-06 than the 308, and it's obviously long action.

So why does the 30-06 have the reputation for not being as accurate? What do the 308 and 300 win mag have that the 30-06 doesn't?

Thanks and looking forward to the replies.

The 30-06 is just plain boring. Been around for far far longer than the 308 or 300wm. People are allured to the newer stuff like the 6.5 CM for example..

The 30-06 accuracy story likely comes from the M1 Garand vs M14 Service rifle days.

I have a heavy precision style 30-06 bolt gun that shoots lights out.

Build it for precision, and it can deliver.

Time was the 300 H&H was THE long range cartridge , now it is practically unknown.


Mike

I have a .30/06 Winchester Featherweight which is one of the most accurate rifles I ever shot, or saw shot.

I've had an extremely accurate .308 Win (Rem M700) but sold it. None of my .30-06 rifles are quite as accurate, but with one exception (and that rifle will go down the road for multiple reasons), they are not far off. The difference may be due more to the loads developed for them than the cartridge - I've tended to develop .30-06 loads for my original .30-06 and later work back up to them so I can use the same load in all. Not the best method for best accuracy, but adequate for my needs (600 yard accuracy).

First I'll throw out an answer in the most general terms.
Warren Page wrote an article "The Bigger the Package", based on the Remington custom shop records which documented the accuracy of the 40x rifles test fired at the shop for the various calibers produced. It was a fascinating piece because you had rifles built the same way to the same standard with the same action shot for accuracy by people who knew what they were doing. The average group sizes trended with recoil of the cartridge. The 308 average was 0.562", the 30-06 average was 0.768" and the 300 Win Mag was 1.00"


In many cases, folk are shooting the 308 at 1K not necessarily because it is the best, but rather because there are matches where the 308 is the only round allowed in the match. The Palma Matches allow only the 308 shot at 800, 900 and 1000 yards with a bullet lighter than 156 gr. (yes there are some instances where you can shoot a 223)

The 300 magnums get used because they can throw the heavier better bc'd bullets at a decent velocity to battle the wind which is a major factor at long range.


There's truth in what Montana Marine says. Back in the days of M1 Garand, the 30-06 ammo was limited in burn rate and bullet weight because of the sensitivities of the Garand gas system. That resulted in the 30-06 match ammo of the day throwing a 173 bullet around 2550-2600 fps. That also resulted in the loading density of the powder in the cases being less than ideal (there was a good amount of air space in the cases) which wasn't great for accuracy. These days a well built 30-06 bolt gun can shoot great at long range as Montana Marine has shown us. For long range competitive shooting, the pendulum swung back from the big 30's toward smaller, high bc bullets that are gentler on the shoulder without stopping at the mid 30's like the 06...

With all that said, I'll grab a 30-06 for hunting nine times out of ten and I don't feel handicapped in the least alongside my friends shooting Creedmoors, 30 Magnums etc.

With a 308 Bart Bobbitt shot a 20-shot 3.325" group at 800 yards as shown in May 1997 issue of Precision Shooting [Krieger barrel ad].

Bart was a longtime competitor at Camp Perry and was contributing to rec.guns on usenet before the www had gun forums.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.guns/iL7zv-cktJc

Over the years he has explained the accuracy limit of 308, 30-06, and 300WinMag.

Here he is saying in 1994 that the 308 is twice as accurate as the 30-06, but competitive shooters were not good enough to tell the difference.
https://yarchive.net/gun/rifle/30-06_vs_308.html


https://www.google.com/search?q=bart+bobbitt+800+yards&biw=1573&bih=546&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=t0x8Gb9UIOtV6M%253A%252CTwbt9zsuwTZZ6M%252C_&usg=AI4_-kQtLVXPY_8gENdPKbOfrqPTm_Ux_Q&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiwxdmt3oLfAhUrIDQIHe5_DHgQ9QEwA3oECAYQBA#imgdii=9BxOdRZfsjAfBM:&imgrc=vPEaL-corsXuMM:

Over the years I have tried to read everything Bart has written. I know he says that 300WinMag is the most accurate on the first shot, and reloaded brass not so much.

That's ole Bart.
Here's a funny tangent. Bart mentions the NRA changing the targets from the 5V to the 10X in 1966 so that they could discriminate better the scores that the supposedly more accurate 308 was now posting and the 30-06 shooters complaining about the change. I guess Eric England didn't get the memo because in 1968 he fired a 998 on a 1000pt aggregate with a 30-06 and set the longest lasting record (41 years) in Highpower Rifle competition (and it wasn't a 308 that finally broke that record).

Hang on to that one. I have one myself. It's a pre 64 too..

It's funnier than fhuqk,when a Long Action's Swan Song...is that it will "almost" hang with a Short Action.

Hint.

Laughing!..................

I have all three, all shoot great, but I ain’t all that as s shooter. I get a rifle to shoot an inch or better at a 100 yards, I’m happy.

A "good" day for you,is when you don't schit your pants.

Congratulations?!?......................

Your question about theoretical accuracy of the 308 vs 30-06 vs 300wm is well asked and in fact may have more to it then even you know.
The key word here being "theoretical"

Anytime theory and fact disagree, it's easy to figure out which is wrong. But theory is often made into religion by members of the shooting world and facts are ignored.

The truth is as follows (at least in part)

The 30-06 was developed between 1904 and 1906 and was sized to use a case nearly full of the powder needed to achieve the desired velocity with the powders available in 1904. It was fitted to the Springfield m1903 rifle. As time went on the cartridges were loaded with different weights of bullets and also with better powders both by the US Military and also by all civilian manufacturers. It was (and is) a grand old cartridge and still one of the very best all-around shells the world has ever seen. Perhaps the very best.

In the late 40s and early 50s the military load for the 30-06 was loaded with powders that filled the shell only about 85% full and the M2 load (for the M-1 Garand rifle) used a 150 grain flat base bullet. So with the formation of NATO and the idea of a cartridge for all members to use in their rifles so ammo can be shared the idea of using the same diameter bullet as the 30-06 was something US Military leadership was unwilling to give up, and because 80% of the budget for NATO came from the USA, the US Military got it's way. So the new shell (called M65) was reshaped to bring the brass shoulder back to fit the powder charge, and thereby making the cartridge fit into auto-loaders easier and allows for a more compact action with basically the same ballistics as what we had with the M1 Rifle.

Now the new shell was made on more modern machines and the M14 rifles were also more modern and made on machines that were not worn. Such an improvement in manufacture made for a bit tighter tolerances and all US military rifles made for the new 7.62NATO (308) were made this way, so overall the M14s were a bit more accurate then the M1s.

In comparing the 308 Winchester rifles made in the 50s and 60s to the 30-06s, we see comparisons made many times of the best and latest 308 barrels and ammo against some 30-06s that may be of the same quality and same age, but also made against some that were older and somewhat worn, or against guns and barrels made all the way back to 1906. So it's "a given" the average was going to favor the 308 in accuracy.
"Reasons" were often quoted as having to do with short actions being stiffer, but that really has nothing to do with the issue at all. See the accuracy results of various guns used in competition with new barrels since the 60s to the present day and you'll see no direct relationship of groups to action length. Yes, most shooter use the short actions because the short shells use a bit less powder, and so get better bore life, but the advance of the accuracy standard is NOT related directly to the action length as we see by so many good and winning groups shot by those shooting the 300 magnums and some of the 7MM mags over the last 50-60 years.

If the short action was really more ACCURATE we would never see a long action ever win a match again. As we can say that bi-wing prop driven aircraft are not as fast as jet fighters and be 100% correct. You NEVER see an air race with a prop driven bi-plane win against jets. That's something we can say with certainty.
But you cannot say you never see a long action rifle win a match. In fact I can't say that my short action rifles are more accurate then my long action rifles at all. (or less accurate) Accuracy is by far more effected by quality of the barrel and how it's fitted to the action, quality inletting as well as quality of the ammo. The bullet has no idea how long the action was that held it in the magazine ---and "doesn't care".

I do not deny that most of the best accuracy we see today is being shown to us with rifles made on short actions, but not all. And because it's not all I think we can safely say the action length is used for other reasons but really has nothing o do with accuracy per se.

So if the quality of 3 barrels and the workmanship of each rifle, and the quality of all 3 cartridges were equal, I would say there is no real difference in accuracy between a 308, a 30-06 or a 300 mag.

I think the biggest reason the 30-06 is not used in competition much these days is more simple.

The 308 does all the 30-06 will do and gives better barrel life using bullets up to 168 grains. The 30-06 does beat the 308 with heavier bullets but the difference is small enough that if a 30 cal shooter wants more then the 308 gives him, he usually jumps over the 30-06 and goes straight to one of the 300 magnums. It's about speed--- which reduces fight time.
But not intrinsic accuracy.

Recoil is in my opinion more of a factor than any one cartridge being more accurate. That’s why the little 6 br or a blown out version are setting world records now. On the 6 br forums a target shooter built identical rifles Iin 308 and 30-06. The 308 had a slight advantage in short range but the 06 did better long range. Ed k

6 BR?

Never heard of it.

What's it based on?..................

My best 3 shot group ever, came from my 30-378. The hole could be completely obscured with a dime.

How about fifteen that fit under a quarter? (Usual 100 yard assumption)

Exceptionally Precise rifles,are easily scored in this day & age.

Not much to it.

Hint...............

You used to post great pictures. Now all we get are hints. Where's the pictures?

Hint...............

Splitting hairs, fellows.

Stick...I’m gonna need that red white and blue stock from you when my hummer vudoo gets in the works.. just a friendly heads up so you can make other arrangements....
Obliged!

I'd like more Vuddo's in both Hummer and 17 Whizzum..................

Who gives a fugg. You want pictures go to National Geographic. Sheesh.

I've had all 3. I've never noted enough difference in accuracy to matter. I hunted with a 30-06 starting in the 1970's up until about 10 years ago when I started using 308. I've experimented with both the 300 WM and 300 WSM, but simply don't need the power.

Why do I now prefer 308 over 30-06? My 308 gives me 95-97% of the bullet speed of a 30-06 with the same bullets and 20-25% less recoil. That loss of bullet speed means my 308 does exactly the same thing at 450 yards that the 30-06 does at 500 and a 300 WM does at 600. I can't shoot well enough to be shooting at game much past 300 yards. Maybe 400 under ideal conditions.

Like you, I've never noticed enough difference to matter for what I do. Recommended a .308 to Daughter #1 when she was looking for her first bolt rifle, not because of any potential accuracy differences but because she is rather petite, doesn't care much for recoil and a .308 was adequate range-wise with 130-150g bullets. The ammo variety for a .308 was also a consideration.

FWIW, she shot her last critter with her hubby's .300WSM. When she starts looking for a longer range hunting rifle, I'm not at all sure what to recommend. The availability and options for factory ammo will be far more important than any potential differences in accuracy - those differences are swamped by other factors including differences in rifle, trigger, barrel quality, chamber dimensions and so on.

The only thing I know for sure is it will be another lefty, which limits rifle options considerably. May end up with a semi-custom built from parts.

I read someplace (!) Sierra now chambers their 30 caliber rifles for 300 WSM to test quality control.
With the focus on long range bullet performance, higher velocity testing, that seems likely.
(In barrel life, common sense would favor the .308 for high volume shooting...Sierra must be pretty flush now a days)
Can anyone confirm the 300 WSM for QC @ Sierra?

Very well done. Enjoyed reading..

The OP may also be interested in German Salazar`s thoughts on both the 308 and 06. He can go to the "Shooters Forum" for more info.

the 6 BR is alot more fun to use at all distances and with very little recoil. 6 BR also is extremely accurate at distances out to 1000 yards. after many years of using 30 caliber cartridges for target competition recoil from bigger guns is no longer fun and has very little advantage. now days i either use a fast twist 223 or a 6 BR both shoot fantastic at 600 FTR class and at 1,000 yards its surprising how well a 6 BR does. but if i go elk hunting i will use my 300 Win.Mag always.

Bullets matter way more than headstamps. Hint.

There is nothing inherently "redeeming" in the 300 Win Mag and doubly so,less citing the action and bullet. Hint.

The 6BR doesn't induce bad recoil management habits,has enough ass to stay transonic a fair piece,is bolstered by exceptional componetry(brass/dies/reamers) and will skirt atmospherics suplizingly well,if boolits are given a thunk.

Making mechanical fhuqking sense,ALWAYS makes fhuqking sense.

Hint.................

The old ‘06 has won more events than all the others combined!!

For years the military choice for long range was the 300wm. Now they have even better long range sniper rifles and it ain’t a 223 or 6 br. Not talking paper but real life stuff. Ed k

From 1906 on the 30-06 was the military round and what most competitors used until the 308 became the military round. There have been more improvements in components while the 308 was the military round, so they evolved faster accuracy wise and the shooters all ready had the improvements made during the 30-06's time. Back in the reign of the 06 it is what everyone and his dog shot and not all of them were great shots. Not all the 308 shooters were Lones Wigger either. Now the military uses a fast twist 5.56 with heavy bullets for its matches, it's not a 1000 yd cartridge though, while the 300 Mag is and in many military snipe systems developed for extreme accuracy at LR. Maybe I'm wrong but I'm betting the a match prepped 30-06 with the latest components and well made rifle would be very competitive by your better shooters. Just like that dude in the You tube vid whacking steel at 2800 yds with the 30-06. MB

6.5 Creedmoor checks all those boxes...

John

The 300WM is replacing the 338 Lapua due to its inherent agility to keep the right bullet supersonic much farther that the 308 or 06, and nearly as far as the Lapua with much less rifle.
Damn few of us regular humans are capable of taking advantage of what any of them can really do when fully optimized. None of us hunters need to.
I'm a fan of 30 cal rifles, and believe the 300 Savage is the most underestimated deer caliber out there. Not much I would not hunt, confidently, with a Savage, 308, or 06.

Too late. Got her a 22" barreled lefty Rem M700 chambered for .270 Win. Loaded up some 150g LRAB to 2910fps. Recoil is mild, accuracy is great,

One of the goals I had for Daughter's rifle was the ability to deliver 2000fps and 1500fpe to 600 yards at 7000 feet altitude. The .270/150LRAG @ 2910fps meets these admittedly arbitrary goals out to 680 yards. The 6.5CM/140LRAB @ 2670fps (22" barrel) drops below 1500fpe @ 440 yards. At 600 yards the .270 has a calculated 13.7" less drop, an additional 180fps and 345fpe and an inch less drift. Granted, the 6.5CM will do it with about 70% of the recoil, but the .270 load is only 2 ft-lbs heavier than her .308 load - meaning it is easily in her comfort range.

Oh geez. Now ya went and done it. It’s blasphemy to compare a lowly 270 to a creedmooooor. Ed k

COElkChaser,

Personally, as a former/long-serving US Army Rangemaster & elder brother of a world-class competitive shooter, I don't think that one of those three calibers is better at long range than the other two. There is just too great deal of the difference among. firearms, shooters, componentss & a host of other factors to say which round is BEST
All three, in the hands of a great shooter, will do the job, out well beyond 1,000M.

just my OPINION, tex
"Certified OF"

Though I don’t currently own one, the .270 is one of my all time favorites. Have more DRT kills with a .270 than any other cartridge. So, good choice, in my view, provided she can handle the recoil ok. Would love to see manufacturers start producing them with an 8” twist... FWIW, you might be able to do a little better on the velocity of the 140gr from the Creedmoor. Just a few days ago I got 2886 with 147gr ELDs pushed by 7828ssc from my 24” barrel...

John

This article is probably less "theoretical accuracy" and more empirical accuracy;
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2014/11/match-results-for-308-vs-30-06-surprising-findings/

German is a VERY good shooter and a good guy, but I feel like his work was methodologically flawed...yet it is interesting food for thought.

...btw, I'd like to know who your brother is;

[quote=DarlaG]COElkChaser,

Personally, as a former/long-serving US Army Rangemaster & elder brother of a world-class competitive shooter, I don't think that one of those three calibers is better at long range than the other two. There is just too great deal of the difference among. firearms, shooters, componentss & a host of other factors to say which round is BEST
All three, in the hands of a great shooter, will do the job, out well beyond 1,000M.

>yes your very right the greatest sniper in the world used a 308 win . most of the time in just a Winchester varmint rifle but he did change the barrel out to a match grade 308 barrel his name Carlos Hathcock. as one of my friends i hunt with said and he would know because he was a Ranger sniper for 8 years with many more skills too, this ranger told me Carlos Hathcock was the greatest sniper ever in the world will ever know or read about and he just used the lowly 308 Winchester, but carlos did use the 50 for his longest kill shot.

the barrel is most important. I love the 30-06. nothing better than shooting a Krieger barrel against 6.5 creedmore with a factory barrel.

pete53,

Fwiw, I was once shared a house in Triangle, VA with Gunnery SGT Fred Shue (USMC, retired), who was also (then a noted) sniper of the RVN War. - Fred introduced me to Gunny Hathcock, during a visit to Quantico Marine Base in 1988.
(I was honored to have gotten to meet the real man, who was/IS a legend of the USMC.)

My actual point in my post # 13501939 was that there are simply TOO many variables (that likely cannot be duplicated in REAL LIFE) to state which caliber is INHERENTLY superior to the other two cartridges/rifles.

I would happily "sit still" to listen to any competent shooter who can explain to me HOW the INHERENT SUPERIORITY of any cartridge could be demonstrated "in the field", even using target rifles of the same make & with essentially identical match cartridges.

yours, tex

He chose that with all the other options available? Laughing
The 70 would have been in 30’06, 308 was a 700..

If I remember his quote correctly “ I liked one about as much as the other”.

rosco1,

Btw, our Military Police Hostage Rescue personnel (Official policy forbids them being called "snipers".) can CHOOSE most any rifle that the DoD owns. = When I retired from AD, most of our Hostage Rescue teams used National Match M1 Garand rifles in 7.62x51 NATO or Remington Model 700 "target-grade" commercial-buy rifles with "range-finder scope".

Hostage Rescue personnel MUST be extremely accurate, if/when they fire a single round, as INNOCENT lives depend on their being ACCURATE & "taking out" the hostage-taker.

yours, tex

don't be fooled, the 308 is required in palma matches. if the 30-06 was allowed it would dominate.

roninflag,

Be NOT deceived, that requirement for the Palmas has ZILCH to do with the accuracy of the old-school .30-06.

yours, tex

A .308 is everything a .30-06 is and Less!

Filaman,

TRUE As the "old-school" .300SAV is too. = My "early 20th Century .30-06 clone" reloads are KILLERS at the same ranges as M2 Ball or 7.62x51 NATO is.

yours, tex

I promised myself I had said all I was gonna on this thread, but there are some errors I think need correcting;

By all accounts, Carlos Hathcock shot an M70 in 30-06 and M72 Match Ammo for the majority of his tours. There were three American snipers credited with more kills than Hathcock in Vietnam, and they shot 30-06's and 308's. Their choices (nor Hathcock's) were not relevant to this discussion because they had none. They just shot what they were issued.



That is not true. A 308 is barely supersonic at 1000 yards. There's been considerable work to extend the range of the 308 including tungsten core bullets, and ultra low drag bullets so sharp that the tips could literally draw blood. Unless "do the job" is hit the broad side of a barn, the 308 is gassed a bit beyond 1k.

FWIW, about a decade ago, the military chose to go with an improved Win Mag over the 338 Lapua Mag. This Win Mag loading uses heavier bullets than the A191 loading previously used for their long range sniper rifles and extends the effective range considerably.

DarlaG, I'd still like to know who your brother is... I know a few of these "world class" competitors...I might even know him
and since you sound like you shot competitively at some point, you might remember this bit; not long ago, the Secret Service Rifle team was unbeatable in Long Range Rifle competition. They shot Win Mags. I saw them catching zeroes with their "business rifles" not long after, and those were Win Mags as well.

No one round is best for all purposes. As the range changes, the factors that are important also change. At close to mid range, the 308's lower recoil is easier to shoot well. ...and it may be the theoretically most accurate. As the range extends and environmentals become more important, the two bigger cartridges ability to throw bigger pills become an advantage.

Quit trying to be rational Chris.

For those that DON'T KNOW.....the 308 Winchester is very accurate out to 1200 yards and beyond! With a 155 gr. Sierra Palma bullet ahead of 46.5 grains of Varget and a 30" barrel it leaves the muzzle at 3000 fps and is clicking along at slightly over 1216 fps at 1000 yards! The Brits shoot 1200 yard match events quite frequently and the cartridge does quite well!

I was just about to ask you about MPHRP protocol...Uncanny

But back on the subject I was discussing, what you think The Vietnam era guys would say if presented a smart range finder along with an ATACR mounted on a PRC or 338 Norma?

You suppose they’d say fug that gimme the pre’64 ‘06 with that 4ft unertl that I have a 300 meter over/under off the strata wires 500ish meter zero, that I have to give my best wild ass guess as to where everything falls into place.. then I have to long cock the scope mounts back into battery every shot,because that bastards fire?!

Read that slowly then re read it until you understand..but you won’t because you can’t..

Read what they wrote dummy, even the best in that era called it a wild ass guess, based on thousands of rounds fired.. wonder what would happen if they were told they could take two major variables out of the equation right at the start? Probably would’ve paid no attention to stuff that actually matters so’s not to deprive you of nostalgia 50 Years later right? Nope let’s long cock that unertl !?

This stuff is retarded to even debate, but here we are.. 24 hr tradition I guess to have to spoon feed grown men their mush..

maybe throw in some CRF tidbits about having to feed rounds while being upside down to get the real gurus all horned up? Oh what ?they never penned even a single [bleep] word on CRF vs PRF? Say it isn’t so!!

If only those dummy’s had hunted Africa with the legends maybe they’d understand? Funny [bleep] that no doubt sails right over your head.

If you u actually know what they had to work with and better yet actually started out using the same principles like I did in the early 90’s (preLRF)compared to what we have now you’d have to be some kind of special to even bring it up for debate.. they had what they had

Now if your argument is those Vietnam era guys had their [bleep] together with what they had to work with, then yes, yes they did.. did they have more talent than modern military snipers? Probably not, they just perfected what they had to work with, same as today’s snipers do with what they have to work with. That’s why [bleep] on the battlefield is more affective across the board, snipers included. Not really that hard to grasp if we think about it, is it??

Hathcock, Mawhinny and many others had instininctive talent that would have been even more impressive with more intuitive shooting systems, I bet they’d look at modern systems in awe and say that’s Cheeting and would immediately jump on board, because I bet they gave two [bleep] about nostalgia.. obviously


Idiotic to even draw the comparison, but nice that you tried, even bringing “modern” swat tactics into it.

if I’m a hostage I hope what you’ve described isn’t reality... JFC just send my nephew with the CTR please.

Everything in the DOD at their disposal so you say, and they choose a garand or a 700 with “range finding scope” for one shot precision? No kidding? Lol jfc do you read what you write?

Should be working at the mall, not hostage situations.

Do you recommend leaches for cataract patients? Or have they come up with something better in the last 100 years?

“ awe hell we could cure you with these new fangled steroids, but fug that lets give the leeches a go”

saddle me with a 30” barrel, with a cartridge that’s about stumbling over itself at 800 yards vs one with a 20” barrel that I don’t have to worry about such bs until 1500 yards, in a platform that weighs pounds less, even substantially less per 100 rounds...

makes perfect sense as far as government work goes..

Sharpsman, I'm going to defer to your greater experience in this as a Palma shooter. You've put more rounds downrange with a 308 at 1K than I ever will (I don't have Palma aspirations). I'd only heard occasional stories of the Bisley 1200 yard line. Please help me fill in some blanks in my mind on the Stickledown 1200 yard matches; How big is the V-bull? Are the Sierra 2155's getting through the transonic zone better than the 168's did....or are they somehow arriving supersonic? What is a typical winning score at 1200? Does a Warner #1 have enough elevation to get to 1200?

Folks, Sharpsman is one of only a handful of actual high level Long Range competitive shooters I've seen on this board. I might not agree with everything he says, but he's done a few things in his career.

rosco1,

Ive been retired for > 13 years & have NO knowledge of what the HR teams use NOW. = I would presume something more modern/better than what they used when I was on AD.
(The Army doesn't even wear the same uniforms as what were worn when I retired, other than "Dress Blues".)

I will guess that a marksman, who can hit a US Quarter every time with a scoped Model 700 rifle at 200M, can likely use ANY "target grade rifle" for head-shots successfully,

yours, tex

Go here:

http://www.nrcofs.org/MatchRifle.html

The Warner sight will get to 1200 OK! The 2155 Sierra Palma bullet will work at 1200 but oft times a heavier bullet is used! The Sierra 175 gr. should work just fine!

rosco1

If this is 'stumbling'.....I'll take it all day long!! Ten rounds fired from 900 yards that I could cover with the knuckles of my fist! And this....isn't a first time!

308 Win/Remington M700 factory barrel/action by .com/photos/61286670N08/]Sharps Man, on [bleep]

FWIW Todd Hodnett had guys that are attending his course down in Texas shoot out to a mile with whatever they had on hand (this was around 2010). He also told us it would exit a pig at that distance.

We actually pushed the M24 using 118LR out even further while I was at Ft Carson. We set a couple of AR 500 E types at 1800M and 1900M. The 1800 meter target the bullets hit mostly point first but at 1900 close to half the impact marks on the target were sideways. There were guys shooting Mk13 rifles along with the M24's so it was impossible to say which hits were which.

On a side note the daily training (week long sniper refresher training) always started with a cold bore shot. Everyone got one shot for smack talking rights more than anything. Anyhow one of the instructors had a 16" barreled SCAR17 that he took his shot with and made a 1200 meter cold bore shot on an E-type, I doubt he could of repeated it, but it sure impressed the students.

Some things you only have to do once....

-Jake

I am sure these marksman are very skilled. this sounds quite a warm load that would not work particularly well in 100 degree temperatures. would not the 30-06 give you this velocity safer?