Thanks to the NRA...... We can all go home now.

https://www.americanhunter.org/articles/2018/4/6/head-to-head-308-winchester-vs-30-06-springfield/


Ah, boy. I get this one a lot from different ammunition customers, as well as those looking for the consummate rifle to do it all. I’d have thought that by now—some 56 years after the introduction of the .308 Winchester as a sporting round—the feud would have settled down, but it certainly doesn’t look that way. I think this may be the one of the most heated debates in firearms history, and seemingly without much cause, as the two cartridges are very similar in performance levels. However, each camp has an army, and rocks continue to be hurled across the front lines.

The .30-06 Springfield is, undoubtedly, the American darling. It has proven its value on the battlefield as well as in the game fields for well over a century, and earned its place in the annals of cartridge history. It has been used—with varying degrees of success—on every species of game animal that walks the earth. One of the secrets of its success is the fact that it offers quite a bit of bullet weight and killing power without beating the snot out of the shooter. Born for war, it brought the American Military into the modern era, delivering sleek spitzer bullets for the first time, and definitely increasing the effective range of the shoulder-fired weapon. It shows its heritage—sharing the same case head design as the 7x57mm Mauser—but uses a 63mm case length. The first incarnation, the .30-03 Springfield, used the same heavy, round-nosed bullets as the .30-40 Krag (our previous military cartridge), but was quickly revised to the good old .30-06 we all know and love. It was adored by Roosevelt, Hemingway, Fitz and may other early hunters who inspired our grandfathers, and remains a perfectly sound choice as a hunting cartridge today. It works so well it’s almost boring.



The .308 Winchester was born from the idea that modern (late 1940s) smokeless powder would generate the same velocities from a shorter cartridge. Shorter equals not only lighter, but a cartridge that requires less raw materials to produce. The soldier could carry more ammunition, and the field results were so close that the Army felt it worth the time. Experimentation began with the .300 Savage cartridge, but the final incarnation was the 7.62x51mm NATO, released to the sporting public in 1952 (two years prior to military adoption) as the .308 Winchester. It was hailed as a shorter version of the .30-06, and immediately started a cartridge war.

Both cartridges use the same .308″ diameter bullets, and both have a case capacity large enough to push those bullets to sensible, useable velocities. Those who swore allegiance to the .30-06 pointed out the slight velocity advantage that the larger case offers, and how it handles the heavier bullets so much better. Those in favor of the new-kid-on-the-block pointed out how much lighter the shorter action rifles were, as well as the fact that the shorter action offered better rigidity, and therefore a better level of accuracy. The .308 Winchester was offered with a 1:12″ twist rate barrel (as opposed to the Springfield’s usual 1:10″) and wouldn’t stabilize the long 220-grain bullets. While I have used those heavyweights, in my .300 Winchester Magnum, I really don’t know too many people who hunt with the 220s anymore.

My Dad joined the National Guard in 1968, and with an M14 in his hands at Ft. Leonard Wood, Missouri, was hitting human silhouettes at 350 meters with iron sights. He was sold on the .308 Winchester before I was conceived, and in my house, there was but one cartridge, and all else was nonsense. I had friends whose fathers were equally adamant about the Springfield, having given testimony that the shots they made would have resulted in failure if they had any other rifle in hand. Personally, I began my career with a .30-30 Winchester in hand, and I couldn’t see the difference between the .308 and .30-06, at least on deer. Both killed a deer quickly and effectively, and other than one being longer, the field results were inconsequential.



So what’s the big deal? What are the real differences between the two highly respectable .30s? Well, each has come to be the basis for its respective action-length, with the .308 case measuring 2.015″, and the .30-06 measuring 2.494″. The .30-06 does have a definite velocity advantage, bettering the .308’s velocity by about 100-125 fps. Does that translate into a decided advantage in the field? No, no it doesn’t. Does the difference in action length actually make a difference in speed of a follow up shot? Not in my experiences. I’ve used short, long and magnum-length actions all over the world, and none of them have ever posed a handicap, at least not to me. It’s kind of funny, as many in the hunting crowd tout the .30-06 as the better choice for its velocity advantage, yet the precision shooting crowd routinely depends on the .308 Winchester as a 1,000-yard cartridge, and few are taking the Springfield out that far anymore.

Both cartridges are available in many guises; almost every single ammunition manufacturer produces both. With the exception of the truly heavy bullets, both can effectively drive bullets from 125 grains to 200 grains. How does a hunter choose?

The recoil is no mitigating factor, as both are very manageable, even if the Springfield has been historically a bit snappier. Neither has ever been bothersome, even during extended periods at the bench. Cost is not an issue either, as the two are similar in price, with the .308 being (a bit) more affordable. Both cartridges are economical to shoot. If you feel that you are the kind of hunter who would enjoy using one cartridge for all sorts of game, I suppose the .30-06 would make a better choice, as the really heavy bullets are better for large bears, though I personally feel there are better bore diameters for those creatures. They are both very accurate cartridges; and I’ve seen both give fantastic accuracy, as well as some rifles that just wouldn’t shoot.

This is one of those situations where I feel it’s as close to a dead heat as you’re going to get. Within the normal range of bullets, I doubt any game animal would be able to notice the difference between the two. Each has clearly proven itself, and will continue to do so, with improvements in powders and bullet technology making this great pair of cartridges even better. The .308 Winchester certainly doesn’t look like a long-range cartridge, though it can certainly handle shots out to ethical distances. W.D.M. ‘Karamoja’ Bell, the famous elephant hunter who was a proponent of the 7x57 for the pachyderms, stated the shorter bolt throw would have made the .308 Winchester the best elephant cartridge ever. Compare that to the impeccable reputation and nostalgia that comes with the Springfield case, and you’ve got a tough choice.

I was raised on the .308 Winchester, and I’ve used one for a quarter-century on deer, bear and other game. I’ve also used the .30-06 Springfield on some rather tricky shots on game from deer to red stag. I like them both. I have—to be completely honest—mated my .308 with a .300 Winchester Magnum, so the case could be made that I didn’t ask the shorter case to work very hard.

This one is nearly too close to call, but I’m going to give the (very slight) edge to the .30-06 Springfield, based on one factor alone: the additional case capacity. I know that as a handloader, I’ve had to work with some highly compressed loads in the .308 to get what I wanted, and the roomier Springfield case does make life easier. That said, I’m not giving up my .308 any time soon, but I do feel comfortable saying that as far as a hunting cartridge goes, the design of 1906 is about as close to perfection as it gets.

6.5 Creed will make both obsolete! "Cough!!!!!"

Todd

Fair assessment. I'll go a different way though. I see both of them as adequate on most big game at 'normal' ranges. They both get the check in the block for effectiveness. So what's different? The .308 is slightly shorter, allows for a short action which weighs a tiny bit less, and it recoils a little less. Less is more in this case.

They can't even get the timeline correct. That would be 66 years.

Pointless article, rewritten year after year. Obviously magazines still buy it.

And sell it.

So the 30 Carbine should be ideal.

Mutatis mutandis, the 30-378 should be ideal.

No need to choose between them. Get both, shoot both, like both.

I did.

DF

I don't believe that poster said that.

To use your logic ,then a 50 BMG would be ideal.

I own and like both rounds and I agree with PRM...

For most people uses there is not a bit of difference between the two.

For hunting purposes the .308 is fine for 165 grain and below. The 06 is better at pushing 180 and 200 gr. Will a animal really know the difference between 15 grains if they are both traveling the same velocity? ..... doubtful

Nothing new can be added and probably has not been added to the argument in 60 years.

My preference is the 30-06 for bolt actions and the 308 for levers, pumps and autos.

I have several of each. I came to the 308 cause I needed a suppressor. I bought a cheap Savage Hog Hunter, the barrel came threaded. I was amazed how accurate it was with full power loads. My boy and I took it hog hunting, killed quite a few with it. We use the suppressed loads when we catch a bunch in feeder pen. Some of the other hunters whined about us shooting so much. The 308 kills every bit as well with a little less whack on your shoulder. My boy uses it all the time now.

I used to look down on people who hunted with a 308. No more!!!

While I won't argue with what you said I would like to relate an experiment I did a few years ago. I ran Winchester .308 Win. and 30-06 180 gr. Power Point factory ammo through a 22" barreled rifle for the .308 and 22", 24" and 26" barrels for the 30-06. Lon story short, for all practical purposes the .308 and 06 were exactly the same. Both were 2600 and change FPS. The only 06 shots that were even close to factory advertised were the 260 FPS from the 26" Ruger #1.

The .308 Rifle was a Winchester M70. For the 30-06, a Remington M700 22", Mauser M98 24" and the aforementioned Ruger #1 26".

Another interesting thing regarding the .308 and heavier bullets; one of the earlier One Book/One Caliber books for the .308 showed data for 220 gr. bullets. The loads using W760 looked interesting so I work up to the max and got 2320 FPS average. Note that advertised factory loads for the 30-06 claim 2400 FPS. I have never found a box of 220 gr. 06 to try for comparison but is it turned out to be less like it showed in the 180 gr. test, then maybe the .308 ain't so bad with heavy bullets as has been claimed. For the record, groups from that 1 in 12" barrel ranged from.375" to .55" at 100 yards. Fluke? Damned if I know. Just reporting my results from those two experiments. The only .308 I have with a 1 in 10" twist is a Ruger M77 RSI with an 18.5" barrel so shots from that one might not be representative.
Paul B.

That's the best answer to this question.

I will never be without either.

It's really simple...
If the .308WIN existed before the 30-06, there would have never been an 06.

Not me,I'm holding out for the 300 creedmoor!

It's called the 30tc, nothing more than a renamed 308, and the parent cartridge if the 6.5 creedmoor

It would have been the 308 Magnum!

I think Norma did that!

In my earlier years I owned several rifles chambered for both. IIRC, the 06’s I owned were Remington 700’s and Ruger 77’s; the 308’s were Ruger 77’s and a Model 70 Winchester. I don’t know the reason, but my 308’s seemed to shoot a little better. All this was, of course, before I discovered the do-it-all cartridge ( for my uses anyway)...................the 7mm-08 Remington. Now, if it had been introduced before the other two..................(smiling)

The B.S. that 308 is more accurate than the 06 is just that B.S.
Have owned both and the only difference is in recoil of 308 being user friendly for candy asses . LMAO !
Just busting the pro 308 guys chops , have had accurate rifles in both . Prefer the 06 cause I like the heavier 308 bullets .
Have a 308 in Venture Predator that is crazy accurate for a factory rifle as well as.a couple factory 700's in 06 that flat shoot 190-200 grain bullets in nice 25 cent groups . Then there is the 721 had a smith rebarrel , lap lugs , trigger job and bedding . Holy smokes what a shooter , Dead on the money cold shots with Berger 175's
Kenneth

I have two ,308 Win rifles and hence have no need for a 30-06.

I also have four 30-06 rifles and hence have no need for a .308 Win.

Glad that is settled.

I have a 308 and a 30-06, I love them both. The 308 is my go to sheep rifle and the 06 is awesome with 200g bullets.

The 308 is more accurate for common shooters shooting production ammunition in production rifles. When you have the top level of each there is no difference.

I love both. Factory ammo is the same price where I’m from, but the 308 takes less powder to reload and I have an easier time getting good groups out of it than I do my 06, though that could be the gun. I also like it for short handy rifles like the BLR and Remington Model 7, since most of my hunting shots are well under 100 yards. But both of my 308s seem to only like 150s, the 30-06- though less accurate in general- will run through 165s and 180s with groups as tight as the 150s. If I had to only have one I’m not sure I could choose, but they’d both lose to the 270 ;]

I am firmly in the .30-06 camp.

If you want lighter, short action, less recoil, then go buy a 7mm-08, .260, .243 etc.

If you want heavier go up to a .338 win mag.

The '06 is the king of it's class. It does everything well. Recoil is easily manageable.

Everything the .308 does, the '06 does a little bit better.

Do you really want to shoot second best?

Can't imagine ever owning, needing, or wanting a .308.

Then again...... No animal will ever be able to tell the difference between the two..... So I guess it's a wash!

-Jake

I believe the opposite to be true. The average shooter isn't good enough, and the average rifle not accurate enough to take advantage of the small differences in accuracy potential between 308 and 30-06. But the 30-06 stopped being relevant for target shooters years ago. The best shooters, firing the best rifles simply shot 308 better. And today other rounds have replaced 308 for that use. For the average shooter any difference in accuracy is probably due to less recoil.

I started with a 30-06 in 1975. Still have a couple of rifles, but they haven't been hunting in over 10 years after buying a 308. Inside of 400 yards no animal will ever know the difference. In the same weight rifle I get 25% less recoil, or the same recoil as 30-06 in a rifle 1 1/2 lbs lighter.

+1

I've been told that 6.5 creed is the ultimate elk cartridge too

It is a PROVEN FACT that on Average the 308 absolutely IS somewhat more accurate then the 30-06. It was proven shooting millions of rounds and with otherwise identical rifles. They even showed it was more accurate in the SAME rifles. They put 308 inserts into the chambers of M1 Garand rifles and the SAME EXACT rifles on average shot more accurately than they did in 30-06. It's been proven by every meaningful way of demonstrating accuracy.

All that being said it doesn't make a hill of beans difference in a hunting rifle. :-)

And also as said above the 6.5 Creedmoor seems to be nearly obsoleting both anyway! LOL


........................DJ

Agreed 100%.

Anecdotally, I have owned a pile of each, and have always found the 308 more accurate and eager to please in factory guise.

I believe one of the major mfg's (Ruger?) found the same in testing.

Not much difference between the two in the field. We can hear the old argument that the 30-06 handles 200 and 220 grain bullets where as the 308 Win can’t. Actually the 308 Win handles 200 grain bullets just fine approaching 2,475 fps. 06 pushes at close to 2,600 fps. Big deal. Most 06 and 308 Win utilize 150-180 grain projectiles showing no appreciable difference on game, with the 06 shooting less tha 2 inches flatter over 400 yards and retaining 100 more ft- lbs of energy. If the need for 200 grain and greater bullet weight should be needed most go to a 30 magnum anyway or reach for a 338 Win Mag. As far as accuracy I have always enjoyed John Barsness in depth look at out-of-the-box 308 Win accuracy. Whether it be bolt, lever, autoloader or single shot, the 308Win flat out shoots accurate. No fuss, no muss.

I don't think there's really any denying the -06 will out run the .308, but it should. It holds more powder. The factor that evens them out is FACTORY .308 ammo is regularly loaded hotter than -06 ammo. So, for that perspective, they're very close to a wash. If you roll your own, you can push the -06 harder.

In the end, I don't think the difference matters a bit in the field with new projectiles and powders.

I can not believe that there are people who think the 308 is better than the 30-06 . Over the years of hunting I have kept records of steps after shot fired . On average the deer ran 5-6 steps less shot with the 30-06 than they ran shot with the 308 .
And was much deader with the 30-06 .
Personally I like my deer really dead when I cook them .
Kenneth

If two or three rifles, say a .243, or both a .223 and a Crapmoor, then the third would be a 30-06. An 03A3 maybe.

If only one, or two rifles. Maybe the first rifle is a .223, then the big gun might be a .308

I've had both, but have neither now. But if I ever get one again, it'll probably be a 30-06. An old one. Neither is a necessity for me, and I'd probably rather have a 30-30, or a 357, or a 45LC. But I might have a 30-06 again for a BIG gun.

If I were buying a Tikka, then probably 30-06 since the action is already long and you might as well fill it up with. If I were shaving as much weight as possible, then a Montana in 308 and shave all the weight I could.

Less filling; Tastes great. Happy Trails

I've always liked the '06 better than the .308 and I've had several of each. In fact I have one of each now. Really don't have much practical use for either and would keep my .30-30 over both if I could only have one.

And now, Nosler has too.

Had both once, only .30 in the safe now is a Win Mag...pretty much all the hunting over .22lr gets done with an 8x57is...since that predates both, maybe they were both just unnecessary.

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. .

When they invented the '06, they should have just stopped.......how cold it get any better? Perfect recoil to power ratio, accuracy, large range of bullet weights, sexy shaped cartridge, War credentials.....It helped save the World....twice! What else do you need in a cartridge? A .308 is fine.......if you can't get an '06. Now, jump on me.. :^)

Would be interesting if they allowed either

I'm going to post here at the risk of appearing to talk out of two sides of my mouth;

Yes and no. The problem with the 30-06 military loadings were that the powder charges did not fill the case. In fact they left a good amount of "air space". A best practice of the day was to tilt the rifle upward to settle the powder column against the primer before firing. Not possible during rapid fire though. Rifle looney solution would be to just load a slower powder to improve load density right? No can do for M1 Garand which was sensitive to powder burn rate for proper function and longevity. Best solution applied was to go the the newer 7.62 NATO which did not have those problems...thus the "Navy Garands" were born. Expedient solution applied was chamber inserts, and magazine blocks. Later rifles had properly cut chambers. And yes, they did shoot better than the 30-06's. Some Navy shooters insist to this day that the 7.62 Garands shot better than the M14's out to 1000 yards. I say the evidence of the day doesn't support that as there were no big wins for the Navy when they were shooting against the 14's.

Here's the evidence from the other side of my mouth.
Someone brought up the Warren Page article that showed accuracy testing data from the Remington Custom shop. Fascinating piece of information, but the supposed case of recoil being the deciding factor did not hold true for the 30-06. The 308 rifles shot significantly better than the 30-06's...and there is a definite trend that could say that increasing recoil caused decreasing accuracy (negative correlation). The problem is that the 30-06 is an outlier of sorts because it shot larger groups on average than one of the heavier recoiling chamberings (7mm Rem Mag) and was virtually the same as one of the 30 magnums (30-338).

With all of that said, I cut my teeth hunting a 308. My go to gun is now a 30-06 but would have no qualms about grabbing one of the 308's...and when asked why I don't go to one of the more "modern" calibers or load my 30's to what they are capable of, my reply is that I have shot thousands of rounds of both, burning out multiple barrels in competition. I am intimately familiar with making wind calls for a 168 at ~2600 fps and load to that level which has translated well for a 165. I limit my shots to what I am confident I can kill and recover with a very high probability of success.

Of course! the standard comeback of all 30-06 and 1911/ .45 ACP guys when they've run out of logical arguments. "TWO WORLD WARS".

F-T/R requires .223 Remington or .308 Winchester.

F-Open requires any cartridge 35 caliber or less.

Comparing Super Performance Ammo (after all 6.5 CM is a Hornady invention): 308 Win 150 grain SST at 3,000 fps and 6.5 CM 129 SST at 2,950, the 308 Win compares pretty well out to 500 yards for practical shooting distance on game in the field. It delivers greater energy at all distances out to 500 yards, being almost 300 ft-lbs greater at 200 yards; 200 ft-lbs greater at 300 yards; 125 ft-lbs greater at 400 yards; at 500 yards the 308 Win maintains a 60 ft-lbs advantage. With 200 yard zero for both, at 300 yards the 6.5 CM shoots 1/10 of an inch flatter; at 400 yards the 6.5 CM shoots 4/10 of an inch flatter; at 500 yards the 6.5 CM shoots 1.2 inches flatter.

If you were to substitute the 165 grain 308 Win and 140 grain 6.5 CM you'd see pretty much the same. So the 308 Win can hang pretty well with the 6.5 CM at all practical hunting distances. For hunting large game such as moose, I would rather shoot the 308 Win with 180-200 grain bullets over anything the Creedmoor can hurl. IMO the 6.5 Creedmoor is somewhat less versatile than the 308 Win when it comes to larger game. Certainly both SA cartridges work well and no one should lose any sleep over which is better.

Wind drift is the key, drop doesn't matter.....

Dang right we use it.........Beat that with your .308 pop gun! :^)

We could have of course won both World Wars with the 308 Winchester just as easily. The WWII load was a 150 at 2,700.

Well you got me there. Using same projectiles with 15 mph at 90 degree cross: 300 yards the 308 Win will have to account for 0.9 inch more wind drift; at 400 yards the 308 Win will have to account for 1.6 inches more wind drift; at 500 yards the 308 Win will have to account for 2.6 inches more wind drift. Not terribly difficult to factor in and still hangs pretty well with the Creedmoor. Not to mention the 1,000s of pages of paper written on the 308 Win shooting 700-1000 yard matches accounting for drop and drift. With the scopes you can utilize today in the hunting field out at 500 yards or so, I still don't see the chore being any more difficult for the 308 Win than the 6.5 CM at these distances.

Then when you get to the 6.5 stuff that's pushing .700 BC's, it's like DAMN. Thing is, you can't unring a bell and knowing that schit kinda puts a little thorn in your side. Trust me, I've made the argument that "it's just another 6" at 500....or whatever"....but it's still there.

To top it off, I don't have either and still like a lowly 270. I can live with +\- .450's at 2,950 since it's pretty close to 75's in my 223 which I shoot a bit of.


Point being I realize I'm still sucking hind tit...no matter how well I might shoot.

Blasphemy.....no 25-06, no 6.5-06, no 270, no 280, no 338-06, and no Whelan.

Go say 30 "Hail Mary's and think upon what you have done.

But isn't today's 308, yesterday's 30-06?


Dunno....if I were shopping for either and found a steal on the other, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

I'm in the both crowd. With 150s and perhaps 165s, I like the .308. With 180 Superformance and 200s, I like the '06. With 150s in my BAR, it shoots good and is mild on the shoulder.

Jack

As yet I have not seen convincing proof, although from an engineering standpoint I would expect a marginal difference, advantage .308 Win. Shorter action = stiffer action, all other factors remaining equal, plus a powder column with a higher diameter/length ratio for more even/complete burn.

Putting an insert in a rifle to change the cartridge makes it, AFAIC, a very different rifle. Shooting anything but the best handloads for each also skews the results. So does different leade lengths, bullet jump, twist rates, etc. Corral ALL the variables and run the tests, then if the .308 comes out ahead I could be convinced. Have not seen such tests yet.


On that I completely agree.


I'll stick with my 6.5-06AI.

Palma requires 308. Ft-r requires 308. would be interesting if 30-06 was allowed in both Ft-r and Palma.

Check the rule book again. .223 Remington is allowed for F-T/R.

A properly loaded 300 Savage would've done the trick too.

Yawn - 100 years from now our descendants will be having this debate.
Meanwhile the Creedmoor will have the history then like the Swede does now.
And the 270 will still be alive. JOC, Jerry, and JB will be smiling, and perhaps chuckling.

Fun discussion. In the end, it boils down to 2 things.

Good bullet. Thru vitals. And that really falls on 1 factor. The shooter. They choose the bullet (not headstamp) - and address it. Then hit send. If you shoot your weapon well, all ends well. Sounds easy enough right? 🤔

Now back to my 6 and 6.5’s....someday I really should upgrade to a 30 cal 🧐

Meanwhile someone is dumping game with low recoiling, flat shooting, high BC/SD 22 cal 😁

Have a great week folks and enjoy whatever you choose. All about fun.

Yawn, the 308's like sex in the missionary position with a fugly wife and with the lights out..but it works.

PS: I don't own a 308

Agree. But the discussion is about a comparison between the 30-06 and 308 . The 30-06 in not allowed in Ftr. If it was it would allow a direct comparison Btween those two.

R O F


I had one 308......


Jerry

chuckle - chuckle - chuckle


Jerry

In my experience the 308 tends to be easier to load for and on the average...much more accurate.

That being said I don't really love either cartridge. Id much rather have a 270, 280, or 7mm08.

Never could get horned up over the .308, I know guys that have used them but they never did anything for me. In comparing the .308 and the 30-06 the 30-06 always seems to be the one that can do a lot of things real well. A guy can shoot 150-155 gr bullets that buck wind pretty well at 3000-3100 FPS for medium sized game or you could load up 200’s at 2700 for the biggest of critters. Of course my observations are for real world hunting not plinking steel at 800 yards. Hence the 6.5 fan base always interjecting with buuuut what about bucking the wind. To each their own.

I'm a disciple of the School of Hack. 30-06 with 168TTSX. I'm sure a .308 can come close but don't think I give anything up by choosing the 06.

Not with the 30-06 loaded with 220gr fmj loads! The 308 is a light weight flinger!

The 6.5x55 and 7x57 will kill elephants because of the heavy bullets. Remington did not get the memo with the 260rem.

Just as a footnote, Bell started out using the 6.5x55 and only switched to a 7x57 when he had a problem getting ammo.

Well if you insist on shouting, let me point this out.

1. The .308 only exists because they wanted a "shorter" 30/06.

2. The .30 Caliber Government of 1906 ONLY exists because of 3 things:

a. The Krag was shown to be inferior to the Mauser 93 on the battlefield.

b. The US Army was hung up on .30 cal AND the 8x57is was proven to be superior to the .30/03.

c. The US was trying to avoid paying Mauser royalties for ripping off his designs.(Frankly if they were going to do that they should have ripped off the 98 not the 93, as it has MUCH better gas handling properties and was an overall superior design to ANY bolt action made at the time, arguably since).

According to his book he started with the 256

He also had issues with the long 160 gr. FMJ bullets bending and changing direction.

That is another interesting foot note and one I was not aware of.

I know elephant have been killed with all manner of weapons. I have read the 30-06 with 220 solids is a fair performer and adequate on smaller female.

Just to add more nausea to the Bell/Elephant killing herring, the 308 Win has arguably taken more elephants than all other rounds singly, and possibly all other rounds combined...

No, the 7.62x39 has killed more elephants than any other cartridge over the last 60 years.

I think you’re right...

No reason to argue other than to kill time until the snow and mud at the range dries up. Anchored with a few .270 Win's, I've stepped over both and into the 300 Win Mag. to get a little more separation of performance. They are all good - depends on your needs.

Heretic. Burn him.

I’d lay my bet the 7.62x51. The 7.62 NATO rules the roost over there imho

I have one 30-06 because it’s just so American...

But otherwise I know where you’re coming from and I agree.

Jerry

I like the 30-06. You really have to go to the 9.3x62 or .338 WM level to get a noticeable increase in power and it has little fuss and muss. I like the .308 too but when I go on that side of the 30-06 spectrum I tend to go with a 7mm-08 or something like that.

There isn't enough difference to over ride that the best choice is whichever rifle you prefer.

I'd hate to collect data on how many humans and game animals have fallen to the 30-06 Springfield and 7.62x51 NATO/308 Win. It would be cumbersome to say the least. Years back I was reading a J. Barsness article on the 308 Win. He had indicated that in loading for both he had discovered, on average, that the 30-06 showed greater accuracy similar to the 308 Win when loaded to 308 Win velocities. Once velocity was increased in the 30-06 it's accuracy somewhat decreased. Any 30-06 owners see better accuracy with reduced velocities? I shoot the 308 Win, but can't see anything between the two that would cause me to lose sleep.

You see photos of African Game Rangers carrying their FN FAL rifles in .308. I think poachers use them too.

So, FMJ .308 military ammo may have taken more elephants than any other round, based on that info.

DF

Bell did not start out using 6.5mm.
Bell did not mention using 6.5x55, ..he did eventually employ 6.5x54 MS.
I don't know of Bell having supply problems with (.256 bore) rounds.





I recall Bell remarking that ..256 did bend and .275 solids he wasn't too sure..... he still found them to hold
a relatively reliable (straight enough) course to the brain,....., .318 cal 250grain proved more reliable
in that respect. This was especially the case when performing oblique going away shots, where projectiles
had to navigate the neck before reaching the skull.


" I never saw a mangled or bent 7 mm. bullet, possibly because most of them had passed on whistling as they went.."
- Bell, American Rifleman 1954.

".256 Mannlicher and :256 Mannlich· er-Schoenauer. Here we are approaching the limit of safety,
in diameter to length, for long traverses in heavy game. These long narrow four-diameter bullets bend
into the most extraordinary hook- like shapes and this oddity of theirs in- evitably brings under suspicion
their true course-holcling properties. I must say I only once failed to kill the animal fired at with the ,256
and that was due to a misfire because of a faulty round ...." - Bell, American Rifleman 1954



Isnt full bolt-cycle length of .308win and .30/06 the same in Pre64 M70s..?

Bell was merely speculating on the potential effectiveness of .308 win,
deep down his trust was with .318 because of real world experience with such....

"We now come to what I would take to Africa if I had to go through the whole thing again under the same set of conditions.
I would base my battery on a Winchester .308 Model 70 burning a cartridge loaded with a homogeneous bronze or Monel
metal bullet , of the form as worked out by Kohlbacker. At the same time, I would have a .318 barrel to fit the same stock and
a supply of 250-grain solid conventional lead- filled steel-jacketed bullets, just in case any unforeseen snags arose from the
use of homogeneous bullets in the .308." - Bell, American Rifleman 1954.


"Then coming down the scale we reach the .318 with its four-diameter 250-grain bullet. This is a killer. It holds its course
through almost anything and is superior in this respect to all other bullets I have tried. For oblique shots into large animals
it is quite the best...... I have a .318 weighing seven pounds ten ounces exactly, when empty. The deadliest weapon of
the push bolt type known to me." - Bell, American Rifleman 1954

["About ten per cent of bulls shot in the head received a second shot when using the .275, and this per-centage
was appreciably reduced when the .318 was used.- I put this down to the fact that the 250-grain bullet of the .318
held a truer course than the 170-grain bullet of the .275. - I know, too, that in the case of slanting shots from
behind where the bullet would have to traverse the im-mense neck muscles to reach the brain, the .318 long
250-grain bullet was more uniformly successful than the .275." -Karamojo Safari- (p.242-243)

"Broadly speaking, the best bullet for killing elephant is one which combines a good weight (it will not be easily deflected),
long parallel sides (this will help it keep course), good sectional density (not too much diameter to length), and a good but
not excessive velocity. - In my opinion the 250-grain .318, although far from perfect, approaches most nearly the big game
hunter's ideal bullet, followed by the 7.9 mm. or 8 mm. Mauser." - Karamojo Safari- (appendix p.291)

Well there is a pre '64 that only goes out on sunny days.

Poachers carry AK-47s. Southern Africa is awash in weapons from the Soviet era and the Cuban expeditions.