.308Win. vs. 7.62x54R

Bowhunter57 · June 7, 2006, 06:02 AM

I was in a discussion with a competition bench/target shooter, the other day and he mention the 7.62x54R being a more effecient cartridge (ballistically) than the .308Win. As he talked, I listened and what he had to say made sense. However, I'd never had this comparison presented to me.

Does anyone agree or disagree with this comparison?
Are there reloading manuals to confirm or deny this comparison?
Any links or other reading matieral that could be suggested would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you, Bowhunter57

Leftoverdj · June 7, 2006, 10:41 AM

I ain't sure I know what "efficient" means in this context, but I am real sure that I don't care. The .308 uses bullets and brass that are widely available and of expremely high quality. The 7.62x54R has a crappy selection of both and they are more expensive. Extremely good rifles are available in .308, and most 7.62x54R are mediocore milsurp.

If it takes a grain or two more powder (and that's dubious) to get same results, you'll never notice the cost.

Crosshair · June 7, 2006, 01:33 PM

7.62x54R has more case capacity and can take heavy bullets better, though it does operate at a lower max pressure.

**44 AMP** · June 7, 2006, 01:46 PM

Interesting choice of terms. Both cartridges are listed with 150gr bullets in the 2800fps range as factory ammo. In a couple of the loading manuals I looked at, max powder charges were about the same, well within the variation one would expect with different test guns. So, ballistically, they are equal.

The .308 case is slightly shorter (51mm) and has less body taper. rimmed/rimless makes no difference in ballistic efficiency. Where that makes a difference is in feeding/extraction in certain action types.

Benchrest shooters have been telling us for years that short (fat) cartridges with minimal body taper are more "efficient" and more "intrinsically accurate".

Observed results seem to bear this out.

Interesting that your friend the benchrest shooter was taking the opposite point as the majority of shooters in his sport. I would love to hear his arguments (as best you can remember them).

June 7, 2006, 06:02 AM	#1
Bowhunter57 Senior Member Join Date: July 23, 2002 Location: N.W. Ohio Posts: 301	.308Win. vs. 7.62x54R I was in a discussion with a competition bench/target shooter, the other day and he mention the 7.62x54R being a more effecient cartridge (ballistically) than the .308Win. As he talked, I listened and what he had to say made sense. However, I'd never had this comparison presented to me. Does anyone agree or disagree with this comparison? Are there reloading manuals to confirm or deny this comparison? Any links or other reading matieral that could be suggested would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Bowhunter57 __________________ If God didn't want us to eat animals, he wouldn't have made them out of meat.

June 7, 2006, 01:33 PM	#3
Crosshair Senior Member Join Date: December 16, 2004 Location: Grand Forks, ND Posts: 5,333	7.62x54R has more case capacity and can take heavy bullets better, though it does operate at a lower max pressure. __________________ I don't carry a gun to go looking for trouble, I carry a gun in case trouble finds me.

June 7, 2006, 01:46 PM	#4
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,839	More efficient? Interesting choice of terms. Both cartridges are listed with 150gr bullets in the 2800fps range as factory ammo. In a couple of the loading manuals I looked at, max powder charges were about the same, well within the variation one would expect with different test guns. So, ballistically, they are equal. The .308 case is slightly shorter (51mm) and has less body taper. rimmed/rimless makes no difference in ballistic efficiency. Where that makes a difference is in feeding/extraction in certain action types. Benchrest shooters have been telling us for years that short (fat) cartridges with minimal body taper are more "efficient" and more "intrinsically accurate". Observed results seem to bear this out. Interesting that your friend the benchrest shooter was taking the opposite point as the majority of shooters in his sport. I would love to hear his arguments (as best you can remember them). __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

June 7, 2006, 10:41 AM	#2
Leftoverdj Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 2004 Posts: 934	I ain't sure I know what "efficient" means in this context, but I am real sure that I don't care. The .308 uses bullets and brass that are widely available and of expremely high quality. The 7.62x54R has a crappy selection of both and they are more expensive. Extremely good rifles are available in .308, and most 7.62x54R are mediocore milsurp. If it takes a grain or two more powder (and that's dubious) to get same results, you'll never notice the cost.