Looking for advice

[Unlicensed Dremel]

Yes, you will definitely get more velocity, without a doubt - materially... might approach but probably not quite equal .300 winmag from a 22" bbl. Close enough. Excellent chambering choice.... as mentioned, the .30-06 is never a mistake.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by I'vebeenduped

I forgot to add something. I am hoping either you guys could de-bunk this or a .30-06 aficionado will chime in. One reason that I want a 26 inch barrel is that it was my understanding that the extra velocity would reach near 300 winmag proportions. I want you all to know that I really do appreciate all of your input. This rifle will have to be both a hunter and a bench rest rifle for me. I just can't do one of each.

That's all a matter of comparing apples to oranges. A .300WinMag with a 20" barrel, maybe. A .300 could also have a 26" barrel and then the -06 won't be close.

Of course, you don't need a .300Mag to kill deer either, at any distance.

Killing animals is about accuracy, not power. Guns with less recoil get shot with better accuracy than guns with more recoil, by most shooters. There won't be the slightest difference to a deer if it's hit with a bullet from a .308, -06 or .300Mag. The only difference is to the shooter, who has to absorb either 20% or 50% more recoil than if he was shooting a .308.

[I'vebeenduped]

Okay, people! I went in to this thread pretty confident about what I wanted. So, now I am shaking my fist at this thread like the old guy yelling, "Get off of my lawn!" With the cost of doing a special order being much more, what are your thoughts on the accustock versus the wood hardware? I am looking at the model 12 VLP DBM in .308. I would save nearly enough to be able to put a nice scope on it.

[hooligan1]

Yhats a nive rifle, plenty for most game hunting, out of the box accuracy will be top-notch also.


Id do that and dont be tight on rings and bases and nice glass.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Nice gun, just my style. I like it.

(Still wouldn't pick a .30 cal though.)

You can get a pillared stock for it from EABCo for $169 if you're worried. I'd shoot it first.

[AllenJ]

Very nice rifle, I'm jealous Lots of aftermarket parts available too so if you want to change something in the future it should not be a problem.

What kind of glass are you thinking about?

[I'vebeenduped]

Heck, it took me a while just to save up for this rifle. I am probably about 4 or 5 months away from even thinking about the scope. I want to save about 600 before I start looking. I know that isn't much for a scope but my means are my means...

[old roper]

I'vebeenduped, 30-06 is never a mistake and they only get better. I'm shooting one with 26" long Bartlein barrel my other 30-06 has 25" long barrel.

Your going to get a gain and it is the unknown. In my rifles with longer barrels I find I may be gr or two under max published load at max velocity.

Good thing about 30-06 you can drop it down get a good target load if you like. My Bartlein barrel 30-06 I use Lapua brass for paper.

I don't own a 308 so can't comment.

Well good luck

[I'vebeenduped]

Old Roper,
I appreciate the input. I really do. I was pretty set on a .30-06. However, another $200+ to special order it just doesn't make sense for me at this point. That and an 8 week wait. There would now be $200 more to my scope fund. That, to me, is pretty important. It would probably be a different story if the rifle I am going to order came in .30-06.

Thanks for the help, to all of you!

[alex0535]

If I was going to get a .30-06, it would be a T/C Venture. I watched as my friend shot 2 deer at 200 yards, both of them fell like they were hit by a car, neither took a single step. T/C guarantees MOA accuracy, my friend's rifle produces 1/4 MOA groups with reloads. Way less money than the Savage your looking at.

Nothing wrong with the .30-06, I personally find it to be a lot more power than I need. Hunting out several hundred yards or more, the .30-06 shines. Shoot a deer around here at the 3-25 yards they tend to come out of the woods, it's a lot more gun than I need for the job.

I would purchase a T/C venture in something like 7mm-08, .308, or .243 win. All of these wouldn't have any problem killing any deer in this part of the country at the ranges I hunt.

[Jimro]

Okay, people! I went in to this thread pretty confident about what I wanted. So, now I am shaking my fist at this thread like the old guy yelling, "Get off of my lawn!" With the cost of doing a special order being much more, what are your thoughts on the accustock versus the wood hardware? I am looking at the model 12 VLP DBM in .308. I would save nearly enough to be able to put a nice scope on it.

The accustock is perfectly fine for shooting tight groups. Whether it fits you well or not is an entirely different matter.

If you get the 12 VLP DBM with the wood stock, I would shoot it first before changing anything.

Jimro

[44 AMP]

Yea, the 30-06 can shoot heavier bullets than a 308 can handle,

I've been hearing this for decades. It wasn't true then, its not true now.

It is HALF a statement, and gives a completely FALSE impression.

If you can shoot it from a .30-06, you can shoot it from a .308. Period. Other than the chambers, the barrels are identical. And you can get either in different twist rates.

Can you get the same velocity from both? No. Duh!

But not being able to get as much velocity as you might like is worlds away from "not able to handle" heavy bullets. Yes, the 200 & 220gr in the .308 are slower. But "not able to handle them" is BS.

Put a 220gr bullet in a .308 win and you have a modern short action .30-40 Krag (ballistically) and the Krag has killed dead everything that walks in North America, including grizz.

For that matter, so has the .30-30.

interestingly, nobody is going around saying the .30-06 "can't handle" heavy bullets because the .300 Weatherby shoots them faster.....

Sorry for the rant. Done now.
Till the next time I see that same phrase thoughtlessly repeated...

[PVL]

Lots of hooey out there about 308 Vs 30-06.

The reason why? - The folks who used the 30-06 in the military are a vanishing breed, most have passed away - but most of the ones who used .308 in M14's are still with us.

So we get a lot of this "there hasn't been anything better than the .308 since the invention of sliced bread" horse-hockey floating around.

An objective look at the .308 and the 30-06 will tell you that the 30-06 has more boiler-room and thus can give you at least 100-300 fps more velocity with most if not all bullets. ( Other factors such as barrel length being the same ) - And yes, velocity does matter.

Statements about one cartridge being "more accurate" than the other are a good way to spot those who are either deluded, or wish to BS somebody. Fact of the matter is: Accuracy is much more influenced by the rifle and by the shooter - than by the cartridge. Both cartridges are capable ( in the right rifle ) of shooting much more accurately than most shooters can.

The .308 is definitely a little cheaper to shoot, and technically more efficient than the 30-06, but only if you are using lighter bullets. If you are using heavier bullets for big game or long-range shooting, the 30-06 gives you a velocity edge that the relatively pipsqueak .308 case simply cannot match.

For hunting and long-range shooting purposes, the 30-06 has a definite edge over the .308 - and always will. Anybody who is objective and knowledgeable on the subject will tell you that much. Again, velocity does matter or we would all be shooting .30 carbine because it is "more efficient".

When you see multiple posts desperately trying to bulldoze you into one opinion or another with loads of cherry-picked, alleged 'facts', that's the best BS detector that we have at our disposal. Usually these posts come from ex-military folks, as mentioned above. Whatever they used while they were in the service is always the best - and the facts be damned.

If you want a lightweight rifle to shoot lightweight bullets at the smaller varieties of big game, and you want to save money on powder, the .308 is the way to go. It has a definite edge there.

Otherwise...

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by PVL

Statements about one cartridge being "more accurate" than the other are a good way to spot those who are either deluded, or wish to BS somebody. Fact of the matter is: Accuracy is much more influenced by the rifle and by the shooter - than by the cartridge. Both cartridges are capable ( in the right rifle ) of shooting much more accurately than most shooters can.

A few minutes look at historical accuracy records will show who's "deluded". Within a few years of coming on the scene, the .308 broke every accuracy record held by the .30-06 and the -06 has never reclaimed them in the many decades since.

Of course accuracy is influenced both by the rifle and the shooter. Since the shooter will be the same either way, the variable is the rifle and cartridge.

The accuracy difference will never be known by an average shooter with an average rifle, or even by an above average shooter with an above average rifle but it IS real and with the .30-06 the shooter is absorbing 10-20% more recoil while trying to get that accuracy.

In terms of velocity, a brief few minutes looking at load data for both cartridges shows that the .30-06 almost never has an advantage of more than 125fps over the .308 and the advantage at 200gr (bullets the .308 supposedly "can't handle") is virtually zero. According to Hodgdon, the numbers are essentially identical from a 24" barrel. Considering that different barrels will shoot IDENTICAL ammo as much as 150fps different or more, those differences in load data velocity amount to statistical noise that may or may not be true in any given gun.

So, let's look at the factual comparison.

1)There are more loads available for the .308. Hodgdon has more than twice as many for .308 as .30-06. If a person wants maximum versatility, .30-06 would be the wrong choice.

2)Factory ammo selection mirrors load data. MidWayUSA carries 170 choices for .308, 123 for .30-06. In stock and available, 49 for .308, 23 for .30-06. If a person wants best factory ammo selection, .30-06 is the wrong choice.

2)The .308 broke every accuracy record held by the .30-06. It's indisputable. Any given gun may be more or less accurate and may be better than the shooter, that doesn't change the inherent advantage. If you want inherent accuracy, the .30-06 is the wrong choice.

3)Even if we assume a 300fps velocity advantage with a 200gr bullet (which isn't real but let's just pay along), that's 40 ft-lbs difference at the muzzle and about 4" trajectory at 500 yards. The real difference is more likely to be AT MOST about 20 ft-lbs and 2" trajectory, which is already essentially zero, or it may on fact actually BE zero. 40 ft-lbs difference between cartridges that produce 2,850 and a trajectory difference at 500 that amounts to 3 clicks? Ok, that "advantage" goes to the .30-06.

I'm not a military guy and I don't even particularly like the .308. Don't own one, never will. But the facts speak for themselves. In any category, there's either virtually no difference or the .308 wins.

[PVL]

Modern manufacturing processes today are producing much higher quality barrels of much higher quality steel that were available in the past.

I thought everybody knew and understood that.

The same goes for automobiles, which needed a "tune-up" every few thousand miles when 30-06's were most popular - but only need that at 100,000 miles today.

We are talking about cartridges, not the rifles of yesteryear compared to the rifles made today.

Digging up old match data from the 1950's to compare to matches run today only proves that you are willing to go to great lengths to distribute highly questionable data. Of course modern rifles out-shoot old style guns, but this tells us absolutely nothing about so-called "cartridge accuracy", a dubious concept at best.

Your data is less than credible, to say the least. Might as well compare the Brown Bess to the M16 as a military arm, while you are at it.

In equivalent modern rifles, the 30-06 has an edge over any .308 simply through the fact that there is more velocity available. Neither one has an accuracy edge over the other with equivalent modern rifles.

That's why I say that statements about one cartridge being "more accurate" than the other are a good way to spot those who are either deluded, or wish to BS somebody. Fact of the matter is: Accuracy is much more influenced by the rifle and by the shooter - than by the cartridge. Both cartridges are capable ( in the right rifle ) of shooting much more accurately than most shooters can.

[I'vebeenduped]

PVL,
To be sure, the main reason for changing to .308 instead of the '.06 is price. To special order the first rifle, it was going to cost me $1,300 exactly. The final rifle I am ordering, if I can find a dealer that can get their hands on it in Phoenix, is $1,100 MSRP, yet I see it on Cheaper than Dirt for about $850. For this guy, that is scope money!!! I do appreciate reading the differing interpretations, however. The more I learn, the better I am. Thanks guys!

[Brian Pfleuger]

We are talking about cartridges, not the rifles of yesteryear compared to the rifles made today.

They made .308 and .30-06 rifles then, they make .308 and .30-06 rifles now. Is anyone using .30-06 in matches where it is allowed but not required? How does that compare to .308 rifles allowed but not required? What record does the .30-06 hold, at any point since the introduction of the .308, that the .308 has not broken?

Do you suppose that competitors care about names of cartridges? They use what's best. If the .30-06 was superior, they'd be using it. How many are, when it's an option?

Any improvement in quality of rifles, barrels, shooters, bullets, etc all applies equally well to both cartridges. If the .308 was better then (and it was), it is also better now (and it is).

Show me a .308 accuracy record that a .30-06 has beaten (or even matched), any where at any time. Show me a .30-06 accuracy record that the .308 has not beaten, any where at any time.

[Ruger480]

I have researched the '06 quite a bit. I don't care to dig up all those resources but what I found was that the 308 is NOT the cartridge the 30-06 is. It never will be.

I don't really care about punching a hole in a piece of paper at 1,000/1,500 or even 2000 yards. What I care about is "what can that bullet do when it gets there?"
If its only moving at 50 FPS when it hits the paper, what does is matter if you can put 10 of them in the same hole?

This is why the '06 will always be a better cartridge in my mind. It will do more down range than the 308.

If we are talking about target practice then I would say the 260 or a 7mm would be the best since they have the least bullet drop at long ranges.
Does my argument make sense?

[Brian Pfleuger]

If we are talking about target practice then I would say the 260 or a 7mm would be the best since they have the least drop.
Does may argument make sense?

There are any number of cartridges that might be better for the task than either the .308 or .30-06, but that doesn't matter when the question is between just those two. I have no interest in .308 or .30-06 for any task.

Your argument about "more down range" doesn't really make sense, except in the most literal sense. As I explained above, using Hodgdon data and 200gr bullet, which is the range where the -06 has an "advantage" over the .308, that advantage amounts to about 40 ft-lbs (out of over 2,800 ft-lbs) and 2-4" trajectory at 500 yards.

Is that advantage worth 10-20% more recoil and roughly 1/2 the load data and factory ammo?

[Ruger480]

Is that advantage worth 10-20% more recoil and roughly 1/2 the load data and factory ammo

Yes............................

[precision_shooter]

I don't know of any animals in the us that would go down with 2,040lbft of energy and would not with 2,000lbft of energy.

Seems to me, you just like the -06 more, which is fine. I'll stick with my anemic .308...

[Westcoaster]

Ahhhh, the 3006 vs 308 debate carries on through the yet another winter thread...

Before I comment on the time honored debate I'll respond to the op.

IBD, some things to consider, first off Bambi or Bullwinkle will not care whether you shoot a 3006 or 308 so just forget about that for now. It's all about shot placement, which in effect is accuracy.

While you can have carry hunting rifles you can paper punch with and target rifles that you can hunt with the more you compromise toward one use or the other, the less suitable it will be for the original use.

Think about the overall weight of the rifle. Most folks will want to keep the all in weight of a carry rig hunting rifle under 9lbs. That includes a full magazine, scope, and sling. This varmint rig is at 10 lbs before you start. Unless you are planning on truck and stand hunting only I would suggest something a little trimmer. While I do truck hunt more than half of my hunting is on foot and a big chunk of that is in mountains - 10+ pound rifles get old fast when you carry them all day. My two goto carry rigs are about 7.5 and 8.5pounds.

Barrel length, while I prefer a longer barrel because for me they seem to "point" better than a 18" to 22" barrel, IIRC the velocity gain or loss per inch of barrel with this type of cartridge is in the neighborhood of 20-25fps per inch - not enough to be a material consideration. For a hunting rig I would council you toward a 22" - 24" barrel.

Detachable vs fixed magazine, while I like the concept of a detachable magazine in my experience, for hunting, it makes no difference in readiness and is just one more thing to lose.

For the kind of money you are spending I would suggest looking at an all weather Ruger Hawkeye, a Winchester Model 70 extreme weather (stainless steel and synthetic stock), or the equivalent SS & synthetic stock in a 700. I have shot all of these with outstanding results. While I don't care for Remington's they do shoot. One of my hunting partners out of the box extreme weather Model 70, in 3006, shot sub MOA for me when we were setting it up three years ago.

Just my opinion but I would try to spend as much on your glass as you do on the rifle. And please consider a 3-9x40 with good glass over a lower quality junior Hubble telescope. You don't need more than 9 power for 500 yard shooting and it will mount in a way that facilitates a better cheek weld than a 50 or 56mm objective bell. Buy good quality mounts, think Badger, Nightforce, Talley, or Warne. And invest in a baby torque wrench so you do not over tighten them. A suggestion? Zeiss 3-9x40 Conquest with the 600 yard ballistic reticle and Warne rings. It won't break the bank, it will give reasonably good performance, and it will provide hold over points past 350 yards.

Distance shooting is harder than it sounds and requires a ton of practice and good glass. I just shoot to 500 yards and it has taken a while to get very consistent at those ranges. I would focus on getting very consistent shot placement out to 500 yards before I pondered long distance shooting. As well, by the time you get good to 500 yards you will have a lot better idea of what will really work at long distance.


Now the 3006 vs the 308...

It doesn't matter.

BUT the 308, in my view, is NOT inherently more accurate, it recoils less, so most folks tend to shoot it better just my opinion.

Here is a link to guy named who did the best test I have ever come across.

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com...-vs-30-06.html

This guy, German Salazar, basically found that the 308 wins more because it is easier to shoot, because it recoils less. All other things being equal there is no difference in accuracy between the two cartridges. His inquiry, with all due respect to the posters on this thread, was very objective and is worth a read.

At the end of the day I still like the 3006 better than it's smaller, weaker cousin, the 308.

[10-96]

Ivebeenduped said:

I want to save about 600 before I start looking. I know that isn't much for a scope but my means are my means...

I won't go into the case war for fear someone will find out I shoot 16ga, .38 S&W, 6mm Remington and other such silly habits- so lets start beating each other up over scopes.

What were some ideas you were tossing around for brand, power, crosshair type, and such?

I personally see no reason in the world to spend over $300 on a scope, well unless I could find a really slick dual post running target match specific scope- then I might entertain the notion. I'm pretty much sold on the Mueller brand myself.

[Bart B.]

Years before German Salazar did his tests cited in that link above, several top ranked bolt action match rifle competitors proved the .308 Win. case shot bullets more accurate than a .30-06 case did. They shot better scores than those shown in Salazar's article.

Folks thinking:

Statements about one cartridge being "more accurate" than the other are a good way to spot those who are either deluded, or wish to BS somebody.

..might want to check out the facts of what happened in the late 1950's through the mid 1960's by getting it straight from the horses mouths of those who done it building and testing the rifles and cartridges as well as shooting the scores and test groups and watching it happen.

The guy who started that's mentioned up front in Salazar's article. Comparisons were made with the same rifle except for the barrel's chamber. The same bore and groove dimensions and twists were used as well as bullets, powders and primers. That started in 1958 and finalized in 1963. By 1966, match rifle scores toppled virtually all the records held by .30-06 chambered rifles, so the NRA had to make new targets with smaller scoring ring diameters so breaking ties would be easier. And the .308 case used in 300 meter free rifles took home the gold in international competition.

Even the Garands converted from .30-06 to 7.62 NATO in 1964 shot more accurate with the new round.

Best accuracy .30-06's produced at 600 yards back then was about 6 inches at 600 yards. Along came the .308 Win and best accuracy dropped to under 4 inches. Tests were conducted by rifles held in free recoiling machine rests eliminating all human error. And Sierra Bullets immediately started using the .308 case to test virtually all of their 30 caliber bullets becase it shot them more accurate than any other 30 caliber case. One of Sierra's tool and die makers (Ferris Pindell, of the "PPC" cartridge design group) used a .308 with their new 168-gr. match bullets to win some benchrest matches; something no .30-06 had done in all its attempts to do so.

Since 1963, when either a .308 or .30-06 cartridge could be used in competion, those shooting the .308 produced better scores. If that's not good enough reason to choose a .308 for accuracy, then the fact that all the old records held by the .30-06 have gave way to the .308 by the late '60's is meaningless. Even with 250-gr. match bullets, the .308 shoots 'em more accurate than the .30-06 did.

It's easy to build a rifle that'll shoot bullets from a .308 case into no worse than 3 inches at 600 yards. I've not heard of any .30-06 rifle that'll do that.

If one makes muzzle velocity comparisons using the same length barrels and equal bore and groove diameters fixed in place hard mounted and SAAMI peak pressure specs for both, the muzzle velocity difference is only about 100 fps.

And with equal barrel bore, groove and length dimensions and at SAAMI peak pressure specs, there's no way a .30-06 will come close to the velocities a 30 caliber magnum produces. Check 'em out in:

http://www.saami.org/specifications_...essure_CfR.pdf

[603Country]

If the OP is going to use the rifle for hunting most of the time, with a little target shooting thrown in, he should get the 30-06 in a rifle with a manageable weight. If he's mostly a target shooter and does a little hunting, he should lean toward the 308 in a rifle with a manageable weight.

I do believe that the 308 is a bit more accurate, but the only reason it was ever created was to get as close as possible to 30-06 performance with a smaller cartridge case. The 30-06 can be had in a rifle with as much accuracy as most folks can employ.