.308 or .30-06?

[Para Bellum]

yep, but that little more power is equaled with the HE Loads. And a.308 has less recoil...

...you've misunderstood me. It is obvious to me that a .308 with HE loads will have almost the same recoil (shorter case though) as the .30-06. But I meant, that if the HE isn't needed, you will have the advantage of normal .308 loads which is less recoil, agreed?

[James R. Burke]

I have had a few .308, and a few .30-06. They are really both nice calibers wheater you buy or reload. If I had to just pick one it would be the .30-06. That is just me. Nothing wrong with the .308.

[OLNfan]

308 ammo is cheaper!! (in my neck of the woods)

[Art Eatman]

The majority of hunting rifles, these days, seem to be made with barrels around 22 inches. If you don't do the reloading game, the .308 is pretty much the equal of the '06. The '06 needs 24" to 26" and handloads to really shine and way outdo the .308. But, 300 ft/sec ain't to be sneezed at.

I've used the Federal Premium High Energy cartridges in both the .308 and the '06. I got reports from a guy in Australia that his 26" Model 70 in '06 with that ammo chronographed what the Federal folks said: A 165-grain bullet in the '06 at 3,150. I'm guessing that the claimed data for their .308 ammo would be equally righteous, but I'm too lazy to try to find the one box of that ammo that I have stashed somewhere in the nether regions.

I've read reports that the Hornady claims are a tad optimistic, but no first hand info.

[kiwi56]

I must admit that I do have a soft spot for the 30-06 having never owned a 308. I think you have to weigh up advantages vs disadvantages of each
308
able to be fired in a shorter action so lighter rifle and lighter ammo
a very accurate cartridge generally having a slight advantage over the 30-06 but there are always exceptions,
for reloading smaller powder charge meaning more shots per pound of powder

30-06
Bullet is going to be between 200-300 ft per second quicker off the mark meaning flatter trajectory and slightly more energy hitting the target
Ability to cope better with bullets larger than 200 grain

As I said I am naturally biased towards the 30-06 as it has always done everything I have wanted it to. However there are other people who feel exactly the same way about the 308.
Another cartridge that you may find interesting is the 270 Winchester

[Fat White Boy]

.308 or .30-06? Yes. Definitely.

[globemaster3]

When someone asks about a specific caliber/recoil level, I choose to remain in the [U]EXACTLY/U] the same range.

The OP asked about .308 or 30-06. So exactly where did your .338 Federal enter the picture? Oh yeah, you went outside the same range and inserted your own...

Unless you handload with Reloder 17.

You're right Phil. Since he didn't mention reloading, I was assuming factory offerings.

[skydiver3346]

Because I am older now and don't like the recoil of my 180 grain .30-06 bullets. I still have a Pre-64 Model 70 in .30-06 and love it because it is a classic caliber and this gun shoots great. But over the years, have switched to my trusty .308 because it is so darn accurate and less recoil. It still hits hard like my .06 but everything else is better.

[Regolith]

But I meant, that if the HE isn't needed, you will have the advantage of normal .308 loads which is less recoil, agreed?

If you hand load, you can load a .30-06 down to .308 levels quit easily. On the other hand, you can't hand load a .308 up above the levels you can get a .30-06, because the case simply isn't big enough.

Come to think of it, you don't really need to be able to hand load to get those benefits. Many companies are offering .30-06 reduced recoil loads that are downloaded to .308 levels, and several companies offer light magnum loadings for the .30-06 as well.

To put it simply, the .30-06 is a more versatile cartridge.

That being said, I wouldn't feel under gunned hunting with a .308. My father took moose in Alaska with a .308 without any issues.

Also forgot to add:

a very accurate cartridge generally having a slight advantage over the 30-06 but there are always exceptions,

This is false. The .308 cartridge is not inherently more accurate than the .30-06. It may in fact be the other way around, because the '06 can better handle larger, heavier bullets which have a better ballistic coefficient.

From what I understand, this myth arose in the '50s and 60s when the .308 became extremely popular. As a result, all of the new rifle designs that incorporated better accuracy were made for the .308 much more often than the '06. Because of this, some believe that the '06, the previous ruler of the long range roost, was not as accurate. In fact, if you have two identical rifles with identical construction, but one is chambered in the '06 and one is chambered in the .308, the accuracy difference wont be enough to calculate. The '06 will probably be able to shoot flatter, however, because it has a bit of a power advantage.

[sc928porsche]

I have both...reload for both. Cant seem to get the 308 to equal the 06. Unless of course I change something around like bullet wt or powder or such. The 06 just outperforms the 308. Period. Only downside is recoil and to tell the truth, it isnt that much either.

[shooter007]

Neither......a 270. Perfect for deer and boar. Ballistic coefficients for the .277 Sierra 135 gr are better than both the .308 Win and the 30-06 with any bullet. High veloicity, high knockdown power, accurate, and range.

[Para Bellum]

The majority of hunting rifles, these days, seem to be made with barrels around 22 inches. If you don't do the reloading game, the .308 is pretty much the equal of the '06. The '06 needs 24" to 26" and handloads to really shine and way outdo the .308. But, 300 ft/sec ain't to be sneezed at.

I've used the Federal Premium High Energy cartridges in both the .308 and the '06. I got reports from a guy in Australia that his 26" Model 70 in '06 with that ammo chronographed what the Federal folks said: A 165-grain bullet in the '06 at 3,150. I'm guessing that the claimed data for their .308 ammo would be equally righteous, but I'm too lazy to try to find the one box of that ammo that I have stashed somewhere in the nether regions.

I've read reports that the Hornady claims are a tad optimistic, but no first hand info.

Thanks a lot for that info!

Neither......a 270. Perfect for deer and boar. Ballistic coefficients for the .277 Sierra 135 gr are better than both the .308 Win and the 30-06 with any bullet. High veloicity, high knockdown power, accurate, and range.

Speaking of Ballistic coefficients: I just seem to have found "THE" bullet for my 7x57 (off-topic, but my thread anyway): The Hornady SST (S&B "PTS"): 0.550
Makes my lill' ol' 7x57 fly far and hit hard
The .270 is an option for my buddy, I admit.
Handloading isn't.

[Art Eatman]

As a generality, for a hunter's shots inside 300 yards the ballistic coefficient is pretty much irrelevant. A higher BC starts being useful as you get out around 400 to 500 yards and are having to guesstimate the range.

[kiwi56]

Well I do believe to most shooters the difference in recoil when shooting the same bullets in identical rifles of each cartridge that it would be barely noticable and if you can't tolerate the recoil of either cartridge it's time to take up knitting.

[shooter007]

As a generality, for a hunter's shots inside 300 yards the ballistic coefficient is pretty much irrelevant.

Wrong, no bullet flys a straight line. Especially past 100 yds. The capability to overcome bullet drop with high BC's leads to greater accuracy and that can be the difference from dropping a deer to the dirt or never seeing it again.

[Regolith]

shooter: nope. At 300 yards, the difference in drop between the highest BC .270 round you can find and the lowest BC .30-06 round you can find is negligible.

They only really start to differ out past 400 yards, and it isn't until around 450-500 that the difference is any larger than the average kill zone of a deer.

Wind drift is similar.

Edit: It should also be noted that BC has nothing to do with accuracy. All a high BC bullet does is make the bullet more resistant to being moved by the wind and it allows it to cut through the air better, allowing for faster flight. This makes it easier to put a bullet on target, because you don't have to compensate for drop or wind as much, but the inherent accuracy of the firearm isn't affected.

[Art Eatman]

shooter, use any ballistic table you like. Whatever bullet diameter. To 300 yards, compare the bullet drop between--for example--a BC of around 0.3 to one of about 0.5. For a given cartridge, odds are the difference will be no more than an inch or so.

In the FWIW department, to around 250 to 300 yards, there's no practical difference in trajectory among any of the commonly-used deer cartridges, omitting the hot-shot .22s or the magnums. If you zero at 200, almost all of them will be with a half-inch of two inches high at 100 yards, and they all will be near five to seven inches low at 300. That holds true whether it's flat-based bullets or boat-tails, spitzers or round-nosed.

[shooter007]

For a given cartridge, odds are the difference will be no more than an inch or so.

Yes, you are correct, but there is a difference. So you are telling me that a inch doesn't matter? An inch is the difference between having a rack mounted in your office and telling a story for the remainder of your life of a deer you came upon...simple.

[Regolith]

Given that the average kill zone of a deer is 9-12 inches...1 inch is negligible, in any direction, provided you put it roughly in the center of that 9 inch circle.

Another thing is that a person who hunts should know where their gun is going to hit. Since what we're talking about here is drop and/or wind drift, and NOT how well the gun groups (i.e. accuracy), all that takes is a little bit of time at the range to sight in the gun and some practice.

It is absurd to suggest that one inch more in drop or wind drift will matter to a hunter who knows his gun and has practiced with it so that it will hit where he wants it to.

[globemaster3]

Shooter, you are off base. By a long shot...

In terms of the discussion of .308 and 30-06 ballistics: no, an inch or so is not a big deal.

In terms of a hunting rig, if what you say is correct, if you cannot print into an inch, at any range, then you are a poor hunter? :barf:

[shooter007]

In terms of a hunting rig, if what you say is correct, if you cannot print into an inch, at any range, then you are a poor hunter?

Hunting isn't only about how good of a shot you are. Finding your game, tracking your game, and stalking your game are far more important. As for your remark to that if I can't shoot 1 inch groups I'm a poor hunter...well personally that isn't a problem for me, but for those who aren't the best shots that doesn't mean they are a poor hunter and your comment is one of the most idiotic comments about hunting that I've ever heard.

[Art Eatman]

shooter, lemme rephrase about why "one inch is irrelevant".

I use an '06, mostly with 150-grain bullets. Say that at 300 yards a flat-base drops six inches, but a boat-tail only drops five inches.

I know this, going in, right? If ol' Bucky is out there at 300 yards, if I'm shooting flat-base I hold six inches above where I want the bullet to hit. If I'm using boat-tail, I hold five inches above where I want the bullet to hit.

So: I say that the one inch difference makes no nevermind. In either case, I'm gonna eat deer meat.

And if it's a heart shot, with that roughly six-inch diameter ruination zone, I don't even have to know which bullet I'm using. If the target is bigger than the rifle's dispersion, you're gonna hit the target.

Been eatin' a lot of deer meat since 1964, so I must be doing something right.

Drifting into FWIW:

A few years back, I set up at my 500-yard table for some testing. The target is a 22" steel plate. It's about 250 feet lower, across Terlingua Creek and about a mile drive by jeep trail to get to it. I got all sighted in for 500 yards. 150-grain Sierra SPBTs, 165-grain Sierra HPBTs and 180-grain Sierra SPBTs.

I vaguely recall five or six rounds of the remaining 150-grain bullets from the box. Two four-shot groups with the remaining 165s. A ten-shot string with the remaining 180s; two called flyers. (I'd started all this happiness at the 100-yard bench, messing with the scope and all that stuff.)

Right at one MOA with the 150s. The 165 groups were each 0.8 MOA. The eight 180s were 6". The overall diameter of all this happiness was about ten inches for 23 or 24 shots. IOW, not much trajectory difference at 500 yards for the three weights.

[sc928porsche]

You know, Its awfully tough to see 1" at 300 yds. It seems that the thickness of the crosshairs covers that much. Try putting a one inch square in the center of a target.....take it out to 300 and look. At least it is on my 3-9. The 6-24 you can see the square.

[James R. Burke]

Sorry already posted.

[simonkenton]

Macht nichts.