The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: General

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old July 1, 2013, 10:55 PM   #51
SVTCobra306
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2013
Posts: 344
I'm no expert, but I would thing there are a lot of things stacking up to make a difference.

1. Different cartridge length.. this makes different powders behave differently, and a better case fill with a faster powder can make a huge difference, also the shorter the case, the better the primer can act on the powder directly, making for better efficiency. As with most things, efficiency = performance.

2. Different shoulder angle.. this has been an area often explored with an eye toward accuracy, the steeper a shoulder is, in general, usually the better the accuracy potential is.

3. Shorter action.. I'm no gunsmith, and I'm sure the difference is minute, but several minor differences add up to a big one..

4. Military development.. yes the 30.06 preceded the .308 as a military sniper round, but the .308 enjoyed more modern testing and development on that end, and that is sure to have made a difference in the overall development of the round over the years. The 30.06 would have been effectively abandoned in favor of the new round, so the military development would have stopped.

5. Availability of match grade components... with the advent of the .308 in the military, so came the .308 in competitions, and that has had a longer life than what the 30.06 spent as a military round, as such there is a larger market base for all the match grade ammunition and rifles in .308 vs. the 30.06.


I do know this.. I've RSO'ed for a few ranges for a sniper section, and I've seen .308 rifles in the right hands do some really incredible things.. as well as the Barret M82.
SVTCobra306 is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 05:42 AM   #52
B.L.E.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Somewhere on the Southern shore of Lake Travis, TX
Posts: 1,889
Quote:
I would think the slower the powder burns the less felt recoil you would have . For lack of a better term . The slower powder would feel more like a push then a kick ?
Nearly all of the recoil you feel occurs after the bullet leaves the barrel. The gun only moves rearward about 1/16 inch or so during barrel time. The rest of the movement is momentum. The exact amount of movement during barrel time depends on the ratio of gun mass to bullet/powder charge mass.

I would think that a slow burning powder would have a higher pressure as the bullet exits making for louder muzzle blast and more jet effect after the bullet leaves the barrel.
__________________
Hanlon's Razor
"Do not invoke conspiracy as explanation when ignorance and incompetence will suffice, as conspiracy implies intelligence and organization."
B.L.E. is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 06:25 AM   #53
Bart B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 4,645
Comments on SVTCobra306's comments follow:

Quote:
Shorter action.. I'm no gunsmith, and I'm sure the difference is minute, but several minor differences add up to a big one..
Note the benchresters sleeved those round Remmy receivers with tubes an inch or more longer than the receiver to get more stock grip on them. Flat side/bottom ones worked the best. With the barrel torque and whip from firing, shorter receivers' bearing surfaces tend to work loose quicker from epoxy bedding. The original .308 bolt guns used standard length (.30-06 size) receivers with flat sides and bottom. The short Remington 700's and 40X ones in .308 were/are notorious for twisting loose from epoxy bedding. Later, when pillar bedding was use, they got somewhat better, but their accuracy never equaled what a standard long Winl 70 receiver would produce; the M70's near 3 times stiffer than the M700's in the vertical plane where it's most important anyway.

Quote:
Availability of match grade components... with the advent of the .308 in the military, so came the .308 in competitions, and that has had a longer life than what the 30.06 spent as a military round, as such there is a larger market base for all the match grade ammunition and rifles in .308 vs. the 30.06.
The .30-06 was a competition round at its onset. The accuracy of its match ammo stayed the same from the 1920's (when the 172-gr. FMJBT bullet was developed) until the late 1950's when good HPBT match bullets became available. I think it's remarkable that the '06 maintained its best accuracy level in the 6 inch range at 600 yards for almost 40 years. The .308/7.62 started out in the 3 inch range and hasn't changed.
__________________
US Navy Distinguished Marksman Badge 153
Former US Navy & Palma Rifle Team Member
NRA High Power Master & Long Range High Master
NRA Smallbore Prone Master

Last edited by Bart B.; July 2, 2013 at 08:44 AM.
Bart B. is online now  
Old July 2, 2013, 11:53 AM   #54
alaskabushman
Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2013
Location: S.E. Alaska
Posts: 89
30-06 not accurate? Nobody told me! Man! I guess I'll have to let that handful of deer I shot with the '06 know that they were killed with an inferior cartridge.
That really bum's me out.
alaskabushman is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 12:50 PM   #55
Paul B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 28, 1999
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 2,617
Way back in 1973, I switched from an almost 10 pound bubba's 1903 Springfield 30-06 to an at leats 2.5 pounds lighter Reminton 660 in .308. Never did have much respect for the .308 until that deer season when I took a nice Mule Deer at 427 paces. My hunting parner had wounded it and I was trying to bring it down. All that shooting at running jack rabbits earler in the year paid off nicely.
I always though the .308 was a 30-06 wannabe but hunting at the 9,000 foot level and saddled with the fact that I was at that time a 3 pack a day smoker was the reason for switching to the lighter rifle. For the record, I did quit smoking just two years later. Haven't touched one since. For deer at least, I haven't touched the 30-06 in years although I still shoot it some at the range. Current pet .308 is a Ruger M77 RSI shooting 165 gr. Speer Hot-Cores at 2550 FPS. No barn burnier but the deer have not been in any shape to complain.
Paul B.
__________________
COMPROMISE IS NOT AN OPTION!
Paul B. is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 06:20 PM   #56
Bart B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 4,645
Alaskabushman and Paul B, nobody has said the .30-06 was not accurate nor it or the .308 could not take game decently.

And all those deer were killed with bullets, not cartridges. The rifles just shoot the bullets and have no idea where they went. There's no way game animals know what gun held the cartridge that shot the bullet they get smacked with. Four identical 30 caliber bullets moving at 1642 fps striking game the same way will all perform equally. Even though they came from four different size cartridges such as the .30-40 Krag, .308 Win., .30-06 and .300 RUM.
__________________
US Navy Distinguished Marksman Badge 153
Former US Navy & Palma Rifle Team Member
NRA High Power Master & Long Range High Master
NRA Smallbore Prone Master

Last edited by Bart B.; July 2, 2013 at 06:53 PM.
Bart B. is online now  
Old July 2, 2013, 07:20 PM   #57
abowlieb
Member
 
Join Date: June 27, 2013
Posts: 25
I just got a savage 10/110 TH xp 30-06. I reqloaded some nosler BT 150gr using IMR4320 @ 49grs n was very please with its accuracy. If what I seen is concerned to be inaccurate then ill take it every day of the week. I really enjoy the 06, n imo would feel more then comfortable taking it anywhere to hunt anything. Just for the simple fact I know I can hit whatever I'm aiming at, up to 500yds.
abowlieb is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 09:00 PM   #58
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,424
Metal god, maybe check your math? How many more grains weight of MagPro did you use? And, same bullet?

I've never really paid a lot of attention to the style of recoil. Folks say that big bores are somewhat lower pressure (.470 Rigby, e.g.) and that''s why the recoil is more of a push than a sharp kick. I dunno.
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 09:20 PM   #59
Metal god
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 1,944
From my sierra book for 30-06

190gr match king / velocity 2500fps

IMR 4895 44.3gr - Total calc = 110,940

Mag Pro 57.5gr - Total calc = 143,940

These were not the exact numbers in My above post cus I used Varget instead of IMR 4895 but the numbers are about the same
Metal god is offline  
Old July 3, 2013, 05:57 AM   #60
B.L.E.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Somewhere on the Southern shore of Lake Travis, TX
Posts: 1,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Eatman
I've never really paid a lot of attention to the style of recoil. Folks say that big bores are somewhat lower pressure (.470 Rigby, e.g.) and that''s why the recoil is more of a push than a sharp kick. I dunno.
I believe that a lot of "push instead of a hard kick" stems from the fact that a rifle chambered for those African calibers weighs at least 12 pounds and may weigh 14 up to 16 pounds.
Your shoulder stopping a 16 pound rifle that's been accelerated backwards to a velocity of 10 ft. per second is going to feel different than your shoulder stopping a 4 pound rifle going 20 ft. per second, even though both have the exact same recoil energy.
__________________
Hanlon's Razor
"Do not invoke conspiracy as explanation when ignorance and incompetence will suffice, as conspiracy implies intelligence and organization."
B.L.E. is offline  
Old July 3, 2013, 08:15 AM   #61
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near Ohio, Indiana.
Posts: 3,505
in case someone else has not mentioned it yet, I noticed while hand loading both (.308, 30-06), it was much easier to find a load that would fill the .308 case than it was to find one that fill the 30-06 case to 100% loading density. Just suggesting that as a possible factor.
Being a rifle bullet caster and member of the Cast Lead Bullet Association for many years, I took note that many of the top cast lead bullet rifle competitors would choose the smaller capacity cases for their .30 caliber, production class, shooting. For instance, 30-30's in single shots (Ruger #3), or the rare Winchester 52', .308's rather than 30-06's. Even 7.62x39 in a Ruger M77.
__________________
Sometimes you get what you pay for, sometimes you only pay more for what you get.
Three shots are not a "group"...they are a "few".

If the Bible is the literal, infallible, unerring word of God...where are all those witches I am supposed to kill?
dahermit is offline  
Old July 3, 2013, 08:34 AM   #62
stubbicatt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2007
Posts: 1,064
Metal God, at least some of, or most of, the perceived recoil is due to "ejecta", that is, the stuff blown out the muzzle of the rifle, including the bullet, hot gases, and unburnt powder etc.

Years ago when shooting IPSC, folks wanted to shoot the 40S&W with heavier bullets to "make major" with a fast burning powder, as it was considered to generate less recoil, thus less muzzle flip, and quicker split times. I never really looked any deeper into this than what I read. So I used heavier bullets, and faster powders.

I think perhaps what you have discovered in your search to calculate recoil is a numerical expression of this same phenomenon, when comparing faster to slower burning powders in the same cartridge.
stubbicatt is offline  
Old July 3, 2013, 01:46 PM   #63
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,424
Until the bullet leaves the muzzle, the weight of the compressed gas equals the weight of the unburned powder. That mass gets accelerated just as does the bullet.

Most of my '06 loads have been with 3031 or 4064, so a max load is around 52 grains. I used 54 grains of H414 with a very accurate 180-grain load. So, a bit of uniformity as to how full the case is.

In Metal god's example, 190 + 57.5 = 247.5. Times 2,500 = 618,750

190 + 44.3 = 234.3. Times 2,500 = 585,750

618,750 divided by 585,750 = 1.056, or just under six percent more recoil with the heavier charge. (Since the velocities are the same, the same percentage results from just using the total weights that are accelerated.)
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old July 3, 2013, 02:23 PM   #64
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,537
There are two primary powder related factors in recoil. The one is powder weight, which is obvious, the other relates to burn speed... muzzle pressure. The bullet's exit of the barrel essentially "uncorks" a very, very high-pressure bottle. You have a rocket in your hands, at that moment. The higher the pressure is at the instant that the barrel is "uncorked", the higher the resultant "rocket effect". The two effects work together. A faster powder will reach max pressure at a lower charge weight. It burns faster and will have a lower muzzle pressure. So, lower pressure AND lower weight.... less recoil. The rocket effect percentage of recoil can be very significant. As much as 1/3rd, even 1/2, of total recoil.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old July 3, 2013, 02:34 PM   #65
Metal god
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 1,944
I can't believe my calc does not calculate correctly or at least they way I think it should . I feel a little dumb right now . Here's how I calculated the numbers . 190+57.5 x 2500 . I never noticed it was not adding the 190 and 57.5 together then x-ing the total by 2500 .I can continuously add and subtract numbers till I'm blue in the face and it tracks what I'm doing just fine . As soon as I throw in a Xs it only uses the last number entered to Xs by the next number added . oops

Maybe that explains why all my bullets impact the ground about 100yds in front of the target .

LOL just kidding If you can't laugh at your self , something ,something , etc etc
Metal god is offline  
Old July 3, 2013, 08:22 PM   #66
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,424
"If you can't laugh at your self..."

I've always told folks that my wrinkles come from grinnin'. Now you know why.
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old July 4, 2013, 05:48 AM   #67
B.L.E.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Somewhere on the Southern shore of Lake Travis, TX
Posts: 1,889
Quote:
I can't believe my calc does not calculate correctly or at least they way I think it should . I feel a little dumb right now . Here's how I calculated the numbers . 190+57.5 x 2500 . I never noticed it was not adding the 190 and 57.5 together then x-ing the total by 2500 .I can continuously add and subtract numbers till I'm blue in the face and it tracks what I'm doing just fine . As soon as I throw in a Xs it only uses the last number entered to Xs by the next number added . oops
In mathematical formula, multiplication and division is done before addition or subtraction, unless prioity is designated by parenthesis. Most scientific calculators follow that protocol.
You should have entered (190+57.5) X 2500 instead of 190+57.5 X 2500
Also, functions have priority over multiplication and division.
A x B^2 gives a different answer than (A x B)^2
__________________
Hanlon's Razor
"Do not invoke conspiracy as explanation when ignorance and incompetence will suffice, as conspiracy implies intelligence and organization."
B.L.E. is offline  
Old July 6, 2013, 11:31 AM   #68
tobnpr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2010
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 2,887
Interesting thread...
Some of the calcs made my head hurt, so I didn't take the time to try to follow all the science.

But seems that one point missed (at least I didn't see it) is a simple one. Larger case capacity, means the .06 can push heavier, high BC bullets than the .308- or the same, faster...just like the .300 WM

So the "plus" for added case capacity, doesn't offset the "downside" of the shoulder/case design as far as ability to put the round on target at long range?
__________________
Custom Bent Bolts and Gunstocks for the Mosin-Nagant
www.biggorillagunworks.com
tobnpr is offline  
Old July 6, 2013, 01:03 PM   #69
Marksinsoni
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2013
Posts: 10
I wonder why not many have mentioned ammo. A lot depends on the ammo too, like the kid of brass you use, the primer type, the positioning of the bullet in the case. Why 308 is better than 30-06 is pure economic. More 308s built now than 30-06 so 308 has lots of production hours tweaks, man efforts behind them. 308 is also a bigger community than the 30-06.
Marksinsoni is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 12:48 AM   #70
Metal god
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
I wonder why not many have mentioned ammo. A lot depends on the ammo too, like the kid of brass you use, the primer type, the positioning of the bullet in the case.
This thread was brought by me out of another thread most of us were in . I think we all understood that the ammo issue was not an issue cus we surrendered the thought that both cartridges were loaded to the best they could be . This was strictly about accuracy of the caliber and not the components that make it accurate .

Quote:
one point missed (at least I didn't see it) is a simple one. Larger case capacity, means the .06 can push heavier, high BC bullets than the .308- or the same, faster...just like the .300 WM

So the "plus" for added case capacity, doesn't offset the "downside" of the shoulder/case design as far as ability to put the round on target at long range?
Same answer as above really . This was never about the capability of a round , Meaning knock down power , energy transfer and what not . That was not part of the debate but the 300 WM and the 30-06 comparisons is one of the reasons I started the thread . I wanted to know why guys like to use the 300 WM for long rang shooting and not so much with the 30-06.

Last edited by Metal god; July 7, 2013 at 06:21 PM.
Metal god is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 08:00 AM   #71
B.L.E.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Somewhere on the Southern shore of Lake Travis, TX
Posts: 1,889
I thought that the reason a .30-06 could shoot the heavier bullets was because most .30-06 barrels have a 1 turn in 10 inches rifling pitch whereas the most common rifling pitch for rifles chambered for .308 was 1 turn in 12 inches, though I'm sure custom barrels can be had in any rifling pitch for either caliber.
__________________
Hanlon's Razor
"Do not invoke conspiracy as explanation when ignorance and incompetence will suffice, as conspiracy implies intelligence and organization."
B.L.E. is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 08:26 AM   #72
Bart B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 4,645
Both cartridges can shoot bullet weights from 90 to 250 grains. And both have done so. More 200 to 250 grainers have probably been shot from the .308 in competition than any discipline from a .30-06. Typical muzzle velocity from the .308's about 100 to 150 fps less than the .30-06, too.

Note the .30-06's standard 1:10 twist makes their bullets spin a lot faster than the 1:12 standard twist does from a .308. Harry Pope (famous barrel maker a century ago) knew a 1:10 twist was too fast for best accuracy with the .30-06; he made them with a 1:12 twist for the US Palma Team. A given bullet from a .308 spins much slower from a 1:12 twist than from a .30-06 with a 1:10 twist.

The ultimate 30 caliber cartridge for accuracy at ranges up to 300 yards when shooting for score:

http://www.6mmbr.com/30BR.html

As to why guys like to use the 300 WM for long rang shooting and not so much with the 30-06 started back in 1935 when a .300 H&H set a new 1000-yard prone record. Belted magnums have more consistant/uniform primer ignition as they headspace on their belts in properly chambered rifles. Even the later 30 caliber magnums with much sharper shoulder angles headspacing on their shoulders shot more accurate than the .30-06. In the late '50's and early '60's, the best built 30 caliber belted magnums would shoot inside 6 to 7 inches at 1000 yards. The .30-06 round with the best handloads using the best bullets in the best rifles would do no better than 10 to 12 inches at 1000. While recoil during barrel time is more with the magnums than a .30-06, the better wind bucking ability of heavy bullets leaving faster makes a difference at the longest ranges.
__________________
US Navy Distinguished Marksman Badge 153
Former US Navy & Palma Rifle Team Member
NRA High Power Master & Long Range High Master
NRA Smallbore Prone Master

Last edited by Bart B.; July 7, 2013 at 11:30 AM.
Bart B. is online now  
Old July 7, 2013, 01:04 PM   #73
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 11,219
Its not...

Quote:
What makes the 30-06 less accurate then the 308 or any other round for that matter .
Short answer, its not.

Not for any practical field application, anyway. Its a question of the individual rifle, and shooter, not .30-06 vs .308 or any other round.

Now, there is a lot of discussion, technical and otherwise about how the shorter rounds are more "inherently accurate" and shorter actions are "stiffer", etc.

And they are real things. However, "inherent accuracy" mattes when you are talking about large numbers of rifles, or when tiny degrees of improvement make a significant difference (such as benchrest shooting).

Take any two basic sporters, one in 06 and one in any other .30 cal and you will find that one rifle may "outshoot" the other. The difference may be tiny, or it may be a fair amount. Either way it is the rifle, ammo, and shooter that make the package, not JUST the caliber the rifle is chambered in.

A .002" difference in group size might be what wins the match, or 3" smaller group at 1000 yds might be the difference. But in the game fields, that tiny degree of improvement is normally meaningless to both the game, and the shooter.

If you have a good shooting 06, you have a fine rifle. Don't be mislead by old records, as more than just the cartridges were involved. Rifle technology has improved considerably since then, as well as new cartridges.

45 years ago, a rifle (sporter) that would shoot 1MOA was a gem to be treasured. Today (at least if you believe what you hear on the internet) rifles that shoot 1MOA are common, and nothing special, or so it seems. Rifles shooting half that (or less) are apparently not rare at all these days...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 01:38 PM   #74
Bart B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 4,645
44 Amp claims:
Quote:
Its a question of the individual rifle, and shooter, not .30-06 vs .308 or any other round.
Leave the rifle out unless they're identical in every way except for the chamber's dimensions. Otherwise, your comparing more than one thing and that's guaranteed to skew the results. When comparing two systems' performance with something different in them, make sure what's different is only one thing; in this case the cartridge/chamber part.

And nowhere was the shooter part of the comparison, so leave the shooter out, too.

The issue's not "who" nor "what rifle" shoots most accurate, just what each of two cartridges do. It is plainly .30-06 rounds versus .308 rounds.
__________________
US Navy Distinguished Marksman Badge 153
Former US Navy & Palma Rifle Team Member
NRA High Power Master & Long Range High Master
NRA Smallbore Prone Master

Last edited by Bart B.; July 7, 2013 at 02:28 PM.
Bart B. is online now  
Old July 10, 2013, 12:22 PM   #75
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 11,219
If all you are interested in is what the cartridges themselves will do versus each other, then get the two most identical barrels you can (other than the chamberings), put them in a universal receiver, and feed them the most carefully crafted ammo you can make.

Do that, and I think you will find basically identical results within the tolerances of the barrels and ammo used. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Real world accuracy involves all the variables, so telling someone that round A is more accurate than round B, as a blanket statement, doesn't even begin to consider any of the variables.

Some combinations of gun and ammo design, manufacturing quality, and tolerances are more accurate than others. No question. But believing that this one will outshoot that one, just because its a.308 and that one is an 06 just doesn't make sense to me.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14106 seconds with 7 queries