.308 vs .30-06

[3006savage]

I look at the 308 vs 06 comparison a little different than most. I do not use the manuals as the basis to compare the 308 and 06. Pressures for the 308 in the reloading manuals and in factory ammo are higher that the 06. This of coarse slightly favors the 308 on paper, but most reloaders base max charges on the same classic pressure signs for the 06 and the 308. They will on average actually operate safely at the same max pressure in a modern bolt action rifle.

The 06 will push a 180 grain bullet at the same velocity the 308 pushes a 165 grain bullet and the 06 will push a 200 at a velocity equal the 308s 180 etc. This means the 06 would still shoot slightly flatter and have less wind drift due the higher BC of the heavier bullets. This also extends the 06 range a full 100 yards over the 308 with equal KE and Momentum numbers. I favor the 06 for hunting situations where you cannot dial in shots like at the range. Ammo and brass costs for the 308 and 06 are about the same also unlike the cases larger than the 06.

 

[Locknload]

The main thing that you fail to recognize is that the 30-06 SAMMI specs are lower than the 308. Yes, that is right, look at the pressures. Why? Because the 06 has some shaky rifles it is chambered in, 30 years before the 308 was invented. The lawyer's answer to being safe in the junk guns, like the brittle 03s, is to reduce the specs for all rifles in 06. At one time folks kinda thought the public had a lick of sense and told ya, no max loads in 03s serial number x-y. Now they just protect you by changing the data.
Best,
Ed

 

[RBrowning]

I find it truely humorous, but everytime that I see the 308 vs 30-06 debate come up, somebody has to bring up the long anction and how it weighs so much more. Now that would play a pretty important role for a brush gun intended for <150 shots or maybe at a moving target. Perhaps this would be important for the sheep hunters among us. But most of us are packing around scopes that weigh as much as some peoples rifles. Then there is the spotting scope snd the bipods and the weather meters and the GPS and the PDA and the ... kitchen sink. For less than a half a pound and 7/8" difference this really isn't, in my opinion, a big deal.

When both are loaded to the same pressure the 30-06 will shoot a little faster because it holds more powder. This is of particular importance with the heavier bullets that we all like so much. But the 308 tends to be a little more accurate. Whether this is due to the short / fat case design or the shorter stronger action, I don't know.

 

[ejones338]

My intent isnt to slaughter you! Just offering my .02

The above quote isnt quite fair. You see to gain that average of 100 FPS by switching from the 308 to 3006 you have to jump up to a long action which is heavier, less ridged and makes an overall longer rifle. The gain doesnt justify the sacrifices. If however you want to make the sacrifices and jump to a long action then at least get some bang for your buck and do it right. This is where you would want to step it up to the 300 win mag or at least a 7mm Rem mag. To me, these calibers are worth the sacrifices of a long action.


+1 Also you can obviously build an accurate long action rifle, but the shorter more ridgid actions are inherintly more accurate. Though it tends to be competitive shooters that are trying to ring out those .25 MOA- groups that will worry to much about it. Most of us here are probably more worried about
sub 1MOA with the added down range energy. However don't get me wrong, .25 MOA- groups would be a fantastic bonus.

 

[J E Custom]

When debating the use of the .30-06 vs the .308 the '06 really earns its keep when you start using 200 and 210 grain bullets. With that being said, When using lighter 175 grain bullets how much more lethal reach does an '06 have?

I prefer to compare apples to apples an to do that you must use the main difference in the two.

Both cartriges were developed by the military and designed to shoot the 150gr ball ammo
the 3006 came out with a velocity of 2740 in 1906 and held almost all of the 1000 yard records
until the 762x51 (308) was adopted in the early 50s and became the NATO cartridge in 1957.

The 762x51 (308) was loaded to almost the same velocity 2750 with the 150 grain ball ammo
and with the available powders met the military spec velocity in a shorter (51mm) case as
apposed to the 63mm 3006 case.

With that said,now comes the potential that the re loader can achieve.

The 3006 has a case capacity of 60 to 62 grains of powder.

The 308 has a case capacity of 50 to 52 grains of powder.

That is 16.7 % more capacity and with the same modern powders and the same bullet weights
the 3006 has a 16.7% edge in velocity if shot in the same barrel length and using slower
powder and the same pressure levels.

So even the fact that the 308 is easier on the shoulder when shooting prone at 1000 yards.
I would have to go with the 3006 for long range hunting if 308 and 3006 were the only two
choices I had.

For 1000 yard target shooting I would use the 308.

I hope this helps in your choice.

J E CUSTOM

 

[3006savage]

That is 16.7 % more capacity and with the same modern powders and the same bullet weights
the 3006 has a 16.7% edge in velocity if shot in the same barrel length and using slower
powder and the same pressure levels.

JE I think you meant 16.7% more KE not velocity. If the velocity were that much higher the 06 would have to be much more efficient than the 308 because energy is Velocity Squared x mass.

 

[Capt Kurt]

We can debate this question all day. I prefer the 308 because of lower recoil, less expensive to reload and the 308 is inherently a more accurate rnd. The 308 and 30-06 are so close in performance up to 178 gr. The question i have is simple. I have not seen a game animal that could tell the difference. Capt kurt

 

[rdsii64]

There are some interesting comments here. It seems that I have opened a bigger can of worms than intended. no worries. that is how healthy debate is supposed to work. First I want to thank folks for not calling someone a jack *** for disagreeing.
The jury is still out on what caliber my next rifle will be. I currently own a .308 and its a fine gun. I have absolutely no doubts that if a elk sized animal showed itself at 400 yards or less I can put a well constructed 180 grain hunting bullet in the boiler room. For what its worth, my interest in the .30-06 lies in building a rifle that can kill big game at long range with out having to deal with magnum level recoil. What I was hopping for was a heavy long barreled 30-06 with a 200 grain bullet would be a good recipe for elk sized game out to 800 yards. Assuming this is a good choice, I get my cake and eat it to. I can put the smack down on large game with out dealing with hard hitting recoil.
opinions welcome, and as always

thanks

 

[liltank]

There are some interesting comments here. It seems that I have opened a bigger can of worms than intended. no worries. that is how healthy debate is supposed to work. First I want to thank folks for not calling someone a jack *** for disagreeing.
The jury is still out on what caliber my next rifle will be. I currently own a .308 and its a fine gun. I have absolutely no doubts that if a elk sized animal showed itself at 400 yards or less I can put a well constructed 180 grain hunting bullet in the boiler room. For what its worth, my interest in the .30-06 lies in building a rifle that can kill big game at long range with out having to deal with magnum level recoil. What I was hopping for was a heavy long barreled 30-06 with a 200 grain bullet would be a good recipe for elk sized game out to 800 yards. Assuming this is a good choice, I get my cake and eat it to. I can put the smack down on large game with out dealing with hard hitting recoil.
opinions welcome, and as always

thanks

I would expect you could put together a decent load with the 30-06 and a 200grn projectile. For what its worth, the 200grn Accu-Bond will give you the best BC in that weight.

I just did some checking with JBM Ballistics. What I am seeing as far as capability is concerned you will fall short of your goal with a 200 grain projectile at 800yards. This is using a speed of 2600fps. I did see some faster on reloadersnest.com, but most were under that speed. Just using the minimums that I know to look for, for sufficiency in killing capabilities, the minimum speed necessary to open a bullet per suggestion of others on this sight is 1600fps. That limits you to about 780yrds (yes I know it is only twenty yards shy). According to the limits of ft.lbs. the suggested is 1500 which now shortens your distance to about 600yards. With that said, that is at a sea level heigth of 1000ft.

So the higher the elevation the better, but it will really limits your distance. Now like any other shot that is made you definitely need to be concerned with shot placement. You may even find a load that will shoot faster, and in a nice long barrel you may get up to 2750fps which would really be pushing that cartridge.

Just my thoughts and opinion,
Tank

 

[rdsii64]

I would expect you could put together a decent load with the 30-06 and a 200grn projectile. For what its worth, the 200grn Accu-Bond will give you the best BC in that weight.

I just did some checking with JBM Ballistics. What I am seeing as far as capability is concerned you will fall short of your goal with a 200 grain projectile at 800yards. This is using a speed of 2600fps. I did see some faster on reloadersnest.com, but most were under that speed. Just using the minimums that I know to look for, for sufficiency in killing capabilities, the minimum speed necessary to open a bullet per suggestion of others on this sight is 1600fps. That limits you to about 780yrds (yes I know it is only twenty yards shy). According to the limits of ft.lbs. the suggested is 1500 which now shortens your distance to about 600yards. With that said, that is at a sea level heigth of 1000ft.

So the higher the elevation the better, but it will really limits your distance. Now like any other shot that is made you definitely need to be concerned with shot placement. You may even find a load that will shoot faster, and in a nice long barrel you may get up to 2750fps which would really be pushing that cartridge.

Just my thoughts and opinion,
Tank

Thanks for the insightful comments. Based on your advise maybe an '06 with 175 or 180 grain hunting bullet might be the ticket. Anyway, while I am saving the money I will have plenty of time to explore what the best combination for me will be.
as always
thanks

 

[pretex]

what about the 208 amax, nice bc

on the other hand might be to fragile for elk​

 

[Michael Eichele]

The 200 grain 30 cal variety is a good choice for elk. With the right load you can get it to do what you want. My 200 grain load is the 200 Sierra game king a top VV N540. Its BC (.560) is slightly lower than the ACCUBOND (.588) but the manufacture stated minimum impact velocity requirment for the AB is 1800 FPS or higher. The stated minimum for the SKG is 1500 FPS. This affords you more range from either round. I am loaded to 2500 FPS in my 308. This offers over 1000 pounds of energy and over 1500 FPS at 850 yards AT 5000 feet above sea level even in 35 degree air. Most elk are found even higher than 5000' ASL which will offer you even more impact velocity.

IMHO neither the 308 or the 3006 are optimum for elk at 800 yards albiet either would work under the 'right' circumstances, ie: proper bullet, proper placement and good to perfect enviornmental factors. Also IMHO the 200 AB would shorten your effective range on elk due to the higher impact velocity requirments. The 200 AB for 800 yard elk hunting is best suited for a bigger cartridge that can get the velocity up to par with the needs at hand.

 

[3006savage]

There are some interesting comments here. It seems that I have opened a bigger can of worms than intended. no worries. that is how healthy debate is supposed to work. First I want to thank folks for not calling someone a jack *** for disagreeing.
The jury is still out on what caliber my next rifle will be. I currently own a .308 and its a fine gun. I have absolutely no doubts that if a elk sized animal showed itself at 400 yards or less I can put a well constructed 180 grain hunting bullet in the boiler room. For what its worth, my interest in the .30-06 lies in building a rifle that can kill big game at long range with out having to deal with magnum level recoil. What I was hopping for was a heavy long barreled 30-06 with a 200 grain bullet would be a good recipe for elk sized game out to 800 yards. Assuming this is a good choice, I get my cake and eat it to. I can put the smack down on large game with out dealing with hard hitting recoil.
opinions welcome, and as always

thanks

My best performing load from my 22" barreled 06 is 2710 Fps with a 200 grain Accubond over 54 grains of RL17. According to Quick load I am running just under 65KPSI at 3.410 OAL. I would not be comfortable with it to 800 yards. I consider it a solid 500 yard load but then I am not the best shot either. With a longer smoother custom barrel you could probably get a little better velocities.

 

[rdsii64]

It seems like I may be reaching a bit further than I should with the .30-06. Since I odn't want to deal with magnum recoil. Maybe I should cut that 800 yards back to about 500 or 600. Also I stated earlier that I have no problem putting a 180 grain round in the boiler room at 400 yards with a .308 This was purley from a marksmanship perspective I have no idea whether or not a 308 is a appropriate caliber for 400 yard elk.

opinions are welcome

thanks