Is the .308 Win 7.62 X 51 still a Long Range Hunting Cartridge?

[M118LR]

Just was wondering, who told you that Army and Marines had stop using 308 for there work…asking for a friend?

Remington was selling reconditioned M24's once the M2010 orders came in. The M2010 is chambered for 300 Win Mag. The 7.62 X 51 is a Sniper Support system like the 5.56 x 45 was for the M24. SOCOM set a minium standard for Sniper Rifles that the 7.62 X 51 can not attain. Production numbers for the New 6.8 x 51 can't even be attained by Lake City and the facilities are expanding. The Army was forced to admit that they didn't have proper weaponry for IA with the emergency fix of retrofitting cold war 7.62 x 51 to be issued to DM's, not Senior Snipers.

 

[liber]

The MK22 comes with 3 barrels; 7.62x51, 300NM, 338NM, and five magasines for each

These are with a 7.62x51 barrel. Taken last yrar, November.

Would be interesting to know what the ratio of 7.62x51 vs 300NM or 338NM? That's a lot of kit to drag around for a 7.62x51, IMO. I would want at least the 300NM. I've heard a lot of rumors on what the military is using, but they seems to deploy a wide variety of calibers.

When you think about it, the 308 went through the same scrutiny that the 6.5 Creedmoor is, today. In the case of the 308, it seems that the 30-06 was hanging over it's head. It took a long time to prove itself, and it was often said that you get similar performance with better ballistics than 30-06. I used to shoot a friends M1 Garand quite a bit. I think that's a great rifle. Wouldn't be my first choice for hunting, but it would get the job done on any game, given good placement. But the 6.5 Creedmoor has a similar issue with the 308 hanging over it's head. On paper it has better ballistics, bucks the wind better, and provides similar performance...less recoil, less powder, smaller bullets that we're told do more damage. Some are not buying it...and it sounds very much like 7BC vs 7PRC, or 277 Fury vs XXX.

Sometimes you shoot what you brung...

 

[bigngreen]

So you have to build a custom rifle and hand load it to get .308 to perform- got it.

Even still: you need approx 2,600fps MV to launch a 220gr Berger fast enough to stay supersonic out to 1,500yds (unless your elevation is the moon).
One of the largest/fastest factory .308 ammo is Hornady Superperformance 178gr, which as MV 2,780 (26" barrel). Norma Bondstrike 180gr is 2,625. Nosler Accubond 200 is only 2,550.

What are the load specs you're using to launch a bullet that's 25% heavier but only 5% slower (vs Hornady's)? 34" barrel from Mt Everest? The pressure to push that load has got to be near 70k psi.

A throater and about 1 min of hand turning and your in business.
Laupua SPR brass and Varget with a Berger 215 at 2640 fps. 6000ft elevation.
I said set up for LRH, not taking some weak sauce range load off the shelf. You need an optic with serious dialing too!

 

[h_1ag]

Would be interesting to know what the ratio of 7.62x51 vs 300NM or 338NM? That's a lot of kit to drag around for a 7.62x51, IMO. I would want at least the 300NM. I've heard a lot of rumors on what the military is using, but they seems to deploy a wide variety of calibers.

When you think about it, the 308 went through the same scrutiny that the 6.5 Creedmoor is, today. In the case of the 308, it seems that the 30-06 was hanging over it's head. It took a long time to prove itself, and it was often said that you get similar performance with better ballistics than 30-06. I used to shoot a friends M1 Garand quite a bit. I think that's a great rifle. Wouldn't be my first choice for hunting, but it would get the job done on any game, given good placement. But the 6.5 Creedmoor has a similar issue with the 308 hanging over it's head. On paper it has better ballistics, bucks the wind better, and provides similar performance...less recoil, less powder, smaller bullets that we're told do more damage. Some are not buying it...and it sounds very much like 7BC vs 7PRC, or 277 Fury vs XXX.

Sometimes you shoot what you brung...

This got long, but I feel like it's important to note: I've got some issues with your comparison here and I'll explain why. .308 was developed as a shorter, lighter recoil round to better feed in full auto and semi-auto rifles vs .30-06 with "close enough" ballistic performance. It uses less powder than .30-06 and only comes close because .30-06 was handcuffed by legacy rifle actions in the field that couldn't handle new powders and modern (at the time) pressures. It was not intended to be a long distance bolt action cartridge. It was pigeon holed into that role after the military moved most issued semi auto rifles to 5.56 (after M14 and AR10 failure) and they needed something bigger than that for medium distance engagements, so it finally found a home. It was not built with that task in mind at all.

6.5 Creedmoor is nothing like that. It was not built with the intention of displacing .308 or 5.56 in the military. Hornady built it because no ammo manufacturers had really optimized a cartridge to suit long range shooting. Jon B Snow (love him or hate him) succinctly describes the bemoaned Creedmoor as the original "Modern Cartridge Design" that almost all new cartridges have adopted features of.
Military personnel have (independently) recognized the advantages (BC, wind drift, energy, etc.) and they've toyed with adopting it in many ways and in many units, but displacing any round in the military is near impossible because you've got millions of fudds that insist that you've got to use the same round that you've always used. And man buns don't meet hair regs.

So those are the main reasons I find the development and history of the 2 cartridges to be nothing alike, but I also think you're missing the mark on performance.
For shooting long range, .30-06 is superior to .308 in almost every way. They shoot the exact same bullets and one has more case capacity than the other. Same bullet starts faster; stays faster. Creedmoor is superior for longer range engagements for different reasons (BC, wind drift, down range energy).

 

[SSG Graybush]

Well, I've have used the 308 for decades, and some of those were in Nat'l Match in 600 yard prone and 800-1,000 yard Palma and some other. Wind reading is always part of LR shooting, and if one is not confident shooting a 308 past 500 yards because of wind reading, then I would suggest more study and practice in that field.

One of my 308 Palma and hunting loads will only drift 4.5" at 600 yards with a 10mph 90 degree crosswind. It would be a rarity if I blow a wind call by 10 mph and at 90 degrees.

Right but constant winds ain't the problem. Variable winds are. I'll use this example.
Am sitting at the 1000 yard line, its like ~65° with a 2 to 10 mph FV variable wind . I have a 6.5 cm and a 6.5 Grendel with me. The cm is shooting a 147 eldm g1 of .697 at 2798 fps(slow) and the Grendel is shooting a 123 gr Nos CC g1 .51 at 2500 fps. shooting at a 18" wide silhouette, both rifles were .6 moa ish. The cm was easy, hold just off edge, bang, but the Grendel wasn't. The variance in hold for 2 mph compared to 10 mph with the Grendel is greater then the width of the target. So holding for 6 mph wind didn't put all rds on target. Those numbers may be slightly off, but my point is hit probably is better with higher bc and speed due to less variation in wind drift. That's not opinion or apples to oranges, thats physics. As is energy, E=MC².
So to all you condescending, practice more, SWFA guys, your wrong. I know charge is hard but sorry, not sorry, the 308 is an intermediate range round.
And when I go to WY where it's most always windy a 308 win would never be my choice of cartridge.

 

[liber]

This got long

Agreed.

, but I feel like it's important to note: I've got some issues with your comparison here and I'll explain why. .308 was developed as a shorter, lighter recoil round to better feed in full auto and semi-auto rifles vs .30-06 with "close enough" ballistic performance. It uses less powder than .30-06 and only comes close because .30-06 was handcuffed by legacy rifle actions in the field that couldn't handle new powders and modern (at the time) pressures. It was not intended to be a long distance bolt action cartridge. It was pigeon holed into that role after the military moved most issued semi auto rifles to 5.56 (after M14 and AR10 failure) and they needed something bigger than that for medium distance engagements, so it finally found a home. It was not built with that task in mind at all.

6.5 Creedmoor is nothing like that.

It does seem the same to me, better ballistics than 308, shoots flatter, bucks the wind better, uses less powder, lighter bullets...and the 6.5 Creedmoor is pretty much what Hornady is doing with their PRC line, so it's working. The ammo is on the shelves to prove it.

It was not built with the intention of displacing .308 or 5.56 in the military.

That may be so, but that doesn't change the fact that it's happening.

 

[NotLongRange]

I think it is fine out 400-500 yards on elk sized game with 165+ grain bullets. Further with smaller game and 150 grain bullets. As a hunting round, I don't know that I would stretch it much beyond that.

 

[LRNut]

Right but constant winds ain't the problem. Variable winds are. I'll use this example.
Am sitting at the 1000 yard line, its like ~65° with a 2 to 10 mph FV variable wind . I have a 6.5 cm and a 6.5 Grendel with me. The cm is shooting a 147 eldm g1 of .697 at 2798 fps(slow) and the Grendel is shooting a 123 gr Nos CC g1 .51 at 2500 fps. shooting at a 18" wide silhouette, both rifles were .6 moa ish. The cm was easy, hold just off edge, bang, but the Grendel wasn't. The variance in hold for 2 mph compared to 10 mph with the Grendel is greater then the width of the target. So holding for 6 mph wind didn't put all rds on target. Those numbers may be slightly off, but my point is hit probably is better with higher bc and speed due to less variation in wind drift. That's not opinion or apples to oranges, thats physics. As is energy, E=MC².
So to all you condescending, practice more, SWFA guys, your wrong. I know charge is hard but sorry, not sorry, the 308 is an intermediate range round.
And when I go to WY where it's most always windy a 308 win would never be my choice of cartridge.

And don't forget about TOF - higher BC bullets at faster speed get there faster.

And to your point about practice: no one calls the wind perfectly every time. I know when I shoot my 308 at 500 yards a wind hold of .5 to 1 mrad (that is 1.8 to 3.6 MOA) is not unusual. Shooting a Lapua or a RUM, it is half that. So a 20% error in wind call (8 mph vs 10) with the 308 is .7 MOA (3.5 inches at 500 yards), which means I have to shoot 3 inch groups at 500 to have a 100% chance of hitting my 10" gong. With my Lapua's, etc., it is 1.5 inches, which means I can hit 100% of the time with a 7" group.

Another example: I brought my 308 to CO thinking it would be perfect to practice on my 623 yard gong, because I rarely miss that with my standard LR rifles - the wind has to be really blowing and even then, I am a bit stunned when I miss. The 308? Forget it; using it was just going to teach me bad habits when using my >500 yard rifles. When the wind wipes out mirage, you are only going to hit based on your experience shooting in that condition. In that video of the 875 yard shot, when I saw that tree blowing I thought "that is at least a 10 mph wind, and it is gusting." My initial thought was "at least 3 MOA using a Lapua."

I just watched that 875 yard shot again - not only was his wind call way off, but so was his elevation - he could have easily shot the jaw of that elk he was so far off. And the surprise that he made it? Tells me it was a hope and prayer.

 

[Calvin45]

I think some of the attempts to make it out that the .308 really isn't losing much to .30 cal and 7mm magnums, 6.5 cm and such, etc… are pretty obviously comparing a .308 loaded to the gills and with "mods" like longer throats, oals, long barrels maybe… and comparing that to factory saami spec over the counter ammo out of factory guns in other chamberings.

Reminds me of a thread a while back where the claim was that the .308 rendered the .30-06 obsolete, that it was the single greatest round there, etc, and then the argument was made on the basis of using the latest greatest powders, a high bc small manufacturer specialty bullet, a longer than spec OAL if I recall, and more or less pitting that carefully and optimally tuned loading to the old standard 180 grain soft point at 2700 out of the 30-06.

The .308 is awesome and it's strongest suit is how gosh darn CONSISTENT you can make it behave and how easy it is to find an accurate load and barrel life and shootability and ubiquity of components and ammo, it's as versatile as the day is long for all manner of tasks, a jack of all trades, eminently useful and practical.

But the only way it holds its own in any honest and realistic way against the 6.5 creed and similar rounds, the 7mms, and the .30 cal magnums (can't believe they even get compared, also not at all putting the 6.5cm in the same league as a 7 or 30 mag) AS A DEDICATED LONG RANGE ROUND is if you refuse to do an apples to apples comparison.

A while back I found a smoking .300 win mag combo, not SAAMI dimensions at all so if we wanna really compare apples to apples and put the .308 when optimized to exceed factory standard loadings against a .300 winny that's had the same treatment, have at it.

I got an HBN treated 200 grain smk (the newer version, lawndart haha) loaded long for single feed to hit 3100 fps with Rl25 and LAPUA brass. No pressure signs at all. 24 inch pipe plus a brake.

Of course factory .300 win mag ammo can "only" do 2960 with a 180, so a hot loaded custom .308 can sort of get close…well not really but anyways