Notes on the Centenerian

This reminds me of the discussion I had on Glock Talk about pistol cartridges. The 9mm fan boys could not grasp the concept that modern tech applies to the. 45 Auto as well as the 9mm. When I put up the load data, still many chimed in with the same brain washed banter: the modern 9mm outperforms the 45... The numbers don't lie, and neither does lethality data. Many a African has killed a waterbuck with a. 22 caliber rifle. Kinetic energy claims are well and good but load data and shot data in ft lbs or joules at range combined with field data is truth.
 
Core781 said:
This reminds me of the discussion I had on Glock Talk about pistol cartridges. The 9mm fan boys could not grasp the concept that modern tech applies to the. 45 Auto as well as the 9mm. When I put up the load data, still many chimed in with the same brain washed banter: the modern 9mm outperforms the 45... The numbers don't lie, and neither does lethality data. Many a African has killed a waterbuck with a. 22 caliber rifle. Kinetic energy claims are well and good but load data and shot data in ft lbs or joules at range combined with field data is truth.
Click to expand...
Can't tell you how many times I've gotten into THAT conversation with 9mm guys... I'll stick to what I feel most comfortable with toting...And that is a .357 Mag and a .45 Auto, because my 2 sub-comps are a S&W 340PD j-frame .357 Mag, and a S&W Shield 45. I've carried many others, but those are my most commonly carried over the years (10 years for the 340PD, and 3 for the Shield 45).

I also like the .357 Sig and 10mm Auto. The 9mm supporters really get ****ed when you bring up those 2 cartridges...Especially the .357 Sig, because they use the same bullets (.355") but are being pushed about 400-500 FPS faster. My Glock 31C .357 Sig pushes 125's at around 1600 FPS while holding 16+1 rounds. Talk about a great woods-walking/hunting backup. Also, lots of Federal agencies still tote the .357 Sig for those reasons. :cool:
 
MudRunner2005 said:
I just like to know specifics of why people think the way they do... I understand feelings and nostalgia, but sentimental value doesn't factor into ballistics, function, design, and terminal performance. It's quite obvious these days (especially after the 2016 election) that majority of people can no longer distinguish between feelings and facts. It's almost like a devolution of the human mind. Very scary stuff.
Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth! I touched on this in my comments about people trying to prove that their abc can kill an XYZ. Eventually they bring up the fact that a .22LR can kill a mature buck. It gets me a bit rankled.
 
fiftybmg said:
Just creating a new thread so as not to sidetrack the original threads where these posts occur.

In response to posts on other threads, where .308 / .30-06 are mentioned in the same context as being replaced by Creedmoor for hunting, and forum members are falling over each other to smugly high-five their Creedmoor marketing knowledge.

Creedmoor is not a hunting cartridge. High BC bullets for Creedmoor are not for hunting.

When you load hunting bullets in a Creedmoor, you lose one of the two pillars underlying it's performance, that of the BC superiority. With the superior BC, the bullets can fly longer to compensate for the shorter powder column. Take that away and you have a small caliber brush buster.

You can certainly use a Creedmoor to hunt, same as you could use any caliber ever invented for hunting. But we do not punt every caliber invented as hunting replacements for the .308 / 30-06.

The 30-06 and .308 were made for terminal performance, not for target shooting.

Comparing the three is invalid, and illustrates shooter ignorance, not cartridge superiority.
Click to expand...
 
I have to say,the big difference between what you can get out of either the 308 or 30-06 r'eally relies on the barrel and powder you run in either.Having both,my 26" barreled 308 was running around 2700fps with a 168gr Nosler Ballistic Tip with Varget.Tried Accurate 4064 and TAC and I found it was easy to get a little over 2800fps.I have a 22" barreled 30-06 struggles to get 2800fps with any powder I've tried with that same bullet.My 24" barreled 30-06's struggle to get 2900fps.My 28" PacNor barreled 30-06 can easily get over 3000fps.So it really depends.The 30-06 has a definite advantage over the 308,because the case is bigger.Anything you can burn in a 308,you can burn in the 30-06,but you can burn a lot of the slower powders with great results in the 30-06,but you would run out of room in the case for those slower powders in the 308 before you would get to a higher velocity.I would consider 4350 powder to be on the extreme slow side of powders for the 308,where Reloader-26 would be on the extreme slow side for the 30-06.So my thoughts on the two,it really depends......
 
I think the 30/06 is a wonderful cartridge and definitely has a place in my lineup.
Off the top of my head isn't the case capacity difference between the 308 and 3006 close to the difference between 3006 and 300win.
 
The old veteran of many wars has proved itself on the battlefields and really stands alone as a great cartridge. It replaced the .30-03, 6mm Lee Navy, and .30-40 Krag cartridges and the rest is history.
The venerable old cartridge was chambered in all the great military rifles both bolt action and semi auto plus a couple of machine guns as well as the BAR.
The .308 didn't come along until 1952 forty six years after the '06. So give the old veteran his due as he has earned a place in the history books that many cartridges will never gain.
 
MudRunner2005 said:
Here we go again.

21% more powder doesn't automatically equal 21% greater performance...Anyone who's ever played around with cartridges or wildcats can tell you that. Cartridge design, burn rates, should angle, wall taper, burn column, all of these factor into performance. The .30-06 still does a great job at what it does, but it's just old school, and the design is old school. The whole entire reason we have the .308 Win (7.62x51 NATO) is because the military wanted a .30 caliber cartridge that would produce .30-06 Sprg. performance in a smaller, lighter, more compact package...And the .308 Win did just that. That's why it exists. "New" designed cartridges (like the Ackleys) are just a much better case design. Scientific facts. Does the old still work? Absolutely. But it's not up to par with the "new" designs when it comes down to burn characteristics and performance. If the old school case designs were so extraordinary, why does nobody still use them when they design their new cartridges...? ;)

As for the 6.5CM, I'm pretty sure we all know where I stand on that one, and that I would not put it above the .308 or .30-06...Ever.

Also, I could see this thread getting really fun, really quickly. Can't wait for the festivities!!! :D
Click to expand...
Mudrunner your missing a little thinking the reason military moved to a 308 was weight of carrying 100 rds 308 was lighter so carry about 140 rds.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

B
On a more positive note...
Replies
0
Views
1K
Buzzsaw
B
foul bore
Note of Appreciation
Replies
0
Views
510
foul bore
foul bore
R
A note for everyone.
Replies
10
Views
2K
speedbump
speedbump
royinidaho
Shooting Angle Note.
Replies
1
Views
2K
MT4XFore
M
Ajwatts88
On the fence
2
Replies
14
Views
2K
Hespco
Hespco

Recent Posts

Top