Sign in to follow this  
tinderwolf

30-06

Recommended Posts

hi all

the 3006 is the only round ever to change the battle tactics of not 1 but 2 world wars.308 has less than 1/2

of penetration.ww1 germans pushed a metal plate in front of them,the brits using a 303 enfield i believe is a 7.62x51 and the french would only ricohet.this tactic worked well till the americans came in with the1903 3006.the germans lost many soldiers,till they changed that tactic.in ww2 , the german prisoners that were questioned of why they surrendered , was because of the 3006 in american hands.these americans just came out of the great depression,each shot counted.best bet is to shoot these rounds into a container 3ft sq.full of sand.shoot a tree that is so big 2 men can't reach around it.then compare. but don't use the 150 grain bullet,i would use the 180 grain,but not less than 174.the 8x57 is close.the 300 win mag-338 win-mag and a few others are more powerful,but if they are one of them that are,i can't afford to feed the gun,or buy the gun.308 ,7.62x51 or 54 only compare in accuracy,not penetration.unless you use the 150 grain.i have most of the testing abilities where i live.but if you flench on kick,then you may need a lighter cal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

enfields were chambered in british .303 which had similar ballistics to the 30.06 same with german 8mm and russian 7.62x54R. and it wasnt the round that was used as much as the fact that Americans were just natural marksmen as it was part of our national psyche to be marksmen, also .308 or 7.62x51 as you put it will penetrate metal plating easily, whoever told you that story is living in a falsehood. im nto knocking 30.06 but .308 should not be discounted as underperforming by any means as it probably more common now than 30.06 with just about the same capabilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my openion it is the best all around cartridge in the world. I'm not sure what all is out there right now but I used to have factory loads from 55 gr varmint loads through 220 gr moose busters. With Barnes solids in custom loads there isn't and animal on earth that it won't take down.

 

Danm,

more friendships have been ended with statements like that than with 'which girl is prettier'!:rolleyes:

 

It would be interesting to know whether the .30-06 or the .30-30 has put more venison on the table over the years. The 30-30 has had a longer run and the .30-06 has had more competition but I suspect it would be close. I've got some raffle tickets for a local charity that may net me a .30-06. If I don't win I may buy the kids dream. There is a lot to be said for that.

 

I remember seeing some numbers so I checked the Remington ammo site for ballistics.

http://www.remington.com/comparison.aspx

 

The results do seem to favor the .30-06 but the differences are rather small. The comparisons are the kind of thing that really can not matter to anyone except a match shooter with a special rifle, using precision everything at distances. One round is better at some distances than the other, but really is the difference between 1269 and 1362 ft-lbs at 400 yards noticeable to the average shooter? Is an impact point that is .2 inches higher at 400 yards noticeable to a hunter taking a shot in the field?

 

I STILL want a .30-06 - a kid should fill his dream list if possible. I suspect that locality will determine which round is more available. I tend to not get too concerned about such things unless the availability is zero. Back when even the big mail order places took 6 months to get .380 auto it was a concern. If you have the weapon, get a solid supply of ammo (300 to 1000 rds depending on your needs and funding) to get through any interruptions in supply.

 

Like the 30-30, the 30-06 is an AMERICAN classic and as such, deserves respect. The fact that each of them have done the jobs asked of them for over a century says a lot about this country; or at least the way it was.

 

Just my not so humble opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi all

wardog yes the popularity the 308 is more popular.but that doesn't make it better.yes the us soldiers were very good shots at that period of time.but i know your taking the word of others.cause if you actually tested them we wouldn't be having this conversation.as far as false stories , your wrong again.1 of the men asking the questions , was my dad.my 8mm is 8x57.test in wet sand , dry sand BIG oak tree.when you test it you'll know better.that's like comparing a 357 to a 38 spl.but when using the 06 don't use the 150 grain bullet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never fired a garand but I have a 30-06 bolt gun. Repeat shot can be difficult off hand with this round. I have much respect for the soldiers that went to fight with the garand. I personally like the 308 better. Not much 30-06 can do that a 308 cant in the real world. Plus the 308 has noticably less recoil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok blacjac please enlighten me with your experience and background on this then? because I have done more than just taken others at their word for it. basically you have already proven yourself wrong with your story of british enfields being chambered in a bullet that wasn't even designed yet when they were supposedly tested. the .308 wasn't even introduced until 1952. the enfields you saw were aftermarket rechambered in .308. I have a lot of years of experience behind rifles that fired these rounds both growing up with a father who was an instructor on the garand in the army and in the USMC myself and comrades in the srevice who swear by this round and have shot this round to its limits I have shot these rounds much further than "60 yards" you are bragging about. also since you aren't going to take my word for it then why is the .308 with its severe under performance the standard with US military snipers as well as the most popular all around hunting round today, not too mention it has pretty much edged out the 30.06 in most high power rifle competitions. usually performing better against its big brother. these aren't my opinion but fact. again show me where the .308 cannot perforate 1/4" steel plate even at distances of 100 yards or more. if you look that the FPS and foot lbs for each round at leaving the barrel the differences are minute at best. A 150gr nosler in .308 is leaving the barrel at 2800fps , a 150gr nosler tip in 30.06 is leaving the barrel at 2900fps, are you really going to argue a difference of 100 fps for the ranges 90% of the people firing both these cartridges at? because unless you are pushing the thousand yard effective range of these rounds then they are essentially both performing the same. with the bullet drop on the .308 only slightly more than a 30.06 and you wont start seeing that till 500 yds and out. what is the maximum range you have fired either of these bullets?

 

go get yourself a steel plate of 1/4" thickness and then fire a .308 round into it at 60 yds and tell me if it goes through or bounces off. Id like to hear what it does for you.

 

I'm not the worlds leading expert on bullets and ballistics or even firearms but i have been shooting a variety of rifles and handguns since an early age backed up by professional military marksmanship training as well as a lot of personnel development and listening to people who really knew their stuff about this sort of thing as well as being a huge history buff when it comes to firearms. so please don't tell me I'm wrong unless you are have some proof to back it up. If you can prove your statements ill be the first to eat crow and apologize to you up one side and down the other

 

 

personally I love both rounds they are both proven bullets that can take down man or beast :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldnt have said it better Wardog. Blacjac, 7.62x51mm/.308 Win is not only the U.S.'s standard sniper round but the majority of the worlds military and law enforcement prefered sniper round this is verified by a quick and simple online search The Lee Enfields that have been converted were converted from the Brit .303 to 7.62X51 Nato by the Indian Army at their Ishapore facility I will back that up with this from Jane's Military Firearms which is also quoted by Wikipedia

\

Ishapore 2A/2A1

 

Main article: Rifle 7.62mm 2A1

 

Ishapore 2A1.

At some point just after the Sino-Indian War of 1962, the Ishapore Rifle Factory in India began producing a new type of rifle known as the Rifle 7.62 mm 2A, which was based on the SMLE Mk III*[72] and was slightly redesigned to use the 7.62 mm NATO round. Externally the new rifle is very similar to the classic Mk III*, with the exception of the front sight protectors and magazine, which is more "square" than the SMLE magazine, and usually carries twelve rounds instead of ten,[73] although a number of 2A1s have been noted with 10-round magazines.

 

Ishapore 2A and Ishapore 2A1 receivers are made with improved (EN) steel (to handle the increased pressures of the 7.62 mm NATO round)[74] and the extractor is redesigned to suit the rimless cartridge. From 1965–1975 (when production is believed to have been discontinued), the sight ranging graduations were changed from 2000 to 800, and the rifle re-designated Rifle 7.62 mm 2A1.[75] The original 2,000 yards (1,800 m) rear sight arm was found to be suitable for the ballistics of the 7.62x51 NATO which is around 10% more powerful which equates to a flatter trajectory than that of the .303 British MkVII ammunition, so it was a simple matter to think of the '2000' as representing metres rather than yards. It was then decided that the limit of the effective range was a more realistic proposition at 800 m.

 

In addition the differences ballistically and terminally between the 30-06 and the .308 Win are so minor in factory loads they are considered by most experts for practical applications twins ("The cartridge itself offers similar ballistic performance in most firearms to the .30-06 Springfield that it replaced in U.S. service. Though shorter, standard loadings fire similar bullet weights with only a slight reduction in velocity. Modern propellants allowed for similar performance from a case with less capacity. The smaller case requires less brass and yields a shorter cartridge. This shorter cartridge allows a slight reduction in the size and weight of firearms that chamber it, and somewhat better cycling in automatic and semi-automatic rifles" "WIKI") , the real differences comes in the action size, breech pressure and carry ability in which the .308 aces the 30-06 the shorter the action the faster the reload that goes for bolts, levers and semi auto's also the shorter the action the shorter the weapon a 30-06 bolt action rifle with a 20" barrel is an inch and a half to 2" (depending on the Manufacturer) longer than a .308 with the same barrel length in addition by bringing the breech closer to the shooter it gives the weapon better balance aiding in increasing overall accuracy (this info can be found in even the most basic sharpshooting and sniping books).

Edited by warrior7r

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After some statements got me curious I contacted Herr Hans Kohler of the Deutsches Historisches Museum, in Berlin. I got this response I post this for historical correctness

 

Redacted,

Sir, you posed an interesting question upon further research we found no mention of the use of Steel Plates as shields by individual soldiers against small arms fire officially sanctioned, recomended or used in mass during the period of the First World War while individual units may have attempted such a thing, there is not an official record of it. Which would indicate it was either ineffective or impractical for any number of reasons. As to the effectiveness of the various small arms of the allies of the time versus that of the Imperial Prussian Army. I point out that the allies held the Imperial Prussian Army in a stalemate which forced a state of trench warfare that was relatively unaltered for years until after American Expeditionary forces arrived.I hope this has answered your questions. If I can be of further assitance please let me know.

 

Respectfully,

Herr Hans Kohler

Assistant Historian

Deutsches Historisches Museum

Unter Der Linden 2

10117 Berlin Mitte

Edited by warrior7r

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
After some statements got me curious I contacted Herr Hans Kohler of the Deutsches Historisches Museum, in Berlin. I got this response I post this for historical correctness

 

Redacted,

Sir, you posed an interesting question upon further research we found no mention of the use of Steel Plates as shields by individual soldiers against small arms fire officially sanctioned, recomended or used in mass during the period of the First World War while individual units may have attempted such a thing, there is not an official record of it. Which would indicate it was either ineffective or impractical for any number of reasons. As to the effectiveness of the various small arms of the allies of the time versus that of the Imperial Prussian Army. I point out that the allies held the Imperial Prussian Army in a stalemate which forced a state of trench warfare that was relatively unaltered for years until after American Expeditionary forces arrived.I hope this has answered your questions. If I can be of further assitance please let me know.

 

Respectfully,

Herr Hans Kohler

Assistant Historian

Deutsches Historisches Museum

Unter Der Linden 2

10117 Berlin Mitte

frigging awesome man and laid that to rest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to go further afield but if you can get your hands on one of the Ishapore Enfields post 1965 that were purpose built for .308, I recommend doing so. Reinforced steel, slick action, and usually accurate, these rifles are also a steal at $200.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to go further afield but if you can get your hands on one of the Ishapore Enfields post 1965 that were purpose built for .308, I recommend doing so. Reinforced steel, slick action, and usually accurate, these rifles are also a steal at $200.

 

buddy of mine let me shoot an enfield jungle carbine chambered in .308 he picked up for $100 it was a blast to shoot. I told him i wanted first dibs if he ever decided to sell it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this