HuntingNut
HuntingNut
   Login or Register
HomeCommunity ForumsPhoto AlbumsRegister
     
 

User Info

Welcome Anonymous


Membership:
Latest: Yt_Nelson
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 2
Overall: 12383

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 185
BOT: 3
Total: 188
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Photo Albums
02: Photo Albums
03: Forums
04: Forums
05: Forums
06: Forums
07: Forums
08: Forums
09: Photo Albums
10: Forums
11: Forums
12: Forums
13: Forums
14: Forums
15: Forums
16: Forums
17: Photo Albums
18: Photo Albums
19: Forums
20: Forums
21: Forums
22: Your Account
23: Forums
24: Forums
25: Forums
26: Your Account
27: Forums
28: News
29: Forums
30: Forums
31: Forums
32: Forums
33: Forums
34: Photo Albums
35: Photo Albums
36: Forums
37: Forums
38: Photo Albums
39: Photo Albums
40: Forums
41: Forums
42: Forums
43: Forums
44: Forums
45: Your Account
46: Photo Albums
47: Photo Albums
48: Forums
49: Forums
50: Photo Albums
51: Forums
52: Your Account
53: Photo Albums
54: Forums
55: Photo Albums
56: Forums
57: Forums
58: Forums
59: Home
60: Photo Albums
61: Forums
62: Photo Albums
63: Photo Albums
64: Forums
65: Forums
66: Forums
67: Forums
68: Forums
69: Forums
70: Photo Albums
71: Forums
72: Forums
73: Your Account
74: Forums
75: Forums
76: Forums
77: Forums
78: Forums
79: Forums
80: Forums
81: Forums
82: Your Account
83: Forums
84: Forums
85: Forums
86: Your Account
87: Forums
88: Forums
89: Forums
90: Photo Albums
91: Forums
92: Forums
93: Your Account
94: Photo Albums
95: Forums
96: Photo Albums
97: Home
98: Forums
99: Forums
100: Forums
101: Forums
102: Photo Albums
103: Photo Albums
104: Forums
105: Your Account
106: Photo Albums
107: Your Account
108: Forums
109: Forums
110: Forums
111: Forums
112: Photo Albums
113: Forums
114: Forums
115: Forums
116: Your Account
117: Photo Albums
118: Photo Albums
119: Forums
120: Photo Albums
121: Forums
122: Forums
123: Forums
124: Forums
125: Forums
126: Forums
127: Forums
128: Forums
129: Forums
130: Forums
131: Forums
132: Forums
133: Forums
134: Forums
135: News
136: Forums
137: Forums
138: Home
139: Photo Albums
140: Forums
141: Photo Albums
142: Forums
143: Forums
144: Forums
145: Forums
146: Forums
147: Forums
148: Forums
149: Forums
150: Forums
151: Forums
152: Forums
153: Forums
154: Forums
155: Photo Albums
156: Forums
157: Photo Albums
158: Photo Albums
159: Photo Albums
160: Forums
161: Home
162: Photo Albums
163: Forums
164: Photo Albums
165: Forums
166: Your Account
167: Forums
168: Photo Albums
169: Forums
170: Forums
171: Forums
172: Forums
173: Forums
174: Photo Albums
175: Forums
176: Forums
177: Photo Albums
178: News
179: Forums
180: Forums
181: Photo Albums
182: Photo Albums
183: Forums
184: Forums
185: Forums
  BOT:
01: Your Account
02: Forums
03: Treasury

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
 

Coppermine Stats
Photo Albums
 Albums: 312
 Pictures: 2417
  · Views: 250125
  · Votes: 1255
  · Comments: 86
 

Support our Advertisers

  The Great .308 versus .30-06 Debate

ShootingThe Great .308 versus .30-06 Debate
A chat room discussion got me looking hard at the “.308 Winchester vs. .30-06 Springfield” debate. My contention was that there was no significant difference between the ballistics of the two in hunting situations, or for that matter in any other situation. So let’s examine the ballistics of both cartridges and compare.
First we’ll take a quick look at the history of both cartridges. The .30-06 Springfield started life as a US military cartridge in 1906. It was derived from the “.30 Model 1903” cartridge that was designed to replace the .30-40 Krag. The ’03 cartridge used the same 220 grain round nosed bullet as the .30-40. The ’06 is essentially the same case as the ’03 with a 150 grain spitzer bullet at 2800 ft/sec. The .30-06 was the primary cartridge for the US military until it was “replaced” by the .308 Winchester/7.62x51mm NATO in 1954. The .308’s original load was a 149 grain spitzer at 2800 ft/sec. Both cartridges have certainly been very successful in military, match and hunting use! (Reference “Handloading” by William C. Davis, Jr.)

To quote the Speer #13 manual, “In the hunting field, ballistic differences between the 308 and the 30-06 are negligible.” The .308 was designed to duplicate the .30-06 for military use, but in a half inch shorter package. Both guns use the same 0.308” bullets. These bullets range from 100 grains to 250 grains in various styles. I figured that the .30-06 would have an advantage as the bullets get over 180 grains because its case was originally designed for the heavier bullets.
The most common hunting bullet weights for these cartridges are the 150, 165 and 180 grain. I realize that there are tons of loads for each cartridge but you’ve gotta start somewhere. I looked in the Speer #13 manual and compared their loads for both cartridges. I figure this is a pretty good comparison as loads for both cartridges were fired in the same type rifle, a Remington 700 with a 22” barrel. In each case I took the bullet with the highest ballistic coefficient and the highest velocity listed.

Here is a chart of the muzzle velocities for each bullet for both cartridges, the difference between them (.30-06 minus .308) and the percentage of that difference:
Bullet weight .308 .30-06 Difference %
150 2919 2847 -72 ft/sec -2.5
165 2812 2803 -9 ft/sec -0.3
180 2623 2756 133 ft/sec 4.8

From the chart we can see that the average difference in velocities for the three bullets is 17 ft/sec, or 0.6%, in favor of the .30-06. Now don’t forget that these are average velocities. In a string of shots a cartridge/gun’s velocity can easily have a standard deviation of 1% or more. In other words the normal variations in loads result in a built-in error that pretty much means we can’t count on such a small difference to be meaningful.

So, what does all this mean downrange? We’ll zero both guns at 200 yards and compare the bullet energy there. Let’s also take a look at what the bullets will be doing at 400 yards, which is a heck of a long shot for hunting. I used the “PointBlank” ballistics program to make the comparisons.

With the 150 grain bullet the .308 has 2093 foot-pounds of energy at 200 yards while the .30-06 has 1985 foot-pounds. Out at 400 yards the .308 will have dropped 20.9 inches, and still has 1512 foot-pounds. The .30-06 will have dropped 22.13 inches and maintains 1428 foot-pounds. The .308 shows 5.9% more energy at 400 yards.

Then with the 165 grain bullet 200 yards the .308 shows 2202 foot-pounds versus 2187 foot-pounds for the .30-06. At 400 yards the .308 drops 21.90 inches and has 1645 foot-pounds. The .30-06 drops 22.06 inches with 1633 foot-pounds left. At 400 yards the .308 has a tiny 0.7% energy advantage.

Finally we take the 180 grain bullet, which should give the biggest advantage to the .30-06. At the 200 yard mark the .308 will have an energy of 2143 foot-pounds and the .30-06 will have 2379 foot-pounds. The .30-06 has about 11% more energy. When we get out to 400 yards the .308 will be 24.64 inches low and still have 1647 foot-pounds while the .30-06 will be 22.10 inches low and still carry 1840 foot-pounds. That means that at 400 yards the .30-06 has an 11.7% advantage in energy.

Now I’m sure that folks will look up their favorite of these two and “prove” that it is better in some manual or another. I looked in some other manuals too and found varying velocities. One thing I noticed in one manual was that, with 250 grain bullets (yes, that is two hundred and fifty grains), there was only 100 feet per sec difference in the velocities of the two cartridges. That particular manual doesn’t give any barrel lengths though.

Just for giggles I also looked at the .270 Winchester and .280 Remington loads in the same Speer manual. With a 22” barrel and a 150 grain bullet at 2907 feet per second the .270 has 2170 foot-pounds at 200 yards and 1648 foot-pounds at 400 yards, while dropping 19.98 inches. The .280, with a 24” barrel and a 145 grain bullet at 2975 feet per second, shows 2209 foot-pounds at 200 yards and 1689 foot-pounds at 400 yards, while dropping 18.83”. So, both of these cartridges “beat” the .30 caliber rounds in energy and trajectory.

When it’s all said and done does either the .308 or the .30-06 really have any ballistic advantage over the other? I’ll concede that an 11% difference in energy with the 180 grain bullet is an advantage but I wonder if a deer on the receiving end tell the difference between 1647 and 1840 foot-pounds of energy? Considering the overall differences and performance of both cartridges I’ll stick to my assertion that there is no SIGNIFICANT ballistic advantage with either cartridge. Now just pick which ever you like and enjoy shooting it!

Posted by Pumpkinslinger on Tuesday, October 16, 2007 (18:29:48) (30320 reads) [ Administration ]
Related Links
 More about Shooting

Most read story about Shooting:
BUILDING THE SWEDISH MAUSER SPORTER
 

Article Rating
Average Score: 4.62
Votes: 45


Please take a second and vote for this article:

Excellent
Very Good
Good
Regular
Bad

 

 


Valid CSS! Valid HTML 4.01!
Click to check if this page is realy HTML 4.01 compliant for speed :)

All logos and trademarks in this site are property of HuntingNut.com.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2011 by HuntingNut.com
Interactive software released under GNU GPL, Code Credits, Privacy Policy

.: Upgraded to DragonFly 9.2 by Dizfunkshunal :.