.308 Win vs. .30-06 — Match Results May Surprise You
The .308 Winchester, a shortened version of the .30-06, has almost completely replaced the .30-06 in NRA competition. The .308 is required for Palma shooting, so it is also used by many Palma competitors in other long-range and mid-range prone matches. However, with the exception of M1 Garand matches, you won’t see many .30-06 rifles on the firing lines. Does that mean the .30-06 is obsolete? Is the .308 Win really much more accurate? Or does it just offer the advantages of reduced recoil and reduced powder consumption?
Cartridge photos courtesy Deuce45s.com, a leading source of specialized military cartridges.
In his Sibling Rivalry: .308 vs. .30-06 article on the Rifleman’s Journal site, German Salazar argues that the .30-06 remains a viable competition cartridge, particularly for the long-range game. This isn’t just a subjective opinion. German has data to back up the argument that the .30-06 can still do the job.
German compares the actual scores produced by his .308 Win rifles with the scores from his .30-06 rifles. German analyzes scores, over a two-year period, shot by “matched pair” rifles (one in each caliber) with similar actions, stocks, sights, and barrels. For comparison purposes, German also includes score data from his 6XC, a modern low-recoil chambering.
RESULTS: .308 Has Small Edge at Middle Distance, But .30-06 Is Better at Long Range
Surprisingly, the .30-06 performed nearly as well as the .308 at middle distances. The .30-06 delivered 99.2% of max possible scores vs. 99.5% for the .308 Win. Notably, at 1000 yards, the .30-06 racked up 97.7% of max scores vs. 97.3% for the .308 Win. So, at 1000 yards, the .30-06 actually proved superior to the .308 Win. German explains: “This isn’t too surprising when one considers [the .308’s] limited case capacity for the bullet weights typically used in Long-Range shooting. They just run out of steam and dip perilously close to the transonic range as they approach 1000 yards of flight. The extra 150 fps or so that can be safely obtained from the .30-06 case really pays off at 1000 yards.”
|
Mid-Range Comparison .308 – 597-36X (99.5%), 960 rounds fired If we look at the score averages, the .308 comes out on top at the Mid-Range distances… by 0.3% of the possible score. By the way, notice that the 6XC, as good as it is, simply straddles the .30 caliber cartridges; it is not the winner. Long-Range Comparison In NRA Long-Range and Palma matches, the average percentage of possible score for each cartridge at 1000 yards was as follows: 6XC – 98.9%, 360 rounds fired Editor’s Note: Among the three cartridges German studied, the 6XC actually proved best at 1000 yards, delivering 98.9% of the maximum possible scores. The .30-06 was second-best with 97.7%, slightly better than the .308 Win at 97.3%. |
You’ll want to read German’s full Sibling Rivalry article, which includes an interesting history of the .30-06 and .308 in High Power shooting, along with tables showing German’s actual scores with his .30-06, .308 Win, and 6XC rifles.
Similar Posts:
- Match Results for .308 Win vs. .30-06 — Surprising Findings
- “Forgotten” IMR 4320 Powder Yields Great Results
- Palma Shooting — What Calibers Are Permitted?
- Long Range Matches at Camp Atterbury This Week
- Ladies Triumph in Arizona. Savage Shocks Shooters.
Share the post ".308 Win vs. .30-06 — Match Results May Surprise You"
Tags: .30-06 Springfield, .308 Winchester, 1000 Yards, German Salazar, high power, Palma
German could outshoot most of us with a pellet gun. It doesn’t seem to matter what caliber he uses!!!
curious as to which bullet he was firing in both the 308 and 06?
Eric, that’s very kind of you but maybe somewhat optimistic!
Ajax, a large variety of bullets: Sierra 155, 168, 180, 190, Berger 155.5, 175, 190 VLD, 210, Lapua 185, Western 197, Cauterucio 200, and I’m sure a few others. I like to shoot a big variety, especially in the .30-06.
Having used the 6 mm calibers (especially the 6XC) for over five years in F-Class Open competition, the qualitative edge this caliber has had over the .30 calibers has been gradually eroded as the quality of projectiles for the .30 calibers has improved to the point where they are as good as the 6 mm projectiles now available. Recoil fatigue in the .30 calibers is still the major disadvantage the .30 calibers have against the 6 mm calibers. Barrel life in the 6 mm calibers has also been improved with better projectiles, new powder formulations, better barrel dynamics and cleaning products. In the final analysis, it boils down to the operator, especially in wind reading skills for both calibers that will determine the winning outcome.
I’m glad someone finally did a modern comparison of these two. I have long contended that the reason that people believed that the .308 was more accurate than the .30-06 was because in two nearly identical rifles firing the same bullet, if one is long action and one is a short action, then the short-action, .308 will have a lower LOCKTIME, which is very difficult for the average shooter to test, but important for accuracy.
Realistically, the .30-06 should outperform the .308 if both attain the same velocity, because the higher case capacity will allow for the use of a bullet with a higher BC and equal velocity, or higher velocity if both use the same bullet, all other things being equal.
A trivial point….however the matched pair of actions are Gilkes-Ross actions I believe. The original Gilkes actions were round receivers and quite large in diameter and were aluminum with a steel insert. Tony supplied a unique bedding block with the actions.I could be wrong but perhaps German can clarify.
Roy
im just reading the comparisons between the 30-06 and .308 and concluded that either is a fine round for most deer but was wondering does either caliber work in short barrel of maybe 20″ inches or so
The edge the .308 displayed at mid range .3 was described as small the difference between the two at 1000 was .4 and this this is superior?
Have always been curious about how these two great rounds compare. Thanks for a very helpful review.
Chip, .3 at mid range is considered small but .4 at to 1000 yards is considered a good difference because we are talking 1000 yards
I have just bought a Remington 700 Long Range in 30-06. This rifle comes standard with the Bell & Carlson medalist aluminum block stock. I have had the stock in letter to accept a 28″ heavy barrel with a 1:11 twist rate. I have had the action and bolt blue printed too. I am shooting 47 grains of H4895 under a 168 grain SMK HPBT, all cases are HXP and are necked turned to 13 thousandths. I am getting sub half inch groups at 100 yrds. I am able to maintain this also at 300. I am very satisfied with this rifle and
I like both and see little reason for picking one over the other. The 308 short action and 3006 long action with a half century between them…times change. Though it is much like my SB Chevy vs my SB Ford debate. Chevy in 1955 and Ford in the early 60’s. As a retired gunsmith/PD armorer many newer guys forget the old 06 is loaded for older guns. Hand loads can achieve much higher velocities SAFELY! Just do not put them in Gramps’ old wall hanger.
From looking at the results. It would appear that he decided which caliber he wanted to win that range and fired fewer rounds than the other caliber. I am willing to bet that he looked at the scores at a certain point and found a minuscule difference. So he fired more rounds through the caliber he had already decided was the loser before he even fired one shot. The only true comparison would be the same number of rounds for each caliber at each range. At mid range he fired more than twice as many 30-06 as .308 rounds. At long range the difference was not so great, but still enough to skew the results any way he may wish to make it move.
Lets see a test where the same number of rounds are fired from each at these ranges, by more than one shooter.
Mr. Vangordan,
Since you are calling Mr. German’s work into contest, I suggest it is upon you to produce the statistics that bear out your objections! I don’t see any data from you here. Don’t get me wrong, I welcome your data and will treat you with as much respect as I think you owe Mr. German. I simply will not see others disrespected because someone thinks their results are cooked, without proof!
I’m currently more on .338wm and .338lm but have been loading 3006 for hunting using bullets up to 220gr. It is no doubt that the larger case gives more opportunities for the home reloader to get longer bullets with higher BC out at higher V0. This is the same differences that you see about .338WM versus .338LM
I’m sure I’m pointing out the obvious to many handloaders out there, but I’ve noticed that all too often manufacturers do not load certain calibers to their full potential for certain tasks. For example, save for some smaller companies like Underwood, the bigger companies no longer load .357 Magnum self protection cartridges in terms of energy as warm as their 10mm offerings. Like .30-06 Springfield over the .308 Winchester, the .357 Magnum has the potential for more energy than a 10mm, so why are these companies minimizing the former’s potential? In my opinion it was and still is about selling more 10mm firearms which have not caught up to .357 Magnum sales historically (though that may be changing).
Handloaders, however, being able to load exactly what they want have thus discovered that a lot of the claims comparing various calibers are often untrue in their experience. As it pertains to .308 vs. .30-06, the latter had been a staple for decades and never needed replacing in the hunting world, so opinions were skewed in my opinion to show favor to the .308 for many years. Now we’re seeing similar bias starting to emerge favoring 6.5 Creedmoor in hunting situations after the .308 market became saturated for some time. For example, the Canadian Arctic Rangers adopted a Tikka chambered in .308 for polar bear protection back in 2014 (https://www.guns.com/news/2015/06/26/canadian-arctic-rangers-get-new-rifle-for-polar-bear-defense). Years later, Tikka only offers one other caliber for this purpose— the 6.5 Creedmoor (https://choose.tikka.fi/global/tikka/t3x-arctic). Now I am the first person to admit that a .30-06, .270 and even a 308 is all you need for hunting brown bear (just check the Alaska Game and Fish website where they make the same claim: http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=hunting.firearms), but the lighter 6.5 Creedmoor bullets seem like a stretch if a rifle company marketing a bolt-action rifle for polar bear work limits their offerings to only two calibers. I understand that polar bear protection is different than grizzly bear hunting, for example, where and exit wound is helpful to ensure a blood trail, but it still seems a little odd to me that the 6.5 Creedmoor should appear as one of only two calibers meant for this use. Anyway, that’s just my opinion.