the case against 308

>>32537450
I just shoot for fun man, any difference between the two is far less noticeable than user error.

>>32537466
What do you shoot for fun? If it's just paper, then you can use any caliber under the sun. If it's animals, both you and the animals you shoot would be better served by a faster bullet.

It's not really a secret that most of the cartridges around .308 perform better, but they haven't been standardized by the military. .308 is still a very capable round on its own, so it's firmly in the "good enough" category.

>>32537532
>military
The military doesn't use expanding bullets, so impact velocity is a moot point for them.

>>32537522
>both you and the animals you shoot would be better served by a faster bullet.

I guarantee you a deer will not notice the difference between a .308, a 30-30, and a .30-06 going through the same place in its heart or lungs at 100 yards.


loljkonly3030.jpg

30-30 shoots a 170gr bullet at ~2,000ft/s. 308 shoots a 175gr bullet at ~2700ft/s. 30-06 shoots a 175gr at ~2800ft/s. 300WM shoots a 175gr at ~3000ft/s (though you would be better to use a 190/208/210/215 for long range. So, how are you comparing the 308 to be more akin to a 30-30 than a 30-06?

Tikka is, I believe, fairly unique in the aspect that their action lengths are all the same and they just change the bolt stop and internal mag size.

Modern bullet construction has come a long way and taking an elk with 308 is fine. If you need more than a 308, you'd be much better off with 300WM or 7mmRM for hunting purposes.

>>32537572
>Tikka is, I believe, fairly unique in the aspect that their action lengths are all the same and they just change the bolt stop and internal mag size.
The point is that standard length actions can still be light and handy.

>308 shoots a 175gr bullet at ~2700ft/s
No, it doesn't. I know the ballistic tables say it does, but the chronograph says otherwise. Heavier bullets have longer shanks, which intrude into your case capacity. 180 grain bullets are no problem for the 30-06, but a 308 with a 22 inch barrel (commonly found on hunting rifles) is lucky to make 2500 fps in that bullet weight. By the time the bullet gets where it's going, it'll be lucky to be above 2300 fps.

>Modern bullet construction has come a long way and taking an elk with 308 is fine. If you need more than a 308, you'd be much better off with 300WM or 7mmRM for hunting purposes.
I prefer 270 Win myself. 130 grains may sound like a small bullet, but the 270 is faster at 200 yards than a 308 is at the muzzle. Speed kills, my friend.

>>32537522
That's the same as the difference between math and engineering when it comes to .99999999 and 1.0. Math demands that the two are different, engineering says the difference doesn't matter, so they're the same.

>>32537733
It's the difference between using the best tools available and using what's just adequate.

>>32537757
Adequate is far more cost effective than best tools available.

>>32537450
I don't think it's been any kind of hidden secret that .308 pales in comparison to .30-06 when reloading or using hunting loads.

Hunting loads for .308 tend to be near the military specifications for the round (were the milspec is near the upper limits of the cartridge). .30-06 military loadings are light, limited mostly by the garand. It is an older cartridge who when it was in military use, the powders were not as advanced as modern powders. Modern hunting loads while not unsafe are good for the wear on an action.

.308 was designed to mimic the military loadings, not the upper end potential of the cartridge, using new powders that were not available 50 years earlier.

The .30-06 has more case capacity and can be loaded to the same pressure. That said, the difference is insignificant. Properly made bullets expand just fine at hunting distances with even .300 blackout power levels. Moreover, there's no military I know of that jumps from .308 to .30-06 simply because it makes no sense to do so when Magnum calibers exist that can fit the same action.

As for your personal rifle, your beef is with a long action rifle chambered short. Get a more expensive rifle or live with the minor ineffeciency. Hell, have the throat opened up and load long.

I personally hate .30 calibers in general, but their effectiveness is indesputable.

>>32537681
I don't mean to derail, but what chronograph do you use?

I like to load lighter weight .30-06 to get, according to the reloading manuals, 3200+ fps.

I haven't taken any animals, but I have noticed how much of a drop there is with 30-30 vs .30-06.

>>32537733
Actually, .9999999999999 repeating is, mathematically speaking, the exact same thing as 1.

>>32538034
What you are questing for is a 25-06.

>>32537681

I've chrono'd my reloads and factory loads. It does. Ballistics calculators and POI confirm. I've reload pretty light at 42gr of 4064 and I'm still getting easily >2600ft/s out of my 22" tikka.

>>32538125
me

>>32537681
Sure, speed does kill but it also burns barrels much faster. If you're going to go down this road, how about arguing for 26 Nosler, 204 Ruger, 220 Swift, 22-250 etc?

>>32538101
I inherited something to close to it, I think.

270 weatherby, but I don't want to take the leap with buying brass and dies for it since the are more expensive. At least until I get better with the rifle I'm reloading for right now.

I like how versatile the .30-06 is though.

I always wondered why other calibers don't have larger variances for their bullet weight.

>>32537522
if your shooting deer slower and heavier is better, you dont need the expansion of faster bullets, as they will absolutely rek the meat

>>32538055
Did he put vinculum? No? Then neck yourself

>>32537450
>things we already know followed by the inability to realize they dont matter to 99% of shooters: the thread

>>32537733
in engineering 1.0 is drastically different than 1.0000000 or 0.9999999

1.0 could be anything between 0.95~0.999999999999999

>>32537542
>the military doesn't use expanding bullets
Found the retard

File: images (40).jpg (11KB, 284x256px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 284x256px

>>32537450
.308 vs .30-30 vs .30-06
7.62x51 vs 7.62x51R vs 7.62x63
The closer match to .308 than the .30-06 is .30-30 Ackley Improved.
Waiting to find a set of dies before I get a reamer run on my 336

>>32538272
First off, 1.0 could be between .095~1.04. You're stuck on the idea of significant figures. He's not pointing out that concept, rather that in functional concept, the difference in .00000001. Math is absolute and insists that you maintain that data, engineering on the other hand isn't really effected by it. Engineering is the application of math in many ways, and the application isn't effected enough by that difference. He's saying OP is using absolute math to make a discernible difference in application. Assuming you're using the proper units, it doesn't matter much. For example, when measuring the width of your index finger, being off by .0000001 km is a lot different than being off by .0000001 mm. (Sorry if I used effected wrong?)

>>32538503
edit: I mean .95~1.04, not .095

>>32537450
.308 is more accurate generally. Of course some shooter/firearms/ammo combinations with .30-06 will be exceptionally accurate, but as a general rule .308 is better. You can confirm by looking at bench rest shooting history.

>>32538503
significant figures are extremely important in engineering though

>>32538375
Just fireform the brass, you faggot.

>>32537450
>not calling it 6.5-08 A-Square
Remshit shill detected

>>32537450
With most factory loads .308 is within 2-3% of factory .30-06. This isn't an endorsement of .308 but a condemnation of the regression of .30-06 for the sake of dumbshits not grenading 100 year old rifles in poor condition.

Also 7mm-08 produces about the same velocity as .308, but with a lighter bullet
>7mm-08 139gr American Whitetail is 2840fps
>.308 150gr American Whitetail is 2820fps
>.30-06 150gr American Whitetail is 2910fps

Most people do not consider 90fps worth 60% more recoil.

>>32537681
its not hard with modern powders to reach that velocity with a 175 smk, hell you can get that velocity with a 185 juggernaut and some 2000mr loads. sure FGMM is closer to 2600 in a 20 inch barrel, but its loaded for consistency and not speed.

also RL17 and 30-06 make some serious magic. The recoil mimics 300wm tho.

>>32537450
.308 was made by America and is the most common cartridge of its class in the world; it's also NATO standard.

Therefore, it is the best.

>>32538375
>>32540974
Reloading dies, cockbreath.
Why fireform cases if I an't refill them?

>>32540974
And he still has to seat the bullet into the case after that you twat

>>32540988
>not calling it .263 Express
A-Shit shill detected