308 vs 30.06

There's not a great deal of difference between the two calibres in my view. Both are more than adequate for any deer in the UK, wild boar and most plains game. I've had both calibres and personally prefer the '06; it's probably more to do with the rifle in reality. Recoil seems pretty similar in both, particularly with a moderator.
 
I have both. If I could only have one it would be 30-06. Difficult to say why they are both great rounds. The 30-06 with its larger capacity case gives a bit more MV and you can load slightly larger bullet weights which is useful for Boar and African plains game.
 
I have a .308 which does everything I want both here in the UK and abroad. Have a friend who shoots an 06 and I am sure he would say exactly the same. Both good and both will do the job.
 
One is a stunted dumpy little cartridge only suitable for the Tacticool Crowd and Paper Punchers - and it spawned the 243. And it was ousted by a 22 Centrefire.

The other is a proper Mans Cartridge with lots of recoil and able to deal the T -Rex by hitting it on the toenail - oh and it served GI Joe through two world wars and was on the winning side.

Amazing the difference on either side of a cigarette paper :)
 
Of course I'll drop this on the table. As HEYM SR20 alluded to. The .30-06 is Meuse Argonne; Wake Island; Bastogne; Chosin. The 7.62 NATO is to that what exactly? Part of what I do enjoy is the connection, the links, that something that binds us to those we knew, or never knew, that came before. Like using my late father's shotgun that he had new in 1919 as a twelfth birthday present. Or an old hammer gun wondering who owned it and what they did with it and indeed what became of them. The .30-06 is overlong, antiquated, uses more powder, needs a longer action. But maybe it needs that extra length to also accommodate the ghosts of history that it carries within it. The .308 is a good, efficient, effective and etc., etc., cartridge of 52mm length. And it has that shorter case as it contains no soul.
 
Last edited:
In my experience.

1. 308 Win is cheaper to run that a 30-06.
2. Stopping power on a 308Win with a 165gr BT is performing very well on sambar deer compared with a 30-06 220gr Woodleigh RNSP to 200m
3. Stopping power on a 308 Win with a 165gr is performing very well on sambar deer compared to 30-06 165gr BT or Accubond or Partition to 200m
4. There is fair more boot with hot loads in a 30-06 in the heavier weights than the 308 Win.

I would advise to get whatever you are comfortable with and for a good price.
 
enfieldspares said:
Of course I'll drop this on the table. As HEYM SR20 alluded to. The .30-06 is Meuse Argonne; Wake Island; Bastogne; Chosin. The 7.62 NATO is to that what exactly? Part of what I do enjoy is the connection, the links, that something that binds us to those we knew, or never knew, that came before. Like using my late father's shotgun that he had new in 1919 as a twelfth birthday present. Or an old hammer gun wondering who owned it and what they did with it and indeed what became of them. The .30-06 is overlong, antiquated, uses more powder, needs a longer action. But maybe it needs that extra length to also accommodate the ghosts of history that it carries within it. The .308 is a good, efficient, effective and etc., etc., cartridge of 52mm length. And it has that shorter case as it contains no soul.
Click to expand...
IN THAT CASE GET A .303!
 
I think, going by what you've said about bullet weight requirements and a nice .308 being available, that will do you nicely. The -06 gives a little more, but is it enough to matter? In my opinion only with 180gr+ bullets where they start to seriously invade the powder capacity of the little .308.

I prefer the .30-06 for it's history and the fact that it can handle all bullet weights well. But then I am more of a long action calibre fan. I don't know why, I just am. Both are great cartridges and both will kill pretty much anything you'd care to shoot with them short of huge American or African game.
 
enfieldspares said:
Of course I'll drop this on the table. As HEYM SR20 alluded to. The .30-06 is Meuse Argonne; Wake Island; Bastogne; Chosin. The 7.62 NATO is to that what exactly? Part of what I do enjoy is the connection, the links, that something that binds us to those we knew, or never knew, that came before. Like using my late father's shotgun that he had new in 1919 as a twelfth birthday present. Or an old hammer gun wondering who owned it and what they did with it and indeed what became of them. The .30-06 is overlong, antiquated, uses more powder, needs a longer action. But maybe it needs that extra length to also accommodate the ghosts of history that it carries within it. The .308 is a good, efficient, effective and etc., etc., cartridge of 52mm length. And it has that shorter case as it contains no soul.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't try chambering your .308w ammo as it seems to have grown an extra 1mm somehow. :rofl:
 
njc110381 said:
If I was looking at the tonsils of a kodiak or brown bear with anger management issues, I'd be happier if I had something bigger.
Click to expand...

Nah. Big is way overrated.

We do of course have the shining example of the Canadian Rangers. Well worth looking them up, interesting history and stories.

From 1947 until 2015, yes 2015, the Rangers were issued - wait for it - the Lee Enfield No.4, in .303 British. Hard case, eh? That was specifically for protecting themselves against bears.

In 2015, they were of course issued with a slightly upgraded new rifle, the Tikka T3 Compact Tactical Rifle in its “Arctic” guise, made under licence by Colt as the C19, and chambered in .308 Win.

Not a .375 or a .45-70 or a whatever. A .308. Because, you see, the Rangers have titanium bollocks. And they know their way round a charging bear. Power does not automatically equate to success, being very, very cool when it counts does. Same for shooting anything big and hungry.

(I’ll add that actually, delivery of the new rifles only started in 2018-19! And I want one.)
 
Last edited:
dodgyknees said:
Nah. Big is way overrated.

We do of course have the shining example of the Canadian Rangers. Well worth looking them up, interesting history and stories.

From 1947 until 2015, yes 2015, the Rangers were issued - wait for it - the Lee Enfield No.4, in .303 British. Hard case, eh? That was specifically for protecting themselves against bears.

In 2015, they were of course issued with a slightly upgraded new rifle, the Tikka T3 Compact Tactical Rifle in its “Arctic” guise, made under licence by Colt as the C19, and chambered in .308 Win.

Not a .375 or a .44 or a whatever. A .308. Because, you see, the Rangers have titanium bollocks. And they know their way round a charging bear. Power does not automatically equate to success, being very, very cool when it counts does. Same for shooting anything big and hungry.
Click to expand...

Well you see that's where me and those rangers differ. I don't know my way around a charging bear and I suspect if I were put in that situation my bollocks would be more like over ripe grapes coated in chocolate sauce!! :-|
 
dodgyknees said:
Nah. Big is way overrated.

We do of course have the shining example of the Canadian Rangers. Well worth looking them up, interesting history and stories.

From 1947 until 2015, yes 2015, the Rangers were issued - wait for it - the Lee Enfield No.4, in .303 British. Hard case, eh? That was specifically for protecting themselves against bears.

In 2015, they were of course issued with a slightly upgraded new rifle, the Tikka T3 Compact Tactical Rifle in its “Arctic” guise, made under licence by Colt as the C19, and chambered in .308 Win.

Not a .375 or a .45-70 or a whatever. A .308. Because, you see, the Rangers have titanium bollocks. And they know their way round a charging bear. Power does not automatically equate to success, being very, very cool when it counts does. Same for shooting anything big and hungry.

(I’ll add that actually, delivery of the new rifles only started in 2018-19! And I want one.)
Click to expand...

Maybe they were/are just issued with whatever was readily available and cheap - two major considerations for public bodies. I know from bitter experience that whatever is issued to those in uniform isn't necessarily the best kit out there, those who chose it and order it very rarely have to use it and most of them wouldn't know how to.
Interestingly, the Fish & Game Dept in Alaska recommends the .375H&H for Brown Bears, it also recommends a few other chamberings including the .338WM, but the good old 375 was top of the list on my last visit there
Lots of the locals pack rifles chambered for it when pushing their way through alder thickets, all the backwoods gunstores I visited seemed to carry a selection of 375 ammo too, but maybe the Alaskans have lost their stones eh?
 
Nah. Read about the selection process, very interesting. The whole Ranger history and purpose is interesting full stop.
 
dodgyknees said:
Nah. Big is way overrated.

We do of course have the shining example of the Canadian Rangers. Well worth looking them up, interesting history and stories.

From 1947 until 2015, yes 2015, the Rangers were issued - wait for it - the Lee Enfield No.4, in .303 British. Hard case, eh? That was specifically for protecting themselves against bears.

In 2015, they were of course issued with a slightly upgraded new rifle, the Tikka T3 Compact Tactical Rifle in its “Arctic” guise, made under licence by Colt as the C19, and chambered in .308 Win.

Not a .375 or a .45-70 or a whatever. A .308. Because, you see, the Rangers have titanium bollocks. And they know their way round a charging bear. Power does not automatically equate to success, being very, very cool when it counts does. Same for shooting anything big and hungry.

(I’ll add that actually, delivery of the new rifles only started in 2018-19! And I want one.)
Click to expand...
a friend got one, he loves it, it has had to go back for a set of new sight, which he is less than impressed about as the new set solve some problems and insert new problems, overall he is a happy bunny, but whoa! it was spendy to buy !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sako 90 30.06 Bullet weight
2 3
Replies
41
Views
1K
Brighty3006
Brighty3006
Time to put in a variation, talk to me about the 6.5 & 7 PRC 🤔
Replies
12
Views
1K
angusb1
angusb1
‘Middle Ground’ Culling Calibre
6 7 8
Replies
141
Views
11K
Shootinshyster
S
First FAC in Scotland – .270 vs .308 vs 6.5×55 vs something else as all‑round stalking calibre?
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
5K
ackers1
A
6.5mm vs 7mm vs .30 cal
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
10K
Midlandstalker2024
M
https://Immersive-optics.com/
Back
Top