Why do tactical/target and .308 go hand in hand?

spenom

spenom

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
61   0   0
Location
Kamloops, B.C.
I guess this is a two part question. First I am wondering why .308 seems to be the caliber chosen for any rifle that is designated to be tactical in nature. It seems that factory rifles of the police/tactical nature seem to all be chambered in .308. Obviously there are other calibers offered in the police/tactical packages but .308 and .223 seem to be the usual suspects. Why is this? Second part of the question, why is .308 so popular for target and range guns as well? I was looking at various ballistic information for the .308 and it does not look as impressive as say a 270wsm. It does not appear to be the flattest shooting etc but it does seem to be very popular with guys who are into the precision shooting. I have a few ideas (guesses) as to why but I am hoping some of you gun gurus might have some answers? I have included the ballistic info below that got me thinking about this. There is no rhyme or reason as to why I chose the 270wsm VS the .308. There are lots of other calibers that appear better ballistically. So how did tactical and .308 end up together and why is it so popular for precision range work??


.308
308.jpg



270wsm
270wsm.jpg
 
Last edited:
To answer the first part of your question, the .308 and .223 cartidges common in North America are NATO chamberings (therefore tactical) otherwise known as 7.62X51mm and 5.56X45mm. Here's some more reading on that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56x45mm_NATO
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62×51_NATO

With regards to the second part of your question, there are advantages to using the popular .308win cartridge for precision shooting. A very wide selection of bullets are available compared to other calibers, with many of them being match grade and/or having high ballistic coefficients. The same goes for factory ammo, and then there's always mil surp ammo for cheap plinking. I'm sure there are other pros to the popular .308 but since I'm not a fan of the .308 I can't think of any more at the moment. Like you said the .308 is ballistically challenged and possibly overrated:stirthepot2: when stacked up against many other popular cartridges. The .308 caliber itself has absolutely no advantage over any other caliber with regards to accuracy. While there are many flatter shooting and harder hitting cartridges out there than the .308, it's still more than capable of it's original tactical intent, ie; human targets. The less-than-flat trajectory is only a problem if your scope runs out of elevation trying to correct for it.
I hunt and enjoy plinking at 600 to 1000yd. Like I said, I'm not a fan of the .308 and will probably never own one, at least not until I add a 22-250, a .17fireball, a .243win, a .223rem, a .300win mag, a 6mmBR, a 7mm rem mag, a .338Lapua mag, and a .50BMG to the .270win I have now, so take what I say about the beloved .308 with a grain of salt.:D
 
Thanks for the info. I am loving those links.

So basically the North Atlantic Treaty Organization set some military standards and one of them was the 7.62x51mm round. So the tactical/sniper type rifles that are produced today still follow the nato standards thus producing rifles chambered for a military centerfire cartridge?
 
.308 is a NATO-equivalent (or close enough caliber), is extremely forgiving to types of powder chosen if you reload, and effective to about 500 yards, possibly up to 800 depending on the trigger-person. Call it the jack-of-all-trades, if you will.

Another bonus is the availability of scopes with bullet drop measured out specifically for the military "match" style ammo (this comes at an extremely steep price, of course).
 
TR (or Target Rifle) competition got it's start in the Military where soldiers would get an issued rifle and ammunition and would compete against each other at the various ranges.

This put everyone on even ground as far as rifle and ammo selection, the rest was up to the shooter.

From Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fullbore_target_rifle

Fullbore target rifle (TR) is a distinctively British and Commonwealth of Nations shooting discipline that evolved from Service rifle (SR) shooting in the late 1960s, and is governed in the UK by the rules of the National Rifle Association, UK (NRA). Similar rules are used in several Commonwealth countries, but the issue in 2009 of the rule book of the International Confederation of Fullbore Rifle Associations (ICFRA) has provided an alternative basis for the administration of the sport.

Modern target rifles are extremely accurate, and have 'iron' aperture sights which are fully adjustable for elevation and windage.

To level the playing field as much as possible without stifling progress, and to make it possible for riflemen of all budgets to compete seriously, the rifle or all its component parts must be 'readily available in quantity'. This stipulation also keeps faith with the longstanding traditions of the NRA that the rifles used in competition should be of a type that, if necessary, could be readily used for homeland defence.

Fullbore Target Rifle involves prone position single shot precision shooting using 'iron' aperture sights at 'round bull' targets at distances from 300 to 1000 yards, with each shot being carefully scored and analysed. The usual calibre used is 7.62x51 NATO.
 
"...one of them was the 7.62x51mm round..." The 7.62 x 51 was jammed down NATO's throat by the U.S. in the mid 50's. (The U.S. did the same thing with the 5.56/.223 in the mid to late 60's.) Nobody, but the U.S. wanted it. Since then the 7.62/.308 and the rifles chambered in it have seen a great deal of developement, mostly by civilians and commercial ammo makers.
The Short Magnums are commercial hunting cartridges. Some will stay around, some will be dropped due to low sales. Not really a good comparison.
There's no such thing as a 'tactical' anything. It's a marketing term only.
 
Since the 7.62NATO is a service rd ie military, LE units naturally gravitate to comply. Why not? Most of the LE's may have served so are comfy with the rd. Bureaucrats take the same approach since they most certainly are not in the arms development business.

It does the job and surprisingly, most in the forces know little or care to know much about firearms and ballistics. It is no more important to them then having a hammer. And as long as it goes bang and does the 'job', it's all good.

AFter WWII when NATO was working on chamberings to standardize, the US pretty much stuffed this rd down everyone's throats since it was a 'modern' 30-06 which the US believed was the end all.

The Brits proposed a couple of mid size cartridges in 7mm. I would expect the ballistics to have been equal or better then the 30cal at that time and today, would smoke the 308 with ease.

If adopted, it would have provided performance similar/better to the new 6.8SPC.

So we have the 308/7.62NATO as a byproduct of politics and no one has had the will to change. Besides, with the 556NATO, we don't need a heavy rd anymore.

Oh wait, maybe we do.....

Now because there is a huge market for wannabe stuff, the 'tactical' market has blossomed to put the 308 on quite a lofty pedestal. Again, a simple case of 'if its good enough for the special forces/swat/what have you, it must be great so I want one.

Competition shooters have seen that ballistics from smaller cals can be vastly superior. So much so that if the rules don't specify its use, no one uses it.

Compare the ballistics of the 260R, 7-08 to the 308. There simply is no comparison.

Jerry
 
The 308 - as has been mentioned innumerable times - is the civilian version of the standard 7.62mm NATO cartridge. Military Rifles were made to chamber this ammo, and if you know anything about military logistics, having 6 kinds of ammo on hand to feed various calibers of weapons, is a huge hassle.

Why this cartridge? It was a shorter version of the 30-06 which fed everything in the US small arms rifle/MG arsenal until the introduction of the M-14. It uses essentially the exact same bullet... a bonus for munitions production.

the 7.62 gave up little to the 30-06 ballistically. It was designed for proper feeding from a magazine AND a linked machine gun belt.

It hits hard, it makes the enemy just as dead as any other bullet when delivered in the right spot, and will penetrate material well. In terms of accuracy, a human head and torso are far larger than the poker chip sized targets at which we poke in civilian "precision" shooting.

It is as accurate as it needs to be for the distances in which technology allowed engagement with a rifle during the time in which it was a popular rifle round.

Many NATO GPMG weapons still use 7.62 ammo and it only makes sense that when courting the NATO consumer market, your firearms conform to that standard. Add tot hat the huge wannabe factor of people who want rifles that fire NATO ammo just to say they do.

The 223 was introduced to increase the ammo load carried by the soldier's basic load, reduce the weight of the weapon and make control of the weapon better in automatic fire. It is a poorer anti-material round.
 
"a simple case of 'if its good enough for the special forces/swat/what have you, it must be great so I want one."

I am not going to lie. The above statement was totally me back when I bought my savage .308 10fcp. That was before I was into reading ballistics and nerding off on gun nuts for hours. Given a time machine I might have actually not chosen the .308. My hunting partner has the 270wsm and its ballistics blow me away! After hunting with my 10fcp though I have decided to keep it as a target range only rig. I need something lighter for hunting to drag through the bush and not worry about scratching up etc. I am thinking that a 300 win mag is a nice compromise it terms of ballistics and price of ammo. I see my buddy shelling out tons of cash for the 270wsm rounds and want no part of that. So 300win mag is still a reasonable price and has ballistics close to the 270wsm and add to that a wider bullet selection off the shelf and I think we have a winner. Only down side is that I am thinking of going with a tikka t3 light in the 300 win mag so recoil will be substantial. Hopefully not so bad as to affect accuracy.
 
What do you want it for? The 270 is a great hunting round, but it is not an entirely efficient case, nor is it known for its bullet selection when reloading for ultra-precision.

300WM can definitely be tuned for fantastic long distance accuracy, but it is a punishing round to shoot in a light gun.

223 and 308 can still work very well for precision shooting. Me? I love 6BR all the way.
 
I am really glad I asked these questions. I am getting really great answers here, thank you. I have to laugh when I think about how just last night I posted this and today at the range I was having a conversation with a guy that turned out to be "CyaN1de" from just a few posts up. anyway just saying thanks for all the info on the internet and in person.
 
The great thing about .308/7.62 and .223/5.56 is that both calibers are available in abundance - rifles, parts, magazines, ammunition, loading components, etc. They both load well from magazines, and both perform fantastically in auto loaders. They don't eat barrels like some calibers, and are relatively easy to shoot well.
For these attributes they provide a very solid foundation for those that like to shoot, and shoot a lot.

I've seen some blind old grumpy full bore-ers absolutely ass-stomp:owned: younger (supposedly) more capable shooters with fancy newer 'inherently more accurate' rounds....at the end of the day, the cartridge doesn't make the shooter. ;)
 
.308 Tactical etc.

It has been said that the RCMP have given explicit instructions that their officers are NOT to engage a target at more than 400 yds. even if the target is laying fire down on them. If this is true, even if they had a better long range cartidge/rifle/scope combo, it would make no difference.

Further to the above, I heard that they lost a member who was following this dictum.

Perhaps someone out there can confirm or correct the statements above.
 
spenom said:
Only down side is that I am thinking of going with a tikka t3 light in the 300 win mag so recoil will be substantial. Hopefully not so bad as to affect accuracy.
Click to expand...
My 270 is a T3 lite S/S and weighs less than 7.5 lbs scoped. The addition of a $45 Limbsaver pad makes recoil a non-issue, even after 50rds in one afternoon. I also got one for my brother for his 7rem mag so I don't have to listen to him whine after 5 shots. I'd highly reccomend the T3, but if you buy one in 300wm, don't leave the store without a Limbsaver.
 
Sly Old Fox said:
It has been said that the RCMP have given explicit instructions that their officers are NOT to engage a target at more than 400 yds. even if the target is laying fire down on them. If this is true, even if they had a better long range cartidge/rifle/scope combo, it would make no difference.

Further to the above, I heard that they lost a member who was following this dictum.

Perhaps someone out there can confirm or correct the statements above.
Click to expand...

inappropriate, and not conducive to this thread
 
So am I crazy to think the tikka T3 tactical that is available in 300 win mag is one bad ass rifle. Dare I say a more bad ass rile than the savage 10fcp that is only available in .308?
 
I love my 10FLCP-K in .308win. Having said that, I was originally looking for the .223 version of my Savage as a paper-puncher, but that doesn't exist unless you go through Savage's "custom shop"... Which is essentially paying aftermarket-component price in Canada, for factory bundled components. No thanks.

I likely will be doing full custom long-rang tack-driver in the future (thinking 6.5x55mm), but on a Remmy platform - a southpaw Savage has little-to-no aftermarket following (wanting a B&C M24 tactical stock, find the sporter stocks not too comfortable in the prone position).
 
Interestingly enough, even if the .308 is popular at the Precision Rifle matches, the 6mm's and 6.5mm's and 7mm's are starting to catch favour! At least the .308 round gets people into the game. Ammo is plentiful (well it usually is), brass can be found easily, and the bullet selection is the cat's pajamas!

While I'm typing this, I'm procrastinating a bullet load session. I have to load up some 125 gr slugs on my .308 prepped brass to shoot out of my Krieger barreled Breda M1. We were chatting up a storm last night about placing that same 125 gr. bullet on top of a .300 Win Mag for some maximum earth pig 'blowed up real good' hunts this spring! :D

Heeeeere kittty kitty kitty! :evil:

:cheers:
Barney
 
The .308 win. works quite well out to 1000 yards in experienced hands and with good loads. Between the choices of being beaten up by the 300 wm and shooting the Savage in .308 it's an easy choice for me. I'd take the Savage. Consider that you might want to shoot a match. A match can easily consist of 60 rds. plus sighters. That's alot of recoil and alot of powder. The .308 barrells tend to last a long time too. Consider the cost of shooting each of them. Also consider the specific purpose you,ll have for each.

M.

btw, I'm still loving my 6 BR too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom