300 Win Mag & 308/30-06

B

buckchaser

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Location
Ottawa
I've been looking hard at the Tikka Battue in 308 or 30-06 (short barrel, fiber optic open sights) as a possible elk (mathematics are now in my favour to draw a tag) and moose (mathematics are never going to be in my favour) rifle. I would likely leave the rifle with open sights as 99% of shot opportunities here will be within 100 meters in tight cover.

Today I saw a Tikka Hunter 300 Win Mag with open sights for 20% off at the local gun shop. In theory, this rifle could fill the above niche as well.

Although it is a good deal, I'm concerned that the additional recoil/noise/muzzle blast of the 300 Win Mag is simply unnecessary given the short ranges I anticipate using the rifle at.

I'm in Ontario so no lurking grizzlies to contend with ...

Thoughts?
 
The 30-06 is plenty of rifle for all listed... It's kinda the "old fart" all around cartridge, not a powerful as the big magnums but a bunch less recoil...

But if you reload... You can bring the recoil in a 300 down to enjoyable levels...

The .308 would honestly do what your asking as well... But you'll feel less under gunned with an -06 and that big ole 6x6 elk will probably take a few less steps after it hears the loud noise.
 
All of the .30 caliber cartridges you mention have excellent pedigrees in the game fields, and none of them could be considered a poor choice. I don't know you, so I can't say with any certainty what your level of recoil tolerance might be; people, even those with little shooting experience, react to recoil very differently. Muzzle blast can be controlled with hearing protection, and the number of hunters who employ hearing protection in the field is growing. If you shoot factory ammo only, recoil can be mitigated slightly by choosing lighter bullets, but its not enough to help if you're upset by .300 magnum recoil. The only way to know if you can handle a .300 magnum is to shoot a .300 magnum. That said, given the range you intend to shoot from, and the game you intend to shoot, a .300 magnum is a bit much, particularly if that's all you intend to do with it, a .30/30 is arguably a bit lacking (but not lacking very much) so a .300 Savage, a .308 or a .30/06 hits the sweet spot.

Recoil management is a three legged stool. One leg is cartridge power, another is the weight of the rifle and it's fit to the shooter, and the third is shooting technique. The more powder you stuff behind a 180 gr bullet, the harder it will kick, and sometimes that additional recoil comes without benefit of an increase in velocity. These days the trend is towards lighter and lighter rifles, and a light rifle will kick harder than a heavier one. If your rifle must weigh more than 10 pounds so you can tolerate the recoil, are you going to enjoy dragging it through heavy cover? Most factory rifle stocks are cut too long for the average rifleman. If you have to shorten the stock to make the rifle fit you, you are also making that rifle a touch lighter. I won't touch too much on technique except to say that if you technique is poor, the recoil will seem worse than it needs to. If you shoot off-hand, and you have the butt placed firmly in your shoulder, you drop your elbow to close and protect the shoulder pocket, you shoot from a boxer's stance with your forward knee slightly bent, and your balance over your forward foot, the recoil will move across your chest, and down your rearward leg, making the recoil as manageable as it can be. As your position gets lower, even with good technique, recoil will seem harder than it does from off-hand.

So lets consider 3 rifles, a .308, a .30/06, and a .300 magnum. The .308 has a short action, it works well with a 20" barrel, so the rifle is shorter and lighter than the other contenders, while producing the terminal performance necessary to humanely kill large game. The .30/06 is usually encountered with a 22" barrel, some are 24", the action is long, and the weight will typically be a pound and a half heavier than the .308. The .300 magnum is usually equipped with a 24" barrel, but can be 26" and is typically a pound heavier than a .30/06.
 
Le Baron Mississauga had 30/06 Tikka,wood stock w/sights on clearance as well.
It comes with leather Tikka sling as well. It is some Le Baron exclusive deal...
 
Buy the 300. If you dont reload, then use the managed recoil factory ammo....30-06 level. Yet if that elk or moose draw comes through....some premium ammo and no need to buy a second rifle. Try sighting in the sights, then mounting a low variable...something like 2-7.....on quick detach mounts. The open sights can be redundancy, a way to save a hunt when a optic craps out at the worst time in the worst place.
 
I'd go handle both and see which fits you best. Then go with that. Whichever cartridge you pick isn't going to matter all that much in real world hunting scenarios in Ontario. If you were out west the choice would matter more.

For example, I had my heart set on a .308, was probably gonna go Sako. Then i read a post on here (I believe it was by Boomer :d) about Brno rifles and ZG-47s in particular. One happened to come up for sale locally, like the next day. So, since Boomer is a gentleman who knows what he's talking about, i decided to go check it out. When i picked it up, it fit me perfectly. I mean better than any rifle I'd ever handled before type of perfect. Bought it on the spot and it's been my main hunting rifle ever since. Now that rifle's in 30-06 and I really didn't want a 30-06 but i knew it was a good all around caliber that would get the job done well as long as i could put the bullet in the right spot. And putting the bullet in the right spot is soooooo much easier with a rifle that fits you like a glove.
 
Take advantage of the Tikka long action and get the 30-06. The most versatile and widely available cartridge out there. If you reload, 30-06 can be hopped-up to near 300 Win Mag levels or softened for the recoil sensitive. There's a wide and varied bullet selection as well. I have the Battue Lite in 30-06 with a QD scope set-up. It's my do-it-all rig and it does it all very well.

You can't go wrong with any of the cartridges listed.
 
nowarningshot said:
Buy the 300. If you dont reload, then use the managed recoil factory ammo....30-06 level. Yet if that elk or moose draw comes through....some premium ammo and no need to buy a second rifle. Try sighting in the sights, then mounting a low variable...something like 2-7.....on quick detach mounts. The open sights can be redundancy, a way to save a hunt when a optic craps out at the worst time in the worst place.
Click to expand...

The hotter 30-06 Hornady Superformance is also available if you don't reload and you need more punch.
 
If 99% of your opportunities are within 100m then a .308 Win should be more then enough and the 300 WM more then required. Why put up with the noise and recoil of a 300 WM
if you don't have to. On the other hand, as "Kurgan" already pointed out, if your heart is set on the Tikka and its one action fits all philosophy, then the 30-06 would be the
logical choice in my opinion - and it has the added benefit of being a little more versatile then the .308 Win. Both the .308 Win and the 30-06 are both capable cartridges, the
30-06 being the better choice for the use of heavier bullets.
 
If I were setting up for an iron sight only, or situation where I knew all shots were gong to be at iron sight range Id go with the 30-06 and never think twice about it. This coming from an unappologetic magnum fan too.
 
Have you used iron sights in tight cover. Sometimes it's hard to see them in the first light or last light. If you have a scope you need to make sure it has good light gathering so you can see the cross hairs then also. As to cartridge I bet a critter can't tell one from another if you put it in the proper place and a bad miss with a 300 mag is still a bad miss and extra power won't make it better.
 
I would go with the .30/06. The .300 magnum though an awesome long range round is not the got to rifle for close range shots on heavy game. Very high velocity hits on heavy bone have a way of leading to pie plate sized entry wounds and poor penetration or outright bullet failure unless using the very best premium bullets. A 180 grain soft point pounding along at around 2600 fps has all kinds of killing power and more reliable bullet performance at close range. To me a .45/70 handloaded would be a better choice then a .300 Win. magnum for the conditions you describe.
The other problem with new rifles and open sights is that they suck for the most part. The sights are generally cheap, coarse adjustments and hard to see. Plus all the new bolt guns I have seen are stocked for a scope and much too straight in the stock for fast use with irons.
If you are set on irons in say, a .30/06 have you considered an older bolt gun that is better stocked for irons? Plus many are factory drilled for peep sights which have it all over standard iron sights for speed and accuracy.
 
The 30-06 will kill any elk, moose, bear, or deer that I ever met up with. Plus Winchester Super-X 30-06 Springfield 165-Grain Power Max Bonded Soft Point Rifle Ammunition is readily available at Canadian Tire for $23.49 a box! So you can enjoy practicing without breaking the bank. :eek:)
 
Dogleg said:
If I were setting up for an iron sight only, or situation where I knew all shots were gong to be at iron sight range Id go with the 30-06 and never think twice about it. This coming from an unappologetic magnum fan too.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I would think along the same lines. You can make a 30-06 into a lot of things, all of them adequate for the game in question.
 
For 100 yards, go with the .308. Match shooters moved to the .308 from the .30-06 because the '06 produces more recoil; at the end of a match the guy with the 'softer' shooting .308 was not as beat up as the guy shooting the '06 all day.

That said though, you won't shoot the .06 all day, and when hunting you won't notice the recoil. So, '06 or .308 both do the trick. The .300 is good if you want to distance work and/or go for bigger or more dangerous animals. But then again, maybe a .338 or .375 would do better for bigger or more dangerous.
 
I own a number of rifles in all three cartridges.

For shots inside 200 yards, there is zero advantage to the .300 Winchester Magnum. In fact, the advantage probably goes the other way because the slower impact speed of the .308 and .30-06 should yield better penetration up close and personal (unless you're using a monolithic bullet like the Barnes TSX, in which case velocity does increase penetration).

As others have said, with any hunting rifle -- especially one with iron sights designed to be used fast in close cover -- go with the rifle that feels best, carries best, and comes up to point of aim fastest and most consistently. The cartridge is a secondary choice.
 
I would choose the 30-06 as it likes heavy bullets better. If you are going to stick with 165 or 180 grain bullets the choice would be the shorter 308 only if the action is shorter. I think it a waste to chamber a long action 30-06 rifle in 308. I put a peep sight on a 7MM Rem 700 lefty years ago. I really like peep sights and see no disadvantage using them. However the rifle slapped me crazy and convinced me that the magnums were just too much noise and fuss for a small gain.

Check the stock fit. Many designs have too high a comb for iron sight use even if the rifle is so equipped. An iron sighted bolt is a nice carrying rifle and quite accurate at longer ranges than many give it credit for. They do require practice and more practice if longer ranges are required. I consider barrel sights good for 50 paces and always choose a peep sight.

Edit, sorry but it seems that the Tikka may not have an after market peep sight. It does use a short action for 308. If the stock fit the Battue would be my choice.
 
Last edited:
30-06 all the way, particularly for open sights. The 30-06 really loves the 150 gr pill, but for open sights, length of sight picture is your friend. I am an open sight fan, and longer barreled rifles just shoot better for me - why? I believe it is chiefly due to the longer length of barrel between the rear and front sight.although most commercials are only 2" difference, it really does make a difference. I have two mausers which I shoot exclusively with open sight (ya! - I got 50 yr old eyeballs) and I refuse to put scopes on either of them because they just shoot so accurately, as compared to some of their shorter barrel cousins...scopes for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom