so, what's so great about the 308 Win cartridge?

Only reason to get a 308 is if you want a Savage 99, the 30-06 is better in every way.

The 308 was 50 years too late for what it is. Why the US Army even bothered is beyond me, the M1 Garand could have just as easily have gotten a box magazine. Machine Guns can function just fine in 30-06.

308 is basically the answer to a question nobody was asking in the 1950's. Compare the Stg44 and AK47 with the M14.

The 243 is really the only interesting member of the -08 family.
 
I have plopped a lot of WT deer with the 308 Win, in the perfect 270ish country of South Saskatchewan.
Zero complaints here.

However, just for 1000 yard target shooting and beyond there is lots of better choices IMO.
One rarely hears of a competent hunter merely wounding a deer with the 308. But I have heard of trophy hunters failing on that buck of a lifetime with the 243.

Perhaps the 7-08 needs more appreciation??
 
MiG25 said:
Only reason to get a 308 is if you want a Savage 99, the 30-06 is better in every way.

The 308 was 50 years too late for what it is. Why the US Army even bothered is beyond me, the M1 Garand could have just as easily have gotten a box magazine. Machine Guns can function just fine in 30-06.

308 is basically the answer to a question nobody was asking in the 1950's. Compare the Stg44 and AK47 with the M14.

The 243 is really the only interesting member of the -08 family.
Click to expand...

At the time, available powders were able to duplicate 30-06 performance in a 7.62 NATO cartridge. But the more important consideration was space and weight. The same amount of 7.62 NATO cartridges occupies less space and weight than the 30-06. ALso, a shorter cartridge will cycle quicker in a machine gun than the longer 30-06. More ammo, more fire power, etc. If you've ever needed to carry a full battle load, you'd appreciate that. But it was also inherently accurate. The US has since dropped it for the 300 WM as the sniper rifle but it will still on the books for the MMG in it's belted format and will be for a long time. The CF only retains it for the C6 machine gun.

And the 260 rem is WAY more interesting than the .243!! :p
 
Not sure how the 30-06 is better in everyway. Bit more Velocity yes, no difference on the kill.
Have dropped many deer with the accurate, short action 308..
 
The 308 is very close in performance to the 30-06, but does a few things better and only one worse 220 grain bullet (which most people never have a use for).
At the end of the day, I want the minimum kick and muzzle blast to get the job done, so I don't flinch and miss, and the 308 family of cartridges does that in spades.
The 06 family has that little extra that I don't want. Therefore, having both would be a waste of space and money for me.

Regarding the OP, if I already had a nice 280 AI, I would keep it simple and save the money, leave it a 6lb .308, for days when Canadian Tire ammo will do. If I really wanted a new calibre, I'd look at making it in 7-08.
 
I have lived all my life without the need for an 30 06. I would not live one day without the 308... Bigger caliber is only good for the ego... JP.
 
B*lls**t the 30-06 is better in every way. Only thing it's better at it slightly higher velocity and at it's top end range can utilize a heavier bullet.

That's it. In pretty much every other way the .308 is better than the 30-06.
 
LarryG said:
The 308 is very close in performance to the 30-06, but does a few things better and only one worse 220 grain bullet (which most people never have a use for).
At the end of the day, I want the minimum kick and muzzle blast to get the job done, so I don't flinch and miss, and the 308 family of cartridges does that in spades.
The 06 family has that little extra that I don't want. Therefore, having both would be a waste of space and money for me.

Regarding the OP, if I already had a nice 280 AI, I would keep it simple and save the money, leave it a 6lb .308, for days when Canadian Tire ammo will do. If I really wanted a new calibre, I'd look at making it in 7-08.
Click to expand...

and .308 has excellent barrel life compare to many others. One point about .308 often over looked.
 
madashell said:
B*lls**t the 30-06 is better in every way. Only thing it's better at it slightly higher velocity and at it's top end range can utilize a heavier bullet.

That's it. In pretty much every other way the .308 is better than the 30-06.
Click to expand...

Exactly..
 
I caribou hunt every year, i was sugessted a 300 mag a 338 mag or a 7mm, they are sitting in my safe doing nothing, i own them all, every year i take both caribous with my Scout Steyr 308, up to 400 metres, i never needed more... JP.
 
Ltbull01 said:
At the time, available powders were able to duplicate 30-06 performance in a 7.62 NATO cartridge. But the more important consideration was space and weight. The same amount of 7.62 NATO cartridges occupies less space and weight than the 30-06. ALso, a shorter cartridge will cycle quicker in a machine gun than the longer 30-06. More ammo, more fire power, etc. If you've ever needed to carry a full battle load, you'd appreciate that. But it was also inherently accurate. The US has since dropped it for the 300 WM as the sniper rifle but it will still on the books for the MMG in it's belted format and will be for a long time. The CF only retains it for the C6 machine gun.

And the 260 rem is WAY more interesting than the .243!! :p
Click to expand...

Yeah right, all the designers did was crack open the "Textbook of Small Arms" from 1909 and read that 15 ft-lbs of recoil should be the maximum and basically came up with a cartridge from the 1890's.

Compare the rate of fire of the C9 (Minime) 5.56 with that of the MG42 8x57 and tell me that cyclic rate is determined by the length of the cartridge.

WWI vintage powders (ie IMR 3031) designed for the 303 British could beat original 30-06 ballistics, and the Germans did it in 1905 with the 8x57. So still 50 years behind the technology.

260 merely duplicate the common 6.5x55, which came around circa 1893.

I'm not calling your baby ugly, it's just that the 30-06 is better; ubiquitous with the same magazine capacity, more velocity, heavier bullets all in a cost effective, manageable package.
 
PEKS said:
Not sure how the 30-06 is better in everyway. Bit more Velocity yes, no difference on the kill.
Have dropped many deer with the accurate, short action 308..
Click to expand...
That's all true, but the benefit of a short action over a long action is minimal as well.
 
heronfish said:
what's better than a good old fashioned 308 v. 3006 fight?
aren't those the rounds that wished they were a 270 win?
Click to expand...

The 270 is an excellent cartridge, realistically the only "better" ones (for NA) are the 300 Winchester Magnum and 32 Winchester Special.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom