30-06 still relevant?

[lash]

I would love to see the 30-06 reintroduced as the 7.62x63mm with slogans like "Everything the 308 Winchester Lacks" posted on every gun forum everywhere to see how the ignorant react.

-Stan

Except Hornady would change the shoulder angle and call it the 7.62 PRC.

 

[stanley_white]

Except Hornady would change the shoulder angle and call it the 7.62 PRC.

I don't buy ChiCom unless I have to.

-Stan

 

[sandwarrior]

Nope, the primary reason that cartridges scaled down was for weight and the ability to increase the number of rounds a troop could carry in the field. Balletically, none of the military calibers post '06' are superior. 100 rounds of "06" definitely weigh more than 100 rounds of 5.56...

But at ranges most soldiers can shoot at, the 5.56 can kill just fine. Why carry all the extra weight when you have what can kill.

And, for the record the .280 British was superior. It had a more streamlined bullet that could hit harder at longer ranges. It was, again, enough power to kill at short ranges and maintaining power over distances where the .30 cal lost power. It's not about all out power at the muzzle, it's about the bullet being able to retain energy better as it moves downrange. A concept that was lost on American ballisticians.

 

[brianf]

But at ranges most soldiers can shoot at, the 5.56 can kill just fine. Why carry all the extra weight when you have what can kill.

And, for the record the .280 British was superior. It had a more streamlined bullet that could hit harder at longer ranges. It was, again, enough power to kill at short ranges and maintaining power over distances where the .30 cal lost power. It's not about all out power at the muzzle, it's about the bullet being able to retain energy better as it moves downrange. A concept that was lost on American ballisticians.

280..thats why the FAL is so hard to handle

it wasnt designed around 762 and its stressed to the max, but the US pulled rank on ammo

 

[stefan73]

This thread makes me want to take that incorrect bolt from PTG I have and re-barrel my .300wm to 30-06.

 

[brianf]

This thread makes me want to take that incorrect bolt from PTG I have and re-barrel my .300wm to 30-06.

Todays 06 with better bullets is 1995’s 300wm

 

[Jscb1b]

Still kills shit dead.

 

[shoots100]

Still kills shit dead.

Since 1906

 

[black5.3]

Yeah mine still shoots good

 

[stefan73]

Todays 06 with better bullets is 1995’s 300wm

True, but todays .300wm is rocking pretty hard these days. Nothing like pushing 210grn Berger VLD's out of a 22" barrel at 2975fps. It is hard on the action

 

[sandwarrior]

Still kills shit dead.

Yes it does and is therefore NOT obsolete. With modern applications applied to the cartridge it is truly a great round. Using it for hunting you wouldn't be packing 100+ rounds of ammunition. When I hear "obsolete" about various cartridges, especially this one, I am forced to cringe! It does still kill shit dead and I have a few of them that are quite capable of killing shit dead.

However, when the discussion turns to the military application of this round I feel the need to remind people that what we have now is better for that application overall. Because I think that this cartridge is still an excellent sniper round. Especially with enhanced components used in today's world vs. those of yesteryear. I do not think it is an advantage for the everyday grunt soldier use. Weight is the biggest impediment.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

And, for the record the .280 British was superior….

You mean .280 Ross… right?

Crazy uncle Ross suddenly not so crazy!!! (Nah, He was batshit loony.)

Still beats 6.5….

Sirhr

 

[The D]

Might as well jump into this thread. Imo, 30-06 is only as dead as brass availability, which means it’s fine. Even crappy brass can be made to shoot pretty well, so I’ve read. If companies like Lapua, Peterson, & RCC(if they survive bankruptcy) keep making quality brass and enough of us keep fiddling with it, the ‘ol dog will always have a spot in the game

So we need to keep talking about it, loading it with some slick new-fangled solids, & annoying the shit out of anyone that asks these sorts of questions. Remember; The king is dead! Long live the king!

 

[CSMRedleg]

Might as well jump into this thread. Imo, 30-06 is only as dead as brass availability, which means it’s fine. Even crappy brass can be made to shoot pretty well, so I’ve read. If companies like Lapua, Peterson, & RCC(if they survive bankruptcy) keep making quality brass and enough of us keep fiddling with it, the ‘ol dog will always have a spot in the game

So we need to keep talking about it, loading it with some slick new-fangled solids, & annoying the shit out of anyone that asks these sorts of questions. Remember; The king is dead! Long live the king!

I should be taking delivery in January of a KMW Long Range Solutions Long Sword in 30-06. I could have easily gone the .308/6mm route, but why...the 06 will deliver at 1K yds

 

[High Desert duck]

 

[MadDuner]

Mine still goes bang, and I still have lots of ammo for it.
It’s here to stay as long as I’m still consuming oxygen.

 

[stanley_white]

View attachment 8036414

The 308 is to the 30-06 what the 45 ACP is to the 45 Colt — an acceptable downgrade in power based on the requirements of the U.S. Military and U.S. Executive Branch at the time.

-Stan

 

[sandwarrior]

The 308 is to the 30-06 what the 45 ACP is to the 45 Colt — an acceptable downgrade in power based on the requirements of the U.S. Military and U.S. Executive Branch at the time.

-Stan

The 7.62x51 is also more efficient. Getting the same velocity as the 30-06 on 10 less grains of powder. Keep in mind the 30-06 couldn't really be upgraded until we retired the M1 Garand.

FTR, the .45 ACP was actually more powerful than the .45 Colt, as the latter was based upon blackpowder. The .45 ACP was also capable of carrying more rounds in a firearm. And, much, much easier to reload and shoot than the .45 colt. An example of where that mattered was The Battle of the Little Bighorn. 210 Men got slaughtered carrying weapons (1873 .45 Colts) that were vastly inferior to the weapons the indigenous people carried. Not until much later was the .45 Colt upgraded to handle smokeless powder. As of yet, nobody has adapted a widespread .45 Colt into a semi-auto pistol

 

[lash]

The 7.62x51 is also more efficient. Getting the same velocity as the 30-06 on 10 less grains of powder. Keep in mind the 30-06 couldn't really be upgraded until we retired the M1 Garand.

FTR, the .45 ACP was actually more powerful than the .45 Colt, as the latter was based upon blackpowder. The .45 ACP was also capable of carrying more rounds in a firearm. And, much, much easier to reload and shoot than the .45 colt. An example of where that mattered was The Battle of the Little Bighorn. 210 Men got slaughtered carrying weapons (1873 .45 Colts) that were vastly inferior to the weapons the indigenous people carried. Not until much later was the .45 Colt upgraded to handle smokeless powder. As of yet, nobody has adapted a widespread .45 Colt into a semi-auto pistol

Jeepers! That was typically accurate for you and also disturbing for me.

I mean, our fantasy of more betterer cannot survive that onslaught of information.

 

[black5.3]

The 7.62x51 is also more efficient. Getting the same velocity as the 30-06 on 10 less grains of powder. Keep in mind the 30-06 couldn't really be upgraded until we retired the M1 Garand.

FTR, the .45 ACP was actually more powerful than the .45 Colt, as the latter was based upon blackpowder. The .45 ACP was also capable of carrying more rounds in a firearm. And, much, much easier to reload and shoot than the .45 colt. An example of where that mattered was The Battle of the Little Bighorn. 210 Men got slaughtered carrying weapons (1873 .45 Colts) that were vastly inferior to the weapons the indigenous people carried. Not until much later was the .45 Colt upgraded to handle smokeless powder. As of yet, nobody has adapted a widespread .45 Colt into a semi-auto pistol

I agree with most of what you’re saying but I disagree with the part about 7.62x51 achieving the same velocities as 30-06. The gap is smaller with factory loaded ammo but it’s not uncommon for 30-06 to be loaded with 15gr-30gr heavier bullets and easily achieve 100fps or more than 7.62x51 or commercial .308 can. Barrel lengths and whatnot come into play but case capacity is case capacity.

 

[CMP70306]

The 7.62x51 is also more efficient. Getting the same velocity as the 30-06 on 10 less grains of powder. Keep in mind the 30-06 couldn't really be upgraded until we retired the M1 Garand.

FTR, the .45 ACP was actually more powerful than the .45 Colt, as the latter was based upon blackpowder. The .45 ACP was also capable of carrying more rounds in a firearm. And, much, much easier to reload and shoot than the .45 colt. An example of where that mattered was The Battle of the Little Bighorn. 210 Men got slaughtered carrying weapons (1873 .45 Colts) that were vastly inferior to the weapons the indigenous people carried. Not until much later was the .45 Colt upgraded to handle smokeless powder. As of yet, nobody has adapted a widespread .45 Colt into a semi-auto pistol

I agree with most of what you’re saying but I disagree with the part about 7.62x51 achieving the same velocities as 30-06. The gap is smaller with factory loaded ammo but it’s not uncommon for 30-06 to be loaded with 15gr-30gr heavier bullets and easily achieve 100fps or more than 7.62x51 or commercial .308 can. Barrel lengths and whatnot come into play but case capacity is case capacity.

That should be prefaced with an “at the time” it was true however with the slower powders of today the 30-06 can be loaded roughly 100 to 200 fps faster with any given bullet weight due to the aforementioned extra case capacity when loaded to the same pressure.

 

[stanley_white]

The 7.62x51 is also more efficient. Getting the same velocity as the 30-06 on 10 less grains of powder. Keep in mind the 30-06 couldn't really be upgraded until we retired the M1 Garand.

FTR, the .45 ACP was actually more powerful than the .45 Colt, as the latter was based upon blackpowder. The .45 ACP was also capable of carrying more rounds in a firearm. And, much, much easier to reload and shoot than the .45 colt. An example of where that mattered was The Battle of the Little Bighorn. 210 Men got slaughtered carrying weapons (1873 .45 Colts) that were vastly inferior to the weapons the indigenous people carried. Not until much later was the .45 Colt upgraded to handle smokeless powder. As of yet, nobody has adapted a widespread .45 Colt into a semi-auto pistol

I understood the original 45 Colt to be a 255 grain bullet at 1050 FPS while the original 45 ACP was 230 grain bullet at 830 FPS — though I confess I am on Wikipedia as my copy of Hatcher’s Notebook is not handy.

-Stan

 

[Jscb1b]

There is no replacement for displacement.

 

[gunsnjeeps]

If anyone wants to safely dispose of any obsolete .30-06 ammo or M1 Garands contact me. I'll even pay shipping.

 

[lash]

If anyone wants to safely dispose of any obsolete .30-06 ammo or M1 Garands contact me. I'll even pay shipping.

Haha! Good plan. I’ll get in on that action too.

 

[sandwarrior]

That should be prefaced with an “at the time” it was true however with the slower powders of today the 30-06 can be loaded roughly 100 to 200 fps faster with any given bullet weight due to the aforementioned extra case capacity when loaded to the same pressure.

The “at the time” factor was limited by the M1 Garand. Too slow of a powder and you will bend the op rod. In a bolt gun, this is not an issue. Thus why you can easily bring 150-165 gr. Bullets to 3K fps with newer powders.( bolt gun)

 

[sandwarrior]

There is no replacement for displacement.

Yes there is… in many facets!

 

[amymorgan20]

If anyone wants to safely dispose of any obsolete .30-06 ammo or M1 Garands contact me. I'll even pay shipping.

Haha, fat chance

 

[cjs88]

Plans to build one here in the near future, so will be relevant for me. Just trying to decide on barrel length since it will be a lightweight hunting build.

 

[FNG1001]

Nothing more American and nostalgic than Winchester Model 70 chambered in .30-06
Been putting food on the table for generations.

The 30-06 is never a mistake. – Townsend Whelen

 

[Dead Eye Dick]

Without the .30-06 there would be no .25-06, there would be no .35 Whelen….Never has been and never will be a .25 or .35 made from a .308 that was a ever a patch to the first two.

 

[High Desert duck]

Nothing more American and nostalgic than Winchester Model 70 chambered in .30-06
Been putting food on the table for generations.

The 30-06 is never a mistake. – Townsend Whelen

I agree.
Win 70. (New CRF) 30-06. Antelope doe.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

My original '06 was a Win 70 Featherlight, glass bedded in a very old B&C polymer stock. It has been handed down to my SIL and harvests deer for him on a very regular basis.

My current '06 is (please don't laugh) an Axis II with a blem wood stock (whose brand slips my mind right now, fageddaboudit, I'm 76, so... Boyd's?). It's feels like the lightest weight '06 I've ever handled, and shoots just fine for me. Likes the Hornady 150gr American Whitetail factory deer round. 22 inch barrel.

Maybe this info can be helpful.

Greg

2/12/23 ETA PS some research into comparative weights seems (to me, anyway) to indicate that the Axis II XP LA is .38lb heavier with a scope than an M70 featherweight without a scope.

Further: The .243 Win. and .358 Win. were born in 1955, only three years after the introduction of the .308 Win. Two and a half decades later, in 1980, Remington introduced the 7mm-08 Rem. In 1997 the .260 Rem. was announced as a new offering by Remington. Finally, in 2006, Federal introduced the .338 Federal. All seem to be holding their own if the rifle offerings by Kimber, Sako, T/C, Winchester, Remington, Ruger and Browning are good indicators. FWIW, I make my own 260 brass by necking 7mm-08 down to 6.5mm, it's cheaper, and usually available when 260 is both unavailable, or more expensive when it its available.

 

[sandwarrior]

Without the .30-06 there would be no .25-06, there would be no .35 Whelen….Never has been and never will be a .25 or .35 made from a .308 that was a ever a patch to the first two.

.25 SALVO, which the Army didn’t adopt, and, the .358 Winchester.

 

[Dead Eye Dick]

.25 SALVO, which the Army didn’t adopt, and, the .358 Winchester.

Didn’t read the post did you? Didn’t say they couldn’t make a .25 or a 35 out of a .308, Said, they couldn’t hold a patch to the original .25-06 and .35 Whelen.

 

[sandwarrior]

Didn’t read the post did you? Didn’t say they couldn’t make a .25 or a 35 out of a .308, Said, they couldn’t hold a patch to the original .25-06 and .35 Whelen.

Don’t really care. Two viable cartridges that were made from the .308, as well as the .25 Souper. Try using ‘plainspeak’ so we’ll know what a ‘patch’ is

 

[RUTGERS95]

.276, .280 I'd of liked to see us adopt as our small arms would have been further ahead. That said, the 06 is king, all hail the king!

 

[The D]

.276, .280 I'd of liked to see us adopt as our small arms would have been further ahead. That said, the 06 is king, all hail the king!

 

[264pr]

Still kills shit dead.

And dont forget that there are still many million rounds of surplus black tips squirreled away across the country.

 

[brianf]

If you didn’t care, why did you respond? Cant hold a patch, nice way of saying, They stand up to the .30-06 derivatives, like a blade of grass stands up to a bush hog, or even plainer, not nearly as useful or as capable. Plain enough. Can’t get any simpler?

Might want to take what @sandwarrior says about mil stuff serious

he has a idea,just saying

 

[sandwarrior]

If you didn’t care, why did you respond? Cant hold a patch, nice way of saying, They stand up to the .30-06 derivatives, like a blade of grass stands up to a bush hog, or even plainer, not nearly as useful or as capable. Plain enough. Can’t get any simpler?

The point is you said, “There are no such rounds.” Well, there are, and they are good rounds.
If you read my responses to this thread, you will see that under given circumstances (not restricted circumstances generally) that I am a proponent of the 30-06. And that derivatives of the 30-06 are excellent.
Just understand you don’t need to demean other derivatives to prove the 30-06 is still a very viable round. They kill just fine. The .308 (actually derived from the .300 Savage) makes an excellent case to work from for improved ballistics. That said, there are no improved ballistics without changing our basic concept of how to set up a rifle to allow better ballistics i.e. tighter twist, better rifling, and better shaped bullets with tighter tolerances.

 

[RUTGERS95]

And dont forget that there are still many million rounds of surplus black tips squirreled away across the country.

now that stuff straight up fuks!

 

[Greg Langelius *]

For my part, I intend, down the road, to make a .358Win Upper for my PA10, and my favorite '06 derivative is the .280 Rem. I've shot and load developed for the 280, and it's easy to find accuracy with it. If I could get 28" .280 AR barrel, I'd be pretty happy. Same/Same for a 28" .280 bolt gun barrel.

But I haven't a clue about dwell times, or how they affect reliability with such long barrels. I got an unpleasant surprise about that with a 24" 6.5G when it broke my standard extractor.

The J-P Improved Grendel Extractor was my solution; and I recommend it for any 6.5G barrel over 20" in length. I've put a halt to heavier 6.5 bullets (than 90gr) in my 24", it's really probably best use is as a Varmint barrel. Failing that, I have a spare 20" barrel for a swap out, if all else fails.

Greg

 

[Greg Langelius *]

I have 8 rifles in 06, very relevant in my mind. If I could have only one rifle Win 70 Featherweight in 06.

My original '06 was, indeed, a Win 70 featherweight, dressed in an aftermarket composite stock. I had been at the range all day on a Friday, and caught a glance at the poster for the 1997 ANJRPC State Team Sniper Championships scheduled the following day.

On the way home, I stopped at the first G&A shop along the way, and bought a used Model 70 Featherweight .30-'06, enough .30-'06 FGMM to permit a good sight-in and confirmation, and to compete on the next day. A quick turnaround back to the range, the barest time to do the setting up, and then (next Morning) meeting another gentleman shooter from the unassigned pool of shooters.

At day's end we each held fourth place trophies for the Match, and I probably had the goofiest grin on the range property. I'm regarding that trophy as I write.

For many years that rifle was my "Never Fails" trusty rifle. I have since given it to my Son-n-Law in Upstate NY, where it continues to harvest the large deer the region produces every year.

Now living in AZ, it soon became apparent that its like was needed, and that few other rifles unlike itself could serve in its revered role. So I did several cruises among the local G&A Shops and settled on a new Savage Axis II LA .30-'06. As put out by the factory, it was a workmanlike implement with what I would describe as sharing the visual character of a hand sledge. I managed to obtain a Blem Boyd's replacement stock from Midway cheaply, mounted the barreled action, swapped out the inexpensive Savage Factory provided XP Option scope for something more preferable (an heirloom Weaver V-16), and tried it out. It turns out (with the new scope) to weigh just a hair more than the Win 70 LA Featherweight .30-'06 without a scope. While I have not set it to any challenges like a State Sniper Championship, it's very comfortable, and shoots as well as I can reasonable manage at the age of 76.

All in all, this Axis II XP .30-'06 is earning much the same trust as my former "bestie" Win 70 Featherweight, at a far more agreeable cost. It processes any popular 150gr-165gr Deer Load admirably, and shoots my M-2 Ball Clone Load very well. One particular point is that the stock design places the recoil thrust line high, very much like an AR, and I particularly appreciate this.

All of this turns out to be a pretty large and pleasant surprise to me, and the rifle definitely resides in my 'Keeper" Cabinet.

Greg

 

[MK20]

Bumping an awesome thread

 

[CaseFinder]

Keeping thread going. God bless German Salazar for extolling the merits of the .30-06 with his Serengeti reamer that makes a 1000m tack driver with today's pills and powders. Throw a good brake on, decent glass, and get a newbie shooter behind it to keep the love affair alive for the next generation!

 

[Dead Eye Dick]

When I was growing up, the two most common long range target rounds were the .30-06 and the .300 H&H. Experiments were being made with such rounds as the brand new 6.5x284, 300 Win Mag, and the 6.5x300 Weatherby-Wright

So, thinking hitting long range targets with the .30-06 is not only doable, not that long ago, it was the goto round for 1000 yards.

 

[Jscb1b]

Sargent Alvin York thought it a fine round. It has been around 117 years. And still kills shit dead.

 

[armorpl8chikn]

Sargent Alvin York thought it a fine round. It has been around 117 years. And still kills shit dead.

Actually....
Its been around 120 years.

 

[gunsnjeeps]

Ehh...the .30-03 and .30-06 aren't the same. The cases are slightly different and the bullets are much different.