User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 7:14:42 PM EDT
[#1]
There are tons of better choices performance wise, but being the military caliber it became hugely popular. Same reason 45-70, and 30-06 became the predominate rifles in their time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 7:19:31 PM EDT
[#2]
They are very accurate, mine will hold a inch at 100yds with Remington UMC, I have a Remington 700VS and when I bought it there was actually a rush on heavy barrels in 308.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 7:27:43 PM EDT
[#3]
There is nothing in North America you can't kill with a .308, ammo is everywhere, short action, light rifle, and mild recoil.
A better question would be.......... Why would you need a short action bolt gun in anything BUT .308? I can see moving up to a long action / magnum if you are hunting the biggest game @500+ yards most of the time, but other than that you can keep the recoil. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 7:40:47 PM EDT
[#4]
I use 308 exclusively for hunting.
Where I hunt, the very farthest I can shoot is 200 yards, my usual shots are much closer (brush and trees get in the way). I only hunt deer with it and it works well Short action is shorter, lighter and quicker to cycle. 30 caliber kills stuff very well. 308 brass is easy to find. 308 can use the same powder as 223 I can make easy to find empty 243 brass into 308 brass Light recoiling, especially out of a light rifle Works well out of shorter barrels Factory ammo is easy to find (usually) Factory ammo is pretty accurate My hand loads are super accurate Since I don't need to shoot far, I can use a lighter scope and have a lighter rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 7:53:24 PM EDT
[#5]
Some states don't allow hunting with semi-autos.
If you have a semi-auto in .308, it makes sense to have a bolt action in .308 as well... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 8:07:07 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you have a semi-auto in .308, it makes sense to have a bolt action in .308 as well... The reverse of this is why I want an AR10 in .303 Brit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 8:30:23 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOLWUT? For military applications, logistics is everything. For civilian applications, it still plays a big part. Common, popular calibers such as .308 are readily available in a wide variety of loadings from many, many suppliers, giving you choice from easily accessible stocks. Uncommon calibers may present a smaller selection of loadings, and from more specialty suppliers. Particularly uncommon calibers require (or virtually require) loading your own. This is often a very big factor in choosing a firearm - if you can't feed it, or feel it is too expensive and/or time consuming to feed it, you likely aren't going to be inclined to purchase said rifle. (And if you already have something else in .308 - say, a semi-automatic rifle, as you mentioned - why get into another caliber entirely?) Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
...and logistics isn't as much of a concern. LOLWUT? For military applications, logistics is everything. For civilian applications, it still plays a big part. Common, popular calibers such as .308 are readily available in a wide variety of loadings from many, many suppliers, giving you choice from easily accessible stocks. Uncommon calibers may present a smaller selection of loadings, and from more specialty suppliers. Particularly uncommon calibers require (or virtually require) loading your own. This is often a very big factor in choosing a firearm - if you can't feed it, or feel it is too expensive and/or time consuming to feed it, you likely aren't going to be inclined to purchase said rifle. (And if you already have something else in .308 - say, a semi-automatic rifle, as you mentioned - why get into another caliber entirely?) Logistics is only really a meaningful variable for civilians if they already own a semi-auto .308. I'd be very surprised if more than 25% of .308 bolt action owners owned some kind of .308/7.62x51 autoloader that could share ammo with their bolt gun. If you're not a volume shooter with your bolt action of choice, the logistical demands aren't that hard to address. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 9:17:29 PM EDT
[#8]
Perhaps the arguments for it are weak but the arguments against are no stronger.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 9:18:45 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Logistics is only really a meaningful variable for civilians if they already own a semi-auto .308. I'd be very surprised if more than 25% of .308 bolt action owners owned some kind of .308/7.62x51 autoloader that could share ammo with their bolt gun. If you're not a volume shooter with your bolt action of choice, the logistical demands aren't that hard to address. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
...and logistics isn't as much of a concern. LOLWUT? For military applications, logistics is everything. For civilian applications, it still plays a big part. Common, popular calibers such as .308 are readily available in a wide variety of loadings from many, many suppliers, giving you choice from easily accessible stocks. Uncommon calibers may present a smaller selection of loadings, and from more specialty suppliers. Particularly uncommon calibers require (or virtually require) loading your own. This is often a very big factor in choosing a firearm - if you can't feed it, or feel it is too expensive and/or time consuming to feed it, you likely aren't going to be inclined to purchase said rifle. (And if you already have something else in .308 - say, a semi-automatic rifle, as you mentioned - why get into another caliber entirely?) Logistics is only really a meaningful variable for civilians if they already own a semi-auto .308. I'd be very surprised if more than 25% of .308 bolt action owners owned some kind of .308/7.62x51 autoloader that could share ammo with their bolt gun. If you're not a volume shooter with your bolt action of choice, the logistical demands aren't that hard to address. I am not a volume shooter but have plenty of 308's to go around. I am slowly phasing out the bolts as I don't hunt and the autos will do everything I need. That being said if a guy already owns a 308 there is no reason to get rid of it. For most people they will never realize the performance difference between 06 and 308. It is nice being able to buy everything from cheap plinking ammo to high end match right off the shelf. Not as common with 06 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 9:20:14 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've been known to kill a few things with mine - 1968 Mod 70 /.308, plus I can hand load any .30 bullet from 110 - 220 g for it and kill anything I want. https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/857x643q90/39/zpu.JPG Your choice in whiskey is awful how could we possibly expect you to pick a good cartridge? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 9:20:53 PM EDT
[#11]
Because its a(lmost a) NATO caliber.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 9:26:32 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you're not a volume shooter with your bolt action of choice, the logistical demands aren't that hard to address. In some respects, it is actually the opposite. Buying dies and other reloading equipment just to load your boutique round for occasional use is anything but cost-effective. Nor is it cost-effective to order just a few boxes of your super-duper cartridge. In that respect, it's much better to have something that I can stop in anywhere on the spur of the moment and grab some ammo at a fairly reasonable cost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 9:28:01 PM EDT
[#13]
Accurate and low recoil. I bought one for my 12yo daughter.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 9:45:34 PM EDT
[#14]
Short action equals lighter rifle and faster follow up shots. .308 is an extremely accurate round with low recoil. .308 is a text book deer cartridge out to 300 yards and is available in practically every rifle made today. What's not to like?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 9:50:16 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
I understand why .308 and 7.62x51mm semi-automatic and automatic rifles are as popular as they are. Those calibers seem like a nice compromise within the limitations of a box mag fed autoloader and logistics shared with belt-fed MGs. In bolt actions, .308 doesn't make as much sense to me. Bolt actions are more forgiving of varying loads, and logistics isn't as much of a concern. The performance of the cartridge is almost all that matters, and from my limited knowledge, .308 seems like a bit of an odd compromise. .30-06, for example, can do everything .308 can and then some. It can be loaded for heavier bullets, higher velocity, or both. And that's just looking at things from a general purpose perspective. Guys in the know looking for precision and chasing ballistic coefficient seem to end up in the 6mm range. Hunters seem to look at lighter cartridges like .243 unless they're going after something big, in which case .30-06 almost seems to be the minimum caliber they ask for. But when people talk about getting a bolt action rifle, .308 seems to be the default caliber when there's no particular use in mind. Why is that? What are you guys shooting with a .243 that a .308 can't handle? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 9:57:59 PM EDT
[#16]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 10:11:45 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What are you guys shooting with a .243 that a .308 can't handle? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I understand why .308 and 7.62x51mm semi-automatic and automatic rifles are as popular as they are. Those calibers seem like a nice compromise within the limitations of a box mag fed autoloader and logistics shared with belt-fed MGs. In bolt actions, .308 doesn't make as much sense to me. Bolt actions are more forgiving of varying loads, and logistics isn't as much of a concern. The performance of the cartridge is almost all that matters, and from my limited knowledge, .308 seems like a bit of an odd compromise. .30-06, for example, can do everything .308 can and then some. It can be loaded for heavier bullets, higher velocity, or both. And that's just looking at things from a general purpose perspective. Guys in the know looking for precision and chasing ballistic coefficient seem to end up in the 6mm range. Hunters seem to look at lighter cartridges like .243 unless they're going after something big, in which case .30-06 almost seems to be the minimum caliber they ask for. But when people talk about getting a bolt action rifle, .308 seems to be the default caliber when there's no particular use in mind. Why is that? What are you guys shooting with a .243 that a .308 can't handle? I think you have that question backwards, and it's probably more of a regional thing. There are some parts of the country where I would want nothing less than a .45-70 or a magnum rifle caliber. Around here, most game doesn't get too big. .243 is more than adequate, and it has the added advantages of a flatter trajectory with casual recoil. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 10:11:47 PM EDT
[#18]
I went with .308 because-
Excellent barrel life when compared to other "long range precision" calibers. Low cost ammo. Very available and diverse selection of ammo. I also own a .308 semi, mag fed rifle, and I like to keep my calibers consolidated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 10:18:07 PM EDT
[#19]
If you reload you will find that a good load could be found using horse shit for powder. Or so it seems. Good sub moa loads are easy. I will still take a 260 any day of the week over a 308 and I have multiples of both.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 10:31:23 PM EDT
[#20]
My dad bought me a Rem. 742 in .308 when I was a teen. The 742 is long gone and good riddance but I keep coming back to the .308.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 11:56:00 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess I'm a simple kind of guy. I stock: .22 9mm .45 5.56 .308 12guage If I was going to buy a bolt gun I would be looking for one in .308. Exactly my stock, too. I've recently added .303 British and 7.62X54 as fringe rounds. I only have 1 rifle in each. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2014 10:02:47 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Exactly my stock, too. I've recently added .303 British and 7.62X54 as fringe rounds. I only have 1 rifle in each. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I guess I'm a simple kind of guy. I stock: .22 9mm .45 5.56 .308 12guage If I was going to buy a bolt gun I would be looking for one in .308. Exactly my stock, too. I've recently added .303 British and 7.62X54 as fringe rounds. I only have 1 rifle in each. I'm at the other end of the spectrum. I own a bunch of calibers, and I've never owned a .308. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2014 11:37:08 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Short action equals lighter rifle and faster follow up shots. .308 is an extremely accurate round with low recoil. .308 is a text book deer cartridge out to 300 yards and is available in practically every rifle made today. What's not to like? The light rifle argument simply does not hold up. For every example of a light short action .308 Win rifle, I can show you a long action rifle that weighs the same or less, or can show you how to build one that weighs less. My wood stock .30-06 Winchester Model 70 weighs 6.5 pounds with a 2-7X Redfield scope. All of my .308 Win rifles are significantly heavier, ranging around 9.5 to 10.5 pounds without a scope. How a light rifle relates to fast follow up shots is precisely the reverse of "fast", and the cartridge is not low recoil, it's identical to every other cartridge of any caliber that launches a bullet of any particular weight at the same speeds. The accuracy is dependent on the barrel and bullet first and foremost, with no more inherent accuracy than any other cartridge of similar dimensions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2014 11:52:28 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Of course it can, though the real question is "why would you?", when there are far better cartridges to use ie 300WM or 7mmRM Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Short action. Slightly lighter and handier. Very versatile cartridge, will do almost anything that needs done on the North American continent (not big bear or moose). Typically an accurate cartridge. And its a military caliber. There is still a large segment of the shooting fraternity that think cheap military ammo is the way to go. Even tho 7.62 isn't especially cheap. sure it can Of course it can, though the real question is "why would you?", when there are far better cartridges to use ie 300WM or 7mmRM Lighter, cheaper, can use the same gun for anything, so you don't need to buy a new rifle, scope, and caliber just to claim your moose. Maybe your aren't shooting one from 400 yards away. Easier to shoot (because it's lighter, and kicks less) so less fatigue for your trek... Lots of reasons. Dead is dead, they won't become deader from a larger caliber. You can always go bigger on anything what exactly makes something the ideal round across the board for each game animal? Exactly, that's a question that can't be answered. Last deer I shot was DRT with .223, millions of people use a .243, millions use .30-30, some people even use arrows! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2014 11:59:52 AM EDT
[#25]
I dumped .308/7.62 NATO a while back and I don't really have any desire to get back into it. I don't buy ammo from local stores, so local availability isn't a real issue, and I find that 7.5x54 French is a sufficient alternative if one is capable of loading it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2014 1:16:51 PM EDT
[#26]
I picked up a .308 because;
longer barrel life a plethora of reloading knowledge is available for the cartridge I also REALISTICALLY looked at what I was using the rifle for, deer @ 200-400 yards, and Long range (1000 yards max). I don't need a magnum to do this, an the 30.06 is not very efficient at converting the extra cost in powder to increased performance |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:16:10 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Your choice in whiskey is awful how could we possibly expect you to pick a good cartridge? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I've been known to kill a few things with mine - 1968 Mod 70 /.308, plus I can hand load any .30 bullet from 110 - 220 g for it and kill anything I want. https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/857x643q90/39/zpu.JPG Your choice in whiskey is awful how could we possibly expect you to pick a good cartridge? Must be a yankee. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:24:15 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: When you look at new production factory loaded ammo, the big differences seem to be between brands and loads rather than calibers. For example, the Winchester Super X seems to be one price across the popular calibers, the Remington Core-Lokt seems to be another price across the popular calibers, and with the PPU blue box stuff, there only seems to be a $1 or so difference between calibers. The only popular hunting cartridge that seems to have an edge on cost is .30-30. The availability argument seems a bit odd. I've never lived anywhere that people buy their ammo at a gas station, but just about any place I've been that carries ammo is going to have all the major rifle calibers. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: cost and availability? When you look at new production factory loaded ammo, the big differences seem to be between brands and loads rather than calibers. For example, the Winchester Super X seems to be one price across the popular calibers, the Remington Core-Lokt seems to be another price across the popular calibers, and with the PPU blue box stuff, there only seems to be a $1 or so difference between calibers. The only popular hunting cartridge that seems to have an edge on cost is .30-30. The availability argument seems a bit odd. I've never lived anywhere that people buy their ammo at a gas station, but just about any place I've been that carries ammo is going to have all the major rifle calibers. I'll have to take you down to my family's store. They're the only place that sells ammo in about a 10-15 mile radius. Guess what - it's a BP gas station with a small gun/feed shop inside.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:27:06 AM EDT
[#29]
Once upon a time, surplus military 7.62 x 51 NATO ammo was inexpensive and plentiful.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:28:57 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol. 308 AND 30-06 You do think outside the box. You you.... Rebel ETA Many of the tacticool kids think you will catch the Fudds if you had something like a .25-06 or .280. And heaven forbid if you have a .375 H&H!  Ugh, guilty!  If it's good enough for Uncle, it's good enough for me is my mantra.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:37:35 AM EDT
[#31]
Common and affordable caliber. Accurate and effective for most hunting and target shooting needs. Many budget rifles are chambered in it. The same could be said about the 30-06.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:45:36 AM EDT
[#32]
I certainly like mine.
I have two. One is an old Remington 600 Mohawk with an 18.5 inch barrel. The other is a rare(in this caliber) Remington LVSF. My old 1972 built 600 is a very light short action carbine that is my all time favorite walk hunting rifle. I checked the zero two weeks ago at the range and it put three Federal Blue Box 150 gr. bullets that could be covered with a quarter. By the way a few years ago I had a guy chrono three shots ccoming out of it using 165 gr. Federal Premium BTSP and the three shots averaged 2550 at the muzzle. Not bad for 18.5 inch barrel and using a 165 grain bullet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:48:48 AM EDT
[#33]
It's a very efficient cartridge for one.
Also, move on down to .260 Rem or .243 and you cut your barrel life in half. When you shoot a lot of rounds, you'd probably try and avoid a barrel burner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:51:25 AM EDT
[#34]
If you don't reload, there is a larger range of bullet weights in .30-06, which makes it a more versatile round imho.
That said, I have 1 .30-06 and 2 308s. 300 win mag is also an excellent round. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:57:32 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's a very efficient cartridge for one. Also, move on down to .260 Rem or .243 and you cut your barrel life in half. When you shoot a lot of rounds, you'd probably try and avoid a barrel burner. Using 45+ grains of powder to shoot relatively low BC bullets at relatively low speeds isn't exactly "very efficient." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:59:43 AM EDT
[#36]
Lol bassgasm
The question should be..... What is wrong with .308 for most commonly encountered situations for most shooters... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 11:03:14 AM EDT
[#37]
I bought a 30-06. Only because dad and I split the rifle and he wouldn't budge on caliber. My next bolt will be a ruger Mercian in .308 as my beater field gun
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 11:06:24 AM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
I understand why .308 and 7.62x51mm semi-automatic and automatic rifles are as popular as they are. Those calibers seem like a nice compromise within the limitations of a box mag fed autoloader and logistics shared with belt-fed MGs. In bolt actions, .308 doesn't make as much sense to me. Bolt actions are more forgiving of varying loads, and logistics isn't as much of a concern. The performance of the cartridge is almost all that matters, and from my limited knowledge, .308 seems like a bit of an odd compromise. .30-06, for example, can do everything .308 can and then some. It can be loaded for heavier bullets, higher velocity, or both. And that's just looking at things from a general purpose perspective. Guys in the know looking for precision and chasing ballistic coefficient seem to end up in the 6mm range. Hunters seem to look at lighter cartridges like .243 unless they're going after something big, in which case .30-06 almost seems to be the minimum caliber they ask for. But when people talk about getting a bolt action rifle, .308 seems to be the default caliber when there's no particular use in mind. Why is that? In my admittedly limited experience, that load flexibility is more theoretical than practical. My Remington 700 in .30-06 does not like heavy loads at all in terms of accuracy. It shoots really well with lighter bullets. I acquired it used, but it seems to be stock from as near as I can tell. So while I have the theoretical capability of shooting heavier bullets, I would never choose to do so with this gun because accuracy would suffer and I would worry about misses and inhumane hits were I to use it for hunting. If someone were to entice me into a bear hunt or some camp hunt out west or in Canada, I'd opt for a different rifle that could shoot heavier lead more accurately than this one just to make sure the shot was worthy of the trouble taken to take it. So in that sense, that same rifle in .308 would actually offer about the same practical utility as I will get out of it in .30-06. Once you start reloading, the .308 comes into it's own simply because of the cheaper costs to work up a batch. The argument could be made that in a SHTF situation the added top end on the .30-06 might be nice in a survival scenario, but is .30-06 any more prevalent than .308 these days? I have yet to see a store shelf that has .30-06 but lacks .308. So when scrounging, again, I'm not seeing a practical advantage in the .30-06. As for the why is .308 so popular in bolt guns? It's more recent than the .30-06 in terms of military use and the .556 is small enough that it didn't bring everyone with it, so there are lots of .308 hold-outs. It's simple "if the military is using it..." psychology. And there is a caliber commonality aspect for the survivalists. Even surplus ammo can be used to decent effect in a bolt gun if needed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 11:12:22 AM EDT
[#39]
This. My Mohawk has been a great brush gun. By brush, I don't mean shooting through it, but crawling through it.
Ditched the plastic trigger guard and put a steel replacement on it. Many of my friends have tried to buy it from me. .308 IS America! Quote HistoryQuoted:
I certainly like mine. I have two. One is an old Remington 600 Mohawk with an 18.5 inch barrel. The other is a rare(in this caliber) Remington LVSF. My old 1972 built 600 is a very light short action carbine that is my all time favorite walk hunting rifle. I checked the zero two weeks ago at the range and it put three Federal Blue Box 150 gr. bullets that could be covered with a quarter. By the way a few years ago I had a guy chrono three shots ccoming out of it using 165 gr. Federal Premium BTSP and the three shots averaged 2550 at the muzzle. Not bad for 18.5 inch barrel and using a 165 grain bullet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 11:16:04 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Once upon a time, surplus military 7.62 x 51 NATO ammo was inexpensive and plentiful. those were great days 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 11:20:46 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Using 45+ grains of powder to shoot relatively low BC bullets at relatively low speeds isn't exactly "very efficient." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's a very efficient cartridge for one. Also, move on down to .260 Rem or .243 and you cut your barrel life in half. When you shoot a lot of rounds, you'd probably try and avoid a barrel burner. Using 45+ grains of powder to shoot relatively low BC bullets at relatively low speeds isn't exactly "very efficient." Relative to what? A 6.5? A 6mm? Relative to .308, any larger .30 caliber is considerably less efficient. Your use of the word "relative" is pretty pointless, because everything is "relative" to what it's being used for. The vast majority of people aren't shooting 1000 yard competition, and if they are, they're probably better served picking something else, not that plenty of people don't shoot to 1k with .308s. You want a long range 6.5, or magnum .30, you're also going to be toting a lot more barrel around. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 11:26:03 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Relative to what? A 6.5? A 6mm? Relative to .308, any larger .30 caliber is considerably less efficient. Your use of the word "relative" is pretty pointless, because everything is "relative" to what it's being used for. The vast majority of people aren't shooting 1000 yard competition, and if they are, they're probably better served picking something else, not that plenty of people don't shoot to 1k with .308s. You want a long range 6.5, or magnum .30, you're also going to be toting a lot more barrel around. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's a very efficient cartridge for one. Also, move on down to .260 Rem or .243 and you cut your barrel life in half. When you shoot a lot of rounds, you'd probably try and avoid a barrel burner. Using 45+ grains of powder to shoot relatively low BC bullets at relatively low speeds isn't exactly "very efficient." Relative to what? A 6.5? A 6mm? Relative to .308, any larger .30 caliber is considerably less efficient. Your use of the word "relative" is pretty pointless, because everything is "relative" to what it's being used for. The vast majority of people aren't shooting 1000 yard competition, and if they are, they're probably better served picking something else, not that plenty of people don't shoot to 1k with .308s. You want a long range 6.5, or magnum .30, you're also going to be toting a lot more barrel around. As you said, everything is relative. I'm curious since you think 308 is "very efficient" if you could list a few cartridges that are less efficient for general use, or if you could define how you think of what makes an efficient cartridge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 11:28:02 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess I'm a simple kind of guy. I stock: .22 9mm .45 5.56 .308 12guage If I was going to buy a bolt gun I would be looking for one in .308. I add the following to that list: .22WMR .45LC .280 REM .338 WM |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 11:28:05 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Using 45+ grains of powder to shoot relatively low BC bullets at relatively low speeds isn't exactly "very efficient." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's a very efficient cartridge for one. Also, move on down to .260 Rem or .243 and you cut your barrel life in half. When you shoot a lot of rounds, you'd probably try and avoid a barrel burner. Using 45+ grains of powder to shoot relatively low BC bullets at relatively low speeds isn't exactly "very efficient." .308 efficiency When compared to other .30 calibers the .308 shines in efficiency, My load is a 178 amax (.495 bc) under 44g of varget with a velocity of 2700 fps. Maybe you do not find that very efficient but to me I am getting more out of my powder and rifle as compared to my .300 WSM |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 11:30:54 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
.308 efficiency When compared to other .30 calibers the .308 shines in efficiency, My load is a 178 amax (.495 bc) under 44g of varget with a velocity of 2700 fps. Maybe you do not find that very efficient but to me I am getting more out of my powder and rifle as compared to my .300 WSM Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's a very efficient cartridge for one. Also, move on down to .260 Rem or .243 and you cut your barrel life in half. When you shoot a lot of rounds, you'd probably try and avoid a barrel burner. Using 45+ grains of powder to shoot relatively low BC bullets at relatively low speeds isn't exactly "very efficient." .308 efficiency When compared to other .30 calibers the .308 shines in efficiency, My load is a 178 amax (.495 bc) under 44g of varget with a velocity of 2700 fps. Maybe you do not find that very efficient but to me I am getting more out of my powder and rifle as compared to my .300 WSM LOLOLOL. Compared to other 30cal cartridges! That's like saying "my 572 big block car is very efficient if I compare it only to even less efficient cars." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 1:04:22 PM EDT
[#46]
It works great for most North American game.
It is available everywhere. Going back some years, surplus was cheap and readily available. Sure there are allot of newer calibers that fill a niche and are tailored for a specific purpose, but for the average person (fudd) who does not want to have to buy a bunch of different guns for different things you can get .308 from 110g to 240g which pretty much covers woodchucks to shorter (<300y) distance elk and black bear. Which most of the wooded states around here, more than 300y is not a common event. ( I don't think I ever had a shot over 75y in the woods here )
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 1:11:49 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOLOLOL. Compared to other 30cal cartridges! That's like saying "my 572 big block car is very efficient if I compare it only to even less efficient cars." Personally, my go to hunting calibers are my .280 and my .338. Are they the best? Nope. But I've had them a long time and there's no practical reason for me to change to one of the newer calibers. I also use my .308 and .223 for hunting. I'm yet to lose an animal because I didn't use a "better" cartridge. Sometimes, good enough is, well, good enough. dead is dead. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 1:18:37 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Personally, my go to hunting calibers are my .280 and my .338. Are they the best? Nope. But I've had them a long time and there's no practical reason for me to change to one of the newer calibers. I also use my .308 and .223 for hunting. I'm yet to lose an animal because I didn't use a "better" cartridge. Sometimes, good enough is, well, good enough. dead is dead. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
LOLOLOL. Compared to other 30cal cartridges! That's like saying "my 572 big block car is very efficient if I compare it only to even less efficient cars." Personally, my go to hunting calibers are my .280 and my .338. Are they the best? Nope. But I've had them a long time and there's no practical reason for me to change to one of the newer calibers. I also use my .308 and .223 for hunting. I'm yet to lose an animal because I didn't use a "better" cartridge. Sometimes, good enough is, well, good enough. dead is dead. Not a single thing I said had anything at all to do with hunting or being "good enough." It should have been perfectly clear that my issue was originally with the statement that .308 is a "very efficient" cartridge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 1:20:23 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not a single thing I said had anything at all to do with hunting or being "good enough." It should have been perfectly clear that my issue was originally with the statement that .308 is a "very efficient" cartridge. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
LOLOLOL. Compared to other 30cal cartridges! That's like saying "my 572 big block car is very efficient if I compare it only to even less efficient cars." Personally, my go to hunting calibers are my .280 and my .338. Are they the best? Nope. But I've had them a long time and there's no practical reason for me to change to one of the newer calibers. I also use my .308 and .223 for hunting. I'm yet to lose an animal because I didn't use a "better" cartridge. Sometimes, good enough is, well, good enough. dead is dead. Not a single thing I said had anything at all to do with hunting or being "good enough." It should have been perfectly clear that my issue was originally with the statement that .308 is a "very efficient" cartridge. you are correct. I took it as more than that.... I cheerfully re-direct my post elsewhere and owe you an internet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 1:25:16 PM EDT
[#50]
It's a perfectly cromulent caliber.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
