30-06 or .308 for 1000 yds sniping?

[Firepower!]

30-06 or .308 for 1000 yds snipping?

I have Remington model 700 for 30-06; and
HK-91 for .308.

I am going on south in the country for some desert hunting and target shooting.

Which do you think is better?

 

[Jimmie]

http://www.snipercountry.com/Articles/AccuracyFacts.asp

 

[MarshallDodge]

I would think the Remington is going to be more accurate than the PTR anyway.

My suggestion would be to benchrest both guns at 100 yards and see how they do on paper.

 

[skinewmexico]

I doubt that an HK-91 is going to shoot to 500 yards with any kind of predictable accuracy. Plus you need a long barrel to get a 308 to remain supersonic at 1000 yards. So I'd say 30-06, unless you want to start from scratch with a modern 1000 yard cartridge.

 

[Mr White]

If you're looking for an accurate 1000 yd caliber, a 6.5mm is where you want to be. Of the 2 you listed, however, I'd say 30-06 because you can squeeze an extra hundred FPS out of it with 175s.

 

[The Annoyed Man]

I would say either caliber would be good for 1,000 yards, but I tend to use my scissors for "snipping."

 

[W.E.G.]

Only one letter "p" in sniping.

Use whichever rifle has the best sights.

There is little difference between the two cartridges.

A 3mph change in wind velocity will change the point of impact left/right 35 inches at 1000 yards with those guns.

Good luck with your 1000-yard shooting.

 

[cracked butt]

http://www.snipercountry.com/Articles/AccuracyFacts.asp

There are a lot of truths and half-truths in that article.

For one, the .308 was more accurate in gas operated semiautos available when the .308 was introduced- namely the M1 Garand and M14. The M1 garand is typically more accurate when chambered in the .308 simply because the M1 was not originally designed for the 30-06, but a cartridge more similar to the .308, and the M1 could not use the 30-06 loaded to its full potential, even less so today with better powders available.

Palma competitors use rifles chambered in .308 simply because they are required to by the rules of the game, not because its any better or worse than a 30-06, also the ammunition used by Palma competitors are not even Ideal loads for long range shooting of the .308.

Some accuracy tests at 600 yards with the .308 produced test groups in the 1 to 2 inch range. These were 20 to 40 shot groups.

1/3 MOA at 600 yards for a 40 shot group? I have a bridge that's for sale.

The .308 might have a slight edge in accuracy at 1000 yards, but that is pretty much neagted by the fact that a bullet fired from a 30-06 starts out 100fps faster which is enough to make it easier to keep the bullet supersonic out to 1000 yards.

 

[oregonhunter]

your a sniper eh

 

[RIDE]

Take a look at the .257 Weatherby Mag.

 

[BsChoy]

There is a guy named Don (USSR) here and on snipershide who has had really ood results from an '06 and RL22 with 190 grain bullets. It is a completely viable option IMHO

 

[Roswell 1847]

The original Match ammunition for use with the M14 was downloaded to the same balistics as the .303 British service cartridge, 170+ grain bullet at around 2,460 FPS.

Powders used at the time caused a rapid increase in pressures in the 7.62X51 Nato case as bullet weights approached those of the heaviest .30/06 loadings.
To ahceive the same ballistics of the .303 round the Nato round generated about 10% higher pressures.

 

[USSR]

Well, if you look strictly at the two rifles mentioned, it's a no-brainer; the Remington 700 being a boltgun, will shoot rings around an HK-91. If you look strictly at the two catridges in comparable bolt action rifles, I would take the .30-06 for 1k shots (and I have both .308 and .30-06 sniper rifles and shoot regularly at 1000 yards). Here is why: when you are shooting at 1k, the biggest factor is the wind. Assuming you have an accurate rifle, ballistics is everything. With the .30-06, you can drive 190gr SMK's (BC of .533) at 2900fps and cut somewhat into the wind. The .308 simply cannot match the .30-06 with velocity and heavy, high BC bullets. Oh, and Jimmie, that article is 10 years old and based on nearly 50 year old data. With the slower burning powders we have today, and not being forced to load the '06 to pressures suitable to a M1 Garand, the '06 cartridge gives up nothing to the .308.

Don

 

[Roswell 1847]

Actually the Garand receiver and bolt could withstand 120,000 PSI, far higher than any normal cartridge case of the day could handle.
Heavier bullet loads were not normally issued for the Garand because of feeding issues and a defective cut on early op rods rather than lock up or receiver strength issues.
Early failures of operating rods were cured by a radiused cut rather than the original square cut. I traded the square Cut Op rod from a Rifle I rebuilt to a collector for a NIB raduis cut op rod.
He was building up an example of an original early issue Garand on a low number receiver so the part was to finish his gun out as it left the Armory.

Garands with the proper rod can handle even the hottest AP without a problem.

 

[USSR]

Actually the Garand receiver and bolt could withstand 120,000 PSI, far higher than any normal cartridge case of the day could handle.
Heavier bullet loads were not normally issued for the Garand because of feeding issues and a defective cut on early op rods rather than lock up or receiver strength issues.
Early failures of operating rods were cured by a radiused cut rather than the original square cut. I traded the square Cut Op rod from a Rifle I rebuilt to a collector for a NIB raduis cut op rod.

Not talking about chamber pressure. The reason you can't use heavy bullets with slow burning powder in the Garand is due to port pressure, not chamber pressure. And what such ammo does to op rods, will not be cured by the radius cut change that was made during the early production years of the Garand.

Don

 

[Roswell 1847]

with slow burning powder in the Garand

I see you are speaking only of modern loads not the early problems with the 172 gr bullets in the Garand.

 

[Bazooka Joe71]

but I tend to use my scissors for "snipping."

Only one letter "p" in sniping.

Dang guys, tough crowd tonight, eh? I'm going to have to leave a post-it note on my screen reminding me to triple check my spelling before posting on here.

As for the question, there is no question which rifle is going to be better for 1,000 yard shots(Rem 700)...Even though I voted for .308 before reading the whole post.

 

[1200 meters]

Hey Guys, I shoot 1000 meters often. was a sniper for over 16 years and used an M-21 system with ART scope. in 1978 I fired 10.5 in groups at1250 meters with the M-118 ball ammo. I presently load 240gr serrea bthp with 4064 and it is transsonic past 1300meters. dave

 

[Firepower!]

On cartridges

I have read at many places that 308 is more accurate since perhaps its a new cartridge then 30-06??

 

[taliv]

did you read the link on the first response in this thread?

 

[Ol` Joe]

Both have won 1000 yd matches and will do. The biggest thing in long range shooting is knowing for certain exactly how far the target is. Once you get out past 300 yds a error of 25 yds in range or less can result in a miss. If you know your range the drop and windage can be figured to compensate for it. If you don`y you`re just sprayin` and prayin`. The difference in drop at 500 yds with a 190 gr MKHP and 510 yds at 2600 fps is 4" raise the velocity to 2750 and the drop is still 3". That is the difference only 10 yds makes at 500, go to 1000 yd and and you get the idea.....

 

[alsaqr]

My LC-70 M-118 Match says 173 grain bullet and 2,550 fps on the boxes.
My LC-62 M-72 Match (.30-06) says 173 grain bullet and 2,640 fps on the boxes. Neither is nearly as accurate as some linked IVI-70 7.62mm that I have.

Lake City Match ammo started getting sloppy in the early 1960s: primer holes off center, etc.

 

[USSR]

My LC-70 M-118 Match says 173 grain bullet and 2,550 fps on the boxes.
My LC-62 M-72 Match (.30-06) says 173 grain bullet and 2,640 fps on the boxes. Neither is nearly as accurate as some linked IVI-70 7.62mm that I have.

Lake City Match ammo started getting sloppy in the early 1960s: primer holes off center, etc.

If you've ever pulled down one of these LC Match rounds, you would understand why they are not particularly accurate rounds. First, they seal the bullet with asphaltum, which hardens into something akin to epoxy. Bullet release must be into the hundreds of pounds, and the only way you can get them out of the case is with a collet-type of puller. Second, the bullet weights and ogive-to-base measurements are all over the place. And finally, the case weights vary by up to 7 grains with M72 Match. Still, for the reloader with alot of time on his hands, good ammo can be made from the components.

Don

 

[Firepower!]

http://www.snipercountry.com/Articles/AccuracyFacts.asp
I read this one.
It cliams clearly .308

 

[Silvanus]

I think in your case, the weapon is far more important than the caliber. The Remington is the only one of those two that will give you a realistic chance of hitting something at 1000 yards.