fistful
member
I came across this in the Dec. 1983 issue of American Rifleman, in an article by Col. Charles Askins.
What goes on here?
Leaving aside the distinction between 7.62 Nato and .308 Winchester, I thought the .308 was a close duplicate of the .30-06, and therefore closer in terminal ballistics to the .30-ought than to the .Savage. As for recoil, I haven't shot .308 since I traded my Steyr .308 for a .30-06 Mauser. The two guns being so different, I'd have no way of comparing the "kick."
The Army can give you a lot of abstruse reasons for swapping off the perfectly satisfactory '06 round for the shorter and less powerful .308, but the real truth of the story is that the run-of-the-mill GI squawked his head off because the older round kicked him. The .308 has no more kick than a .22 Short. It should have made him happy....It kills about like the much older .300 Savage, a close relative.
What goes on here?
Leaving aside the distinction between 7.62 Nato and .308 Winchester, I thought the .308 was a close duplicate of the .30-06, and therefore closer in terminal ballistics to the .30-ought than to the .Savage. As for recoil, I haven't shot .308 since I traded my Steyr .308 for a .30-06 Mauser. The two guns being so different, I'd have no way of comparing the "kick."