Why it's time to stop recommending 308Win, tips for new "long range" shooters.

[The_Next_Generation]

(This is not the first time this topic has been brought up on the web. SnipersHide has a great article on this subject.)

For shooting enthusiasts (by this I mean people shooting for enjoyment, not survival) interested in a centerfire bolt-gun for casual target and any kind distance work there is no reason to choose 308 Win.

We see it all the time on the forums, Facebook groups, etc. Someone asks about getting into longer-ish distance shooting and inevitably tons of people with minimal experience themselves recommend a 308 - to the point where a well-supported argument for a modern 6.5 or 6mm cartridge is drowned out. This does not help the newbie.

Yesterday I walked into Academy and saw a plethora of quality, match-grade 6.5 Creedmoor ammunition from a range of manufacturers priced at or below comparable 308win loads. I've visited roughly 8 gun stores and pawn shops in my area in North Carolina and they all stocked 6.5 Creedmoor for similar prices to their 308. Back home in WA and ID, the story is exactly the same. These new cartridges seem to be here to stay and are widely available. If a store in any kind of relatively well-populated area sells match-quality 308win, they're going to have 6.5 Creedmoor right next to it.

Please don't post about surplus 308 ammo - yes it goes boom but it's not anywhere near as accurate as other choices in the $0.90+/rd price range for either caliber. Same goes for surplus projectiles, brass, etc. Theyre not the same as match-quality components and we know it. If you're serious about getting hits "way out there", surplus/NATO-spec 308/7.62 will be frustrating.

The ballistic advantage of 6.5 or 6 is obvious. Lower recoil, too. Can the 308 get the job done? Yes, of course. Ive shot hundreds and hundreds of 208gr AMAX loads from a Remington 700 build at 650 yards to just over 1400 yards (I love public land) and made hits. But the 6.5 does it better (or at least makes it easier) hands down.

6mm Creedmoor is even more promising from a performance standpoint (especially with the 110smk), but obviously the ammo availability isn't really there unless you order it online. Which, if you're reading this post, you're capable of doing. Some outfits sell Hornady 105gr 20rd boxes for $17 plus shipping. Not too shabby.

My goal with this thread is that new shooters using the search function may stumble upon it and take this point into consideration when everyone is telling them to "Start on a 308."

As a counterpoint to my elitist rant, Ive shot against and been beaten by more experienced shooters running 308win in competitions. Although humbling, it's awesome to see what a seasoned shooter can do with a rifle/load combo known inside and out.

That said, you likely do not need a new rifle to get a taste of "long range" shooting. Download one of the many free ballistics apps and do your best to input accurate data - you might be surprised. If you have a basic non-tacticool scope pick up a used SWFA 10x42 Mil/Mil and find a way to bolt it to your current rifle (my buddy did this with an old M77 in 308win, worked pretty well for casual plinking out to 800) - That'll make things a little easier yet. Hand loading your own ammo is the next step, then from there I'd say you can start thinking about a new rifle/caliber. TiborasaurusRex has a great video about this.

In closing, whatever you choose, shoot it a lot and if shooting 600, 700, 800+ yards regularly means driving a bit more, do it. Time spent driving to a better range is more productive than trolling the forums anyway.

 

[armoredman]

I wish I could get regularly to a range out here that goes beyond 300 yards, but it's what I have close. I'm not sure I can see 700 yards, much less hit anything out there!
A well written and good point, sir, food for thought.

 

[Hokie_PhD]

I wish I could get regularly to a range out here that goes beyond 300 yards, but it's what I have close. I'm not sure I can see 700 yards, much less hit anything out there!
A well written and good point, sir, food for thought.

Our local range is 100 yards. I wish we had something longer closer. That said, I see very few people shooting out to 100 yards. Most are well under 50.

The_Next_Generation, what do you think of the 6.5 Grendel vs the Creedmore? For those of us who are more interested in the AR platform than bolt guns, does one have a cost advantage over the other? It would seem to me that the Gendel specific bolts and magazines might offset any cost advantage of the AR 15 platform vs the AR 10. Now I'm not looking at either right now, but thinking longer term it would be nice to know as it could help in planning a future build.

 

[444]

This video gives the actual numbers of what he is talking about. Basically, with the 6mm and 6.5mm the bullet is less effected by wind and they have less drop as well as the fact that they also stay supersonic a lot longer. Which means for the new guy (I am one of them) the mistakes you make estimating range and wind speed have less effect. And, with the 6.5 Creedmoor, it is a mainstream cartridge: this isn't a custom build. These rifles and factory ammo are sitting in pretty much every gun store you go to, right next to the .308. They don't cost any more than the .308 does, and they are just as easy to get. So why not ??

 

[The_Next_Generation]

Our local range is 100 yards. I wish we had something longer closer. That said, I see very few people shooting out to 100 yards. Most are well under 50.

The_Next_Generation, what do you think of the 6.5 Grendel vs the Creedmore? For those of us who are more interested in the AR platform than bolt guns, does one have a cost advantage over the other? It would seem to me that the Gendel specific bolts and magazines might offset any cost advantage of the AR 15 platform vs the AR 10. Now I'm not looking at either right now, but thinking longer term it would be nice to know as it could help in planning a future build.

I don't have any hands-on experience with the Grendel unfortunately. However, I would highly recommend you download "Strelok" on your phone (it's free). From there you can research velocities and ballistic coefficients of likely loads, and compare their metrics to other cartridges. You're looking for more supersonic range and less drop. It might be confusing at first but stay with it, watch some videos, and you'll get there I promise.

Price-wise, the two seem close. However, WPAis manufacturing (or was?) 6.5 Grendel for about $0.25/rd if you can find it, so that would be a cheap alternative to domestic options. Maybe one day we will see cheap steel-case 6.5 Creedmoor.

From what I see in factory ammo, the 120gr 6.5G "Black" load from Hornady runs at an advertised 2590ish ft/sec. The same bullet in the 6.5 Creedmoor is pushed to an advertised 2910 ft/sec. Handloading can increase these numbers a bit, but the performance gap is clear. That said, people definitely take the 6.5G to longer ranges. It beats 223 for sure. 6mmAR and similar cartridges do even better than the 6.5G it seems, again with the aforementioned 110gr SMK (G1 BC of .610!!). A friend back home just picked up a Ruger American Predator in 6mm Creedmoor with plans to load the 110smk to 3000+ ft/sec, such a load would exceed the supersonic range of most 6.5 Creedmoor loads. It would certainly be flatter. The predators shoot well, and are a great starting point. Magpul even released a version of their Hunter stock for it.

Edit to add: The AR10-type rifle options are getting more affordable every day. Diamondback now makes a 308Win AR that sells for $720ish online. I've seen it used in shops here for $650, new for $850. A new Ballistic Advantage 6.5 Creedmoor barrel runs $219+shipping on eabco.com right now. Of course you can spend a lot more on other options depending on what you want.

 

[The_Next_Generation]

This video gives the actual numbers of what he is talking about. Basically, with the 6mm and 6.5mm the bullet is less effected by wind and they have less drop as well as the fact that they also stay supersonic a lot longer. Which means for the new guy (I am one of them) the mistakes you make estimating range and wind speed have less effect. And, with the 6.5 Creedmoor, it is a mainstream cartridge: this isn't a custom build. These rifles and factory ammo are sitting in pretty much every gun store you go to, right next to the .308. They don't cost any more than the .308 does, and they are just as easy to get. So why not ??

Haven't watched the video yet but you're right about 6.5CM not being a "custom" round anymore. Attached is a picture of the prices I saw.

 

[The_Next_Generation]

(Glitch post please disregard.)

 

[Legionnaire]

Agree with NextGen completely. I'm an older guy who has been shooting .308s for a lot of years. But I'm switching to 6.5 (.260 Rem, actually). I find the .260 much more enjoyable on several levels. And I don't enjoy or tolerate recoil as much as I once did. No reason at all to recommend .308 to a new shooter, at least for targets (my go-to hunting rifle is still a .308).

 

[jmr40]

I agree. And I like 308, even 30-06, a lot. In reality the 6.5X55 or 260 can be made to duplicate anything 6.5 Creedmoor does. If I had one of those and liked it there is little to gain going to the Creedmoor. But for someone just getting into the 6.5 game the Creedmoor is the way to go. While the advantages are minor, they are real. But the biggest advantage is availability of factory loads and rifles at reasonable prices. Not an option with 260 or 6.5X55 The primary advanage of 308 is that it is still somewhat more available. But the prices on rifles and quality ammo is about the same.

Even if you don't shoot long range or if you hunt the 6.5 is still a better option than 308. Even if you never shoot past 100 yards and even though 308 is fairly mild in the recoil dept, the 6.5 does it with around 12-14 ft lbs recoil vs 15-20 ft lbs recoil. Even in equally accurate rifles most people will shoot the one with less recoil better. As a hunting round the 308 looks a little better on paper. In reality no game animal will know the difference.

 

[Newtosavage]

If I were just shooting "stuff" at long range, I'd agree. But the "stuff" I shoot has a heartbeat and can sometimes weigh 1000 lbs., so I'll take the option that offers 180-200 grain bullets.

But I agree with the premise of the thread. If I were only interested in ringing steel or hunting medium sized game at longer ranges, the 6.5 CM would make a lot of sense.

 

[joed]

I agree that the 6.5cm is a good cartridge, but it isn't the answer to every shooting situation as Newtosavage pointed out. Different cartridges and bullets too have a purpose, the 6.5cm and 140+ gr match bullet is not always the correct answer when someone wants a suggestion on a cartridge for hunting.

I saw one thread where someone with a 6.5cm was asking about using an 85 gr bullet for varmint hunting and the 6.5 fans were all over him telling him he should only be using the 142 gr match bullet because it has the best bc. Bullets too have a purpose, they were designed to perform a function.

Sure, if I were interested in long range target shooting I'd give the 6.5cm a lot of thought. But I'm a hunter where my longest shots may be 500 yards. There are a lot of cartridges capable of doing that besides the 6.5cm.

 

[444]

One cartridge that doesnt get the respect it deserves for long range shooting is the plain 'ol .243 Winchester. Which is a 6mm. We get caught up in more exotic cartridges, but the .243 can hold it's own.

A few of the guys I regularly shoot long range with use the .243. And they hold their own against anybody else at the range.



FWIW: I have almost zero interest in hunting. I love to read about, and learn about long range rifle shooting. But, every thread turns into a hunting thread.

 

[Legionnaire]

I love the .243, too. It is a capable hunting cartridge for medium game--my kids who hunt eastern whitetail all started with a .243, also using it on varmints. And it is quite capable of ringing steel "way out there." The only drawbacks to speak of are the comparatively short barrel life--which could become an issue if someone really wants to shoot a lot--and the comparatively short neck, which doesn't work as well with long, VLD projectiles. The 6 CM is "a thing" now, but it isn't as popular or readily available as the standard .243 Win ... yet.

My thought is that the 6.5 CM became so popular so quickly because it dominated the niche between the .243 and .308; it didn't have to go head-to-head with either. Yes, there were other .264 cartridges, but none of them really commanded the niche. The opportunity for a more efficient case design opened the door for the 6.5 CM and, given its demonstrated capabilities, it quickly overtook the alternatives--as great as many of them were. If I didn't already have a couple of .260 Rems, I'd probably have gone with the Creedmoor, too. When I eventually shoot out my .260s, I'll probably re-barrel in 6.5 CM; will just need to change my brass.

The OP's point was directed at recommendations for the new shooter. To the extent a new shooter (read non-hand loader) needs to rely on factory ammo, it's wise to settle on something popular so that ammo is available and relatively inexpensive. Both the .308 and the .243 are. But the 6.5 CM has exploded in popularity and it too is now available and comparatively inexpensive. The 6 CM isn't there yet; many more factory loads available for the .243 Win. For a hand loader, the 6 CM is a GREAT option, as there are so many different .243 caliber bullets available. But it I would hesitate recommending the 6 CM to a new shooter due to the limited ammo selection available. In a couple of years this might change. I know when it comes time to re-barrel my .243s, they'll become 6 CMs.

 

[benzy2]

If all you are doing is shooting paper/steel at 600+ yards then .308 may not be ideal. But it offers cheaper ammo when you want to play around which isn't the case of the others.

The number of AR10 type rifles in .308 far outnumbers anything else making rifle availability in a semi auto much more likely with .308.

The 6mm and 6.5mm rifles have advantages and from a purely competitive point they win. But if ball surplus ammo is shooting 2MOA you can have plenty of medium range fun on that and not feel broke when you go blasting away.

I haven't seen 6.5 Creedmore or Grendel at the big chains near as reliably as .308. Not that you can't order it or that many gun shops don't carry it, but when I'm out on my way and all that's available is Wal-Mart, is rather bet on .308.

As a dedicated rifle for long range shooting, the 6mm and 6.5mm are a better choice and have been. Most people have come around to that. As a do it all rifle, I'll take .308 every day. If I am going to recommend something to shoot long range, to plink, to hunt, to do it all with a single rifle for a new shooter, I still think .308 offers more variety. As a second rifle the specialty 6mm and 6.5mm rifles make more sense.

 

[The_Next_Generation]

One cartridge that doesnt get the respect it deserves for long range shooting is the plain 'ol .243 Winchester. Which is a 6mm. We get caught up in more exotic cartridges, but the .243 can hold it's own.

A few of the guys I regularly shoot long range with use the .243. And they hold their own against anybody else at the range.



FWIW: I have almost zero interest in hunting. I love to read about, and learn about long range rifle shooting. But, every thread turns into a hunting thread.

I completely agree. The only disadvantage is that longer/heavier projectiles may not fit in a magazine. The 6.5/6 creedmoor rounds have a shorter case that allows a longer bullet to fit in a standard 308-size receiver. TinorasaurusRex does some awesome things with his old 243 M77.

I agree that the 6.5 Creedmoor is far from an end-all round. By "any kind of distance work" I meant that in the context of casual/target/shooting-for-enjoyment kind of work, not hunting. A 338/300/7mm Mag option is obviously a more ethical/lethal choice when hearts need to be stopped at 1k. But that wasn't what I meant to address in this thread..otherwise we'd be discussing the 375 Lethal Mag and Ko2M

 

[Klint Beastwood]

otherwise we'd be discussing the 375 Lethal Mag

haha my man.

 

[The_Next_Generation]

If all you are doing is shooting paper/steel at 600+ yards then .308 may not be ideal. But it offers cheaper ammo when you want to play around which isn't the case of the others.

The number of AR10 type rifles in .308 far outnumbers anything else making rifle availability in a semi auto much more likely with .308.

The 6mm and 6.5mm rifles have advantages and from a purely competitive point they win. But if ball surplus ammo is shooting 2MOA you can have plenty of medium range fun on that and not feel broke when you go blasting away.

I haven't seen 6.5 Creedmore or Grendel at the big chains near as reliably as .308. Not that you can't order it or that many gun shops don't carry it, but when I'm out on my way and all that's available is Wal-Mart, is rather bet on .308.

As a dedicated rifle for long range shooting, the 6mm and 6.5mm are a better choice and have been. Most people have come around to that. As a do it all rifle, I'll take .308 every day. If I am going to recommend something to shoot long range, to plink, to hunt, to do it all with a single rifle for a new shooter, I still think .308 offers more variety. As a second rifle the specialty 6mm and 6.5mm rifles make more sense.

I hear your point, and I agree. But this is more about people who are looking specifically for an intro long-range rifle. Not a do-it-all, gravel-pit plinker or cool-guy battle rifle course blaster. Sometimes it's nice to have ammo at the gas station, but it isn't hard to plan ahead and think "Oh hey, the Walmart on the way to the BLM honey-hole won't have my 6.5CM ammo, so I better hit the LGS Friday on my way home before they close for the weekend." This is more for new guys but I figured I may as well add it in to the discussion.

 

[benzy2]

I don't think a dedicated longneck range rifle is a great new guy choice. If you are going down that path, I'd argue volume shot is more important than the difference down range in .308 and 6.5mm or 6mm rounds.

When new, I'd suggest shooting larger quantity of less accurate ammo over smaller quantity of more accurate ammo. You don't know the difference in 2MOA surplus or .5MOA match ammo. So work on the fundamentals and the basics and shoot a lot with good instruction. Shooting 500 rounds of ball ammo with a paid instructor is a better start than 500 rounds of match ammo. This is assuming the average new shooter isn't plunking down unlimited funds and is instead on a budget (especially since we are assuming they aren't reloading). If money were no issue, then the .308 has no benefits. But that's not reality for most shooters, especially in the beginning.

I think for your long range use the 6mm and 6.5 are better performing rounds but they aren't ideal for a newbie due to lack of budget options and being more stuck to a single use, though I don't think much medium game would know the difference in a 6.5 and a .308.

Based on your condescending response to alternative uses, I see you have a rather limited view on what a rifle could possibly be used for, especially in a newcomer who hasn't tried all the different shooting types. I'd still recommend a .308 and 500 rounds of cheap ammo over a 6mm and 3-4 boxes for a new shooter.

 

[BigBore44]

Well something I’m not seeing mentioned from a cost standpoint is the actual cost of being a long rang shooter. You can buy rifles that shoot well at long range for not that much money. Ammo for volume requires a significant purchase for reloading equipment. And then there is the real investment, the glass. You aren’t going to be shooting 1000 yards with good consistency with a Bushnell Banner from Walmart. You can EASILY have more $$ in your scope, than in your rifle and all reloading equipment/supplies combined.

For the average joe who wants to go try long range with his factory (insert brand name rifle here) and his off the shelf Walmart 3x9 or 4x12, go for it. You’ll ring some steel on occasion....if you can see/focus on it.

So arguing cost and availability of factory ammo is something I really wouldn’t even factor in. Especially M-80 or hunting ammo. It’s the least expensive factor until you include high(er) volume shooting. Even then, factory match ammo may not be what your rifle shoots best. That’s another reason so many distance shooters hand load. They can tailor a load to their rifles tastes.

It really can’t be argued against that the 6.5 is the cats meow, right now, for long range. Particularly for new shooters. But how many “new shooters” are really shooting 1,000 yards? Not many. But those who do, should look very hard at the 6.5.

 

[Nature Boy]

Is no one going to stick up for the .308?

I'm short on time right now or else I'd take a whack at it. Maybe later

 

[BigBore44]

I don't think a dedicated longneck range rifle is a great new guy choice. If you are going down that path, I'd argue volume shot is more important than the difference down range in .308 and 6.5mm or 6mm rounds.

When new, I'd suggest shooting larger quantity of less accurate ammo over smaller quantity of more accurate ammo. You don't know the difference in 2MOA surplus or .5MOA match ammo. So work on the fundamentals and the basics and shoot a lot with good instruction. Shooting 500 rounds of ball ammo with a paid instructor is a better start than 500 rounds of match ammo. This is assuming the average new shooter isn't plunking down unlimited funds and is instead on a budget (especially since we are assuming they aren't reloading). If money were no issue, then the .308 has no benefits. But that's not reality for most shooters, especially in the beginning.

I think for your long range use the 6mm and 6.5 are better performing rounds but they aren't ideal for a newbie due to lack of budget options and being more stuck to a single use, though I don't think much medium game would know the difference in a 6.5 and a .308.

Based on your condescending response to alternative uses, I see you have a rather limited view on what a rifle could possibly be used for, especially in a newcomer who hasn't tried all the different shooting types. I'd still recommend a .308 and 500 rounds of cheap ammo over a 6mm and 3-4 boxes for a new shooter.

I fundamentally disagree. When practicing for precision shooting at long range (even 300-400 yards), why practice with crap ammo that “may” give you 2-3 MOA? How do you even know you’re doing it right?

 

[joed]

Is no one going to stick up for the .308?

I'm short on time right now or else I'd take a whack at it. Maybe later

Nothing wrong with the .308 at all, I have one. I think it's a great choice too.

 

[hdwhit]

Nature Boy wrote:
Is no one going to stick up for the .308?

Where I do my shooting (both recreationally and hunting) there are no open spaces longer than about 200 yards, so the whole notion of shooting at a target I can't even see with the naked eye is foreign to me.

As soon as a bullet exits the barrel it begins to fall towards the ground under the influence of gravity. A high velocity and good ability to retain that velocity over long distances will certainly simplify the problem of aiming and that argues for a smaller projectile. Of course, a smaller projectile means a smaller column of propellant gas behind it in the barrel and that can limit how much velocity is achievable and the amount of wear the barrel experiences, so I don't see any individual cartridge representing the optimal balance of those considerations at all distances.

 

[RussellC]

Is no one going to stick up for the .308?

I'm short on time right now or else I'd take a whack at it. Maybe later

I will, I just bought one. Dont get me wrong, see my thread in this forum "I understand 6.5 Creedmoor is superior to .308".....that said, I got the .308 because I havent shot 1000 yards YET, and I have lots of practice to do first. Most of that will be at 100 yard, I have to travel just a little to get to 300 yards.

Unrelated and not really on point in this thread, if ever faced with another gun/ammo famine, not doubt .308 will be easier to find ammo and reloading supplies. My final thought is that mine is a savage rifle, with easier barrel change than some. Basically, like an AR. When that day comes, a match barrel in 6.5 CM will be installed.

Recoil? Not that much difference, and down downloading a mite will fix that until that day of barrel change....that said, right now the Savage 12FV with Varmint barrel is on sale at Cabelas, 319.00, and a 100 rebate on top of that. ( yes I called both Cabelas and the promo company to make sure this is possible) It is available in 6.5 Creedmoor.

Russellc

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Well something I’m not seeing mentioned from a cost standpoint is the actual cost of being a long rang shooter. You can buy rifles that shoot well at long range for not that much money. Ammo for volume requires a significant purchase for reloading equipment. And then there is the real investment, the glass. You aren’t going to be shooting 1000 yards with good consistency with a Bushnell Banner from Walmart. You can EASILY have more $$ in your scope, than in your rifle and all reloading equipment/supplies combined.

For the average joe who wants to go try long range with his factory (insert brand name rifle here) and his off the shelf Walmart 3x9 or 4x12, go for it. You’ll ring some steel on occasion....if you can see/focus on it.

So arguing cost and availability of factory ammo is something I really wouldn’t even factor in. Especially M-80 or hunting ammo. It’s the least expensive factor until you include high(er) volume shooting. Even then, factory match ammo may not be what your rifle shoots best. That’s another reason so many distance shooters hand load. They can tailor a load to their rifles tastes.

It really can’t be argued against that the 6.5 is the cats meow, right now, for long range. Particularly for new shooters. But how many “new shooters” are really shooting 1,000 yards? Not many. But those who do, should look very hard at the 6.5.

Somehow we got to thinking Next Generation was recommending 6.5cm as a good "I've never shot a high power rifle before, but woke up this morning and think I'll give it a try." caliber....but in his first post, he refers to "Shooting Enthusiasts"- folks who are already somewhat experienced and have probably dabbled at the sub-100 yd range, but are new to LONG DISTANCE target shooting- hence the recommendation not to waste time and $$ on a .308 rig and ammo to accomplish this very specific goal.
Most enthusiasts have already climbed the ladder to center fire rifles (or at least handguns) and have probably shot and/or owned a .308 hunting rifle or milsurp already, right? For my part, I hate stocking multiple calibers and never get the chance to reach out and touch paper beyond 100yd, so 6.5 holds little appeal for me.
But if I was planning on getting serious at distance, you betcha!
And I agree, the glass is just as important as the gun and ammo- its a triad, and if any leg is too short, the whole thing will fall.....