Should I get this in .308 or .30-06?
458 win mag
>>64424961Well what are you going to do with it? Hunt? What and how far away? Targets? How far away?
>>64424961.308 You will never take advantage of 06- versatility
>>64424961why would you ever consider anything besides 30-06?
>>64425152recoil?
>>64424961If you are hunting elk, moose, or grizzly, 30-06. For all else, .308
>>64427067>elk, moose, grizzlyYou want 35 Whelen.
>>64427067I've hunted moose with 6.5mm. Why do you guys baselessly worship caliber like one millimeter will somehow punch the lungs out of an animal better?
>>64425152.30-06 is silly. It requires you to get a long action, yet it offers barely any more power than .308. It just makes no sense.If you need more power than .308 for some reason then go .300 win mag, as that actually has a significant advantage over .308.>>64427100Ignorance. They listened to boomer memes instead of paying attention to numbers.
>>6442710030-06 has like 600ft.lb more energy than 6.5 creed
>>64427127Which is pretty insignificant. Any shot you could make with a .30-06 you could make equally well with a 6.5 mememore or a .308
>>64427078>>64427100the options were 30-06 or 308Not 6.5, not 35 whelen, not 300 win mag, or anything else. Simple as
>>64424961Just get a 308, only reason to go long action is with a 300wm or similar magnum caliber
>>64424964Fpbp
>>64427127You should be comparing .30-06 to .270, 6.5 Swedish, or 6.5-06 A-Square, which are much closer matches.
>>64424961Do you reload? If no, .308. if yes, still .308. this silly notion that .30-06 is greatly more powerful than .308 is from pissing hor fudd loads. Factory ammo it's identical most of the time and barely any different in some cases
>>64424961You should get it in .30 WCF
>>64424961do you reload? >yes.30-06>no.308
One thing I noticed about the Miroku guns is they seem to use 1:12 twist for the 308 and 1:10 twist for the 30-06. It was also true for the Browning BLR which is made by nipponese craftsmen.Worth considering, OP.
>>64427513>1:12 .308That's retarded
>>644279501:12 is fine on the east coast where the long shots are taken on coyotes and the biggest game is whitetail deer
>>64427968But why limit yourself? It's not like you're going to overspin anything you can shoot and now your barrel is permacucked for no reason at all
>>64427980308 can launch 110 grain varmint bullets at over 3200 fps, it wouldn't surprise me at all if a 1:10 rips those bullets apart although I don't have and firsthand experience with itI agree that 1:10 is better, if only because we are trending towards copper bullets that require a faster twist in general
>>64428031Monolithics are nice but I never had much luck with the barnes in my .308. it's definitely a lack of experience with them, though. I loaded a box of 50 and disliked the performance enough to never try again
>>64424961Been debating this myself. The Alaskan in .30-06 is just such a nice looking rifle but it’s never in stock, plus the featherweight makes more sense for durr hunting. .270 should also be in consideration, it’s a fun fudd cartridge that’s a near ballistic twin for 6.5 PRC>>64427111Yeah but a lot of people have reservations hunting bigger game with .308 as opposed to .30-06, so there’s a case to be made for getting that if he intends to hunt big game
>>64427100It will expand better, yes
>>64428160>Yeah but a lot of people have reservations hunting bigger game with .308 as opposed to .30-06,That is a mental problem. It should not be coddled. It should be fought with education. Fuddlore should be challenged and corrected every time it shows itself.>.270Agreed, awesome cartridge.
>>64429393I mean there’s some truth to it. In lighter grain weights .308 and .30-06 are ballistic twins but their difference becomes more noticeable at 180gr+. I wanna say with factory ammo at 200gr the difference is like 200fps. So the .30-06 is gonna be a better round if you’re using heavier bullets, and thats where the versatility argument for it also comes from, in lighter weights it’s basically .308 but can will be hotter with heavier bullets. Less margin of error for the big animals and all that. Plus in area I live they’re rarely more than a couple dollars apart in price so really it only matters if you want a short action or long action
>>64429430>but their difference becomes more noticeable at 180gr+.It's not a significant difference. If you actually need more power with heavier bullets then get a .300 win mag. That takes the same long action as the .30-06, but actually has a tangible power advantage.
>>64424961.300wm
>>64429606It’s pretty significant at 200gr, but also with .300wm it has the issue of being way more expensive and being a little overkill for deer. .30-06 hits that sweet spot of being able to be loaded hot for big shit like bears or moose if you want or loaded a little lighter for medium game. It’s a pretty neat round
>>64424961.25-06
>>64429825>30-06 hits that sweet spot of being able to be loaded hot for big shit like bears or moose if you want or loaded a little lighter for medium game.So does .308, and .243, .270, 6.5x55, etc...Every big game cartridge has this capability.
>>64427323this right here
>>64424961
>>64431260those other cartridges will have bad velocities at 180+ grains which makes longer range shots more difficult
>>6442496130-40 krag
>>64431260Most of those will not have the velocity that .30-06 will have with a 200gr bullet. Whether that’s necessary is up to you, but that is a distinct advantage of .30-06 and why it’s liked for its versatility
>>64424961.308 or .338WinMag.
>>64431057Fair enough.
>>64429393>>.270I wish Jack Connor was dead.
>>64433481>>64433846They don't need it. There is zero need for heavy bullets at high speed when hunting in NA. The perceived need is just more fudd wankery, same as with magnums.
>>64433903What did .270 do to you? It’s just a solid round>>64433908I mean sure but having a bigger heavier bullet travel faster is something I might want
>>6443392420+ yrs of him spamming Outdoor Life magazine built a fake reputation. .25-06, .30-06, .35 Whelen all do the exact same thing better.
>>64424961308, unless you hand load. Then probably still 308, but there is an argument >>64427067Unless you get real meth-y with your pressures in 3006, the difference in terminal performance between the two is negligible. If 308 isn’t enough, you should probably be using a belted magnum or slugs
>>64427127The sec density of 6.5 means it needs way less energy to penetrate sufficiently though. And the 6.5 eldx bullet everyone uses will still expand just fine later in the wound channel
>>64433978Maybe but considering 6.5prc is its ballistic twin, it’s probably not all that bad at all. But yeah most rounds do most things well, at least with full power rifle cartridges
>>64434020>>The sec density of 6.5 means This. Is. Retarded. You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
GUYS HELP Ruger Hawkeye African in .270 Winchester or Winchester Model 70 Alaskan .30-06?
>>64433978Jack O'Connor hunted everything you could in the US. And on every other major continent and a few islands as well. He was a renowned hunter shooting in the mountains for rams. The guy was the editor of several magazines. He was respected and worked with Weatherby and Keith just to name a couple. He used many calibers and rifles and sang praises to those who deserved it. The 270 Winchester is pinned to him because he showed what it was capable of. And continued to do so as bullet technology advanced. Jack O'Connors reputation is anything but fake. As is the 270 Winchester. It was the grandfather of the modern magnum. The only thing the 270 did that could be considered negative was kill the 280. As the (7mm-06) was near as makes no difference its twin)One would be hard pressed to find a better all around rifle in north America than the 270 Winchester.
>>64435382Yeah it’s a good round. I mean it’s a necked down .30-06, it can’t be that bad. The worst I can say is a lot of store ammo for it is loaded rather light
>>64424961for what purpose?because that would have a major impact on caliber choice
I have a model 70 in 30.06, it was handed down to me. The deer are Sitka Blacktail and are the size of large dogs but you get a large caliber because of Bears/Moose that are hanging around being retards.
>>64435613That’s cool man, how does it shoot? There’s something special about an heirloom model 70
>>64435624It shoots great.
>>64435380The Winchester will hold its value better.
>>64435955That’s true BUT the Hawkeye is 500 bucks cheaper and has a sexy ebony tip on its stock. But yeah the model 70 would be way better made and retain its value
>>64424961i dont like the 22" barrel for either caliber, 20 or 24 is where it should be
>>64424961what does pre-64 mean, and why do fudds always talk about that shit? am I to believe theyre shooting clapped out 60 year old 5-moa guns? like who gives a shit.
>>64436150Pre-64 is your IQ. I wouldn't worry about it.
>>64436150>what does pre-64 meanmade before 1964>and why do fudds always talk about that shitBecause they were using proper mauser actions back then with controlled feed. No, this doesn't actually matter.>am I to believe theyre shooting clapped out 60 year oldyes>5-moa gunsNoAlso nobody actually shoots. Most guns ever made have less than 100 rounds through them. They're fine.
>>64436150It just refers to the action. The model 70 before 1964 had a Mauser style controlled round feed action and after 1964 they had a push feed action closer to a Remington 700. It doesn’t really matter besides what your preference is. I personally prefer it over a push feed action as it’s much harder to have a feeding malfunction, and some consider it a necessity for big game hunting. Really you should just try it out and see what you prefer.It’s also worth noting that all modern model 70s have the Mauser style action, so they’re sometimes also called pre 64 actions lmao
>>64436181*dangerous game huntingnot big game, push feeds are just fine for that
>>64436154suck a dick, faggot.
>>64436157>>64436181thank you for the non-retarded answers.
>>64436261Forgot to mention, but the push feed model 70s are typically much cheaper than both modern model 70s and the actual pre 64 made ones, but that checks out as Mauser actions are usually more expensive
>>64424964fpbpBut,>>64427323Also this.You didn't say what you would be using the rifle for, but you want .30-06 for anything larger than durrs. Or, more dangerous shit like bears & hogs.If you're serious, you want to handload and min/max for specific uses. Throwing a 200 gr bullet 500 or 800 yards requires '06.
>>64435380Adding to this, model 70 featherweight .308 or model 70 Alaskan in .30-06? Ones lighter and more practical and the other is just such a nice classic rifle
>>64436725>model 70 Alaskan in .30-06If you are literally hunting in Alaska, get a magnum like .338wWnmag, .378Weatheby or .416Remmag.
>>64436991I’m not but it’s probably the most classic looking rifle Winchester has, with a 25” barrel and open iron sights. Only issue is the price tag is pretty steep compared to the featherweight or something
>>64436261The people you just thanked managed to leave out a critical bit of information. The change after 1964 wasn't just controlled feed vs. push feed. It was a cheapening of the gun in general. Post-1964 guns are not made to as high a quality standard as the earlier guns. That wasn't unique to Winchester either, most American gun makers had major drops in quality around the time of WWII, Winchester hung out longer than most did.
>>64436150>what does pre-64 mean, and why do fudds always talk about that shitIn 1964 Winchester redesigned their rifles to make them cheaper to produce. In doing so they cut a lot of corners. The wood wasn't as nice, the fit and finish (bluing) wasn't as nice, they deleted the controlled-round feed to make the guns simpler, etc.>m I to believe theyre shooting clapped out 60 year old 5-moa guns? They're shooting 60 year old guns, yeah, but nowhere close to clapped out. Fudds don't shoot enough to wear them out.Try going to a gun show sometime so you can examine a gun like side-by-side with a more modern one, then you'll know why the fudds are mad.
>>64437663That’s fair, but I left it out mostly because the actual 1963-64 rifles were also way cheaper than than previous years, and after this would continue. Though I’ve heard very good things about the XTR push feeds. There’s a lot of nuance to it, but the short is to buy a modern FN model 70
