30-06 SUCKS! SHOOT 308 WINCHESTER

[MechAg94]

https://ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/30-06-sucks-shoot-308-winchester/?fbclid=IwAR32IHwoU_erx6LiL_3FUonN03u8hjHrWNCjP0bnssdgkqD4YeolBTrKW2Y

This looks like a fun article.   

The 30-06 is a LONG ACTION cartridge! Each cartridge is up to 3.340-inches long. That means it has to be run through the same long, slow, massively heavy actions as the 270 Winchester, 7mm Rem. Mag., and 300 Win. Mag. In stark contrast is the 308 Winchester of 1952, a fully modern, SHORT-ACTION cartridge! Instead of wasting all that time and motion bolting in a fresh 30-06 cartridge, you can shave 0.00017 seconds off your cycle time by ramming home another 308 round. This ensurers you’ll more quickly miss the buck running that you’d already missed standing. Speed matters. Maybe not in your bullet, but certainly in your bolt manipulation. The average 308 short action rifle is 4 ounces lighter than the average 30-06, too, so there.

[K Frame]

"In stark contrast is the 308 Winchester of 1952, a fully modern, SHORT-ACTION cartridge!"

That was based liberally on the even more modern, and even shorter, .300 Savage!


Not read the article so not sure if it's satire or not, but either way it's definitely 100% fucktardery.

[TommyGunn]

"Shave .00017 a second off your cycle time ...."  Wow!  What an IMPRESSIVE accomplishment!!!!

Um,   otoh,  neither my DPMS LR-308 or my M1A  are gonna benefit .....

[makattak]

"In stark contrast is the 308 Winchester of 1952, a fully modern, SHORT-ACTION cartridge!"

That was based liberally on the even more modern, and even shorter, .300 Savage!


Not read the article so not sure if it's satire or not, but either way it's definitely 100% fucktardery.

If you'd read the article, it is rather clearly satire.

[K Frame]

"If you'd read the article, it is rather clearly satire."

Are you sure?

Are you REALLY sure?

It might actually be a virtue signaling article about can openers!

Thank you for contributing to the fucktardery! 

[K Frame]

Oh, and just for grins & giggles, I own two .30-06 rifles and three .300 Savages, but not a single .308.

I do own a .243, though, which is based on the .308.

[makattak]

Oh, and just for grins & giggles, I own two .30-06 rifles and three .300 Savages, but not a single .308.

I do own a .243, though, which is based on the .308.

Only 1 30-06 here, but I also have a .270 which is based on the 30-06. Zero .308

I'd love to have a .300 Savage, though. I really like that Model 99. (And I like lever guns in general.)

IF I were to get one, I should probably get it in .308 just so it's easier to source ammo, but I also have a strange preference for the more odd-ball cartridges.

[brimic]

This guy is on one of the FB groups I'm in (Long Range Shooters), he wrote purely as a troll.

[K Frame]

"I'd love to have a .300 Savage, though. I really like that Model 99. (And I like lever guns in general.)"

My 99 was the first rifle I ever bought, in 1984. I fell in love with the 99 when I saw on one the cover of a circa 1975 issue of either American Rifleman or American Hunter.

Saw my 99 on the rack at the local sporting goods store. I was in college, earning pretty much zip, but I put it on lay away and picked up at least one, maybe two, campus jobs and put everything I could towards it.

Made in 1936.

I also have a Remington 722 (short action!! That's critical! It's lighter! It's faster!) and a Remington 81.

[K Frame]

"but I also have a .270 which is based on the 30-06."

Piece of very arcane trivia for you, but the .270 is NOT based on the .30-06.

It's based on the earlier .30-03 round.

The .270 and the .30-03 cases are exactly the same length, both of which are longer than the .30-06 case.

[makattak]

"but I also have a .270 which is based on the 30-06."

Piece of very arcane trivia for you, but the .270 is NOT based on the .30-06.

It's based on the earlier .30-03 round.

The .270 and the .30-03 cases are exactly the same length, both of which are longer than the .30-06 case.

Interesting! I know quite a few sources that have that information incorrect. I'm guessing it's a common misconception. (Hopefully the updated information will remain in my vast mental collection of useless trivia.)

[K Frame]

Yep, very common misconception, but the case lengths don't lie.

At the time the .270 was developed Winchester was still loading the .30-03 round, and I think may have been the only company doing so. There was still some call for the .30-03 because of Winchester 1895 rifles chambered in .30-03.

Another bit of arcane trivia... One of the early names for the .30-03 was the .30-45, as the original powder charge was 45 grains. It was the last cartridge I know of that used the old black powder-era nomenclature.

And, the last bit of arcane trivia regarding the .30-03 round?

Remington's .280 Remington/7mm Express was also based on the .30-03 case.

[230RN]

Interesting! I know quite a few sources that have that information incorrect. I'm guessing it's a common misconception. (Hopefully the updated information will remain in my vast mental collection of useless trivia.)

That is not the first time somebody's "logical" guesswork has been wrong and the wrongity gets promulgated across sources.

The OP's spoofiness was immediately recognizable because it reminded me of the Hyperleft's constant sniping at President Trump for the most picayune (and sometimes outright false) reasons.

Poor Melania.  Merry Christmas to you, too!

Go ahead, Leftheads, pick on me.

[Brad Johnson]

Nice piece of satire, that. We need him around these parts because some of y'all are getting lax in the snark department.

Brad

[French G.]

And I am sitting over here wanting 7.5 Swiss to take over the world. Antique as it is it does things that more modern cartridges figured out as far as shorter fatter case and sharper neck angle. 30-06 ballistics in an almost 308 sized package. I would like to chamber a modern rifle for this one.

[Fly320s]

Nice piece of satire, that. We need him around these parts because some of y'all are getting lax in the snark department.

Brad

I went to Dick's to get some snark, but they wouldn't sell it to me.

[Fly320s]

Shoot .308, unless you need to shoot through a tree.  Then use .30-06 M2 steel core!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5RtRoZe18g

[charby]

I still like my .300wm, gets to 400 yards just a little faster and flatter. Also beats the snot out your shoulder!

[Northwoods]

I'd love to have a .300 Savage, though. I really like that Model 99. (And I like lever guns in general.)

If I ever get to the point where I have MMTB I'm going to get a BLR takedown in .300WSM, and rebarrel it (or bore out) to .358 Sambar (.300WSM necked up to .358). 

[Brad Johnson]

I've lusted over a Marlin 1895 (Trapper or GS) in .450 Marlin since they were introduced. I think it would be a superb all-weather dual duty hog/brush gun.

Brad

[charby]

I've lusted over a Marlin 1895 (Trapper or GS) in .450 Marlin since they were introduced. I think it would be a superb all-weather dual duty hog/brush gun.

Brad

I would recommend one in 45-70, I don't see factory ammo for .450 Marlin everywhere.

[Brad Johnson]

I would recommend one in 45-70, I don't see factory ammo for .450 Marlin everywhere.

Yeah, sad that Marlin stopped producing guns in .450. I'm not much into reloading anymore but I supposed a couple boxes worth of up-spec'd .45-70 would be worth it.

Brad

[charby]

Yeah, sad that Marlin stopped producing guns in .450. I'm not much into reloading anymore but I supposed a couple boxes worth of up-spec'd .45-70 would be worth it.

Brad

When the .450 Marlin came out, I looked at it as a why bother. Figured either get a Buffalo Bore type .45-70 round or reload a sporty .45-70.

Now I wish the .405 Winchester would have stood the test of time.

I do hunt (and reload) with a .444 Marlin, brass can be a bitch to find at time. I love that round.

[K Frame]

I've always wanted on of the Marlin Cowboy 1895s with the long octagon barrel.