Within this forum, we are discussing the military applications of the 30-06 round. We are mostly focused on the debate regarding the 30-06 vs. its Cold War replacement the .308, (7.62) and today's 223, (5.56). However, we very much appreciate any talk about hunting and reloading as well.
Please email your comments, questions or information regarding the 30-06 for all of us to enjoy.

Email 30-06 Thoughts & Questions

Sorry…this feature is temporarily unavailable as your webmaster is serving a tour in Iraq with the US Army. Please visit www.serving-in-Iraq.com to live the adventure with me.
I'll be back next year and we'll start this debate back up again. Thank you.

30-06 Talk

I have questions about M1 Garands and the use of bad (dented, dirty) ammunition.

I am buying a nice CMP M1 from a friend and have been told by a couple people that it is in excellent condition. I ordered some "AMMO 30-06 150GR FMJ 20 Rd. Box Military Components, brass case". That is what was described in the add and I did not think at the time that they might be badly re-manufactured. My fault.

What I got was some dirty, dented, thrashed looking rounds in some cheapo cheesy cardboard boxes. (15 of them) They had the word "Talon" somewhere on the back of the box.

I think its a bad idea to shoot lousy ammo in the first place, but do you think I could refuse to accept the order of ammunition because of the dented cases?

I have heard that even at relatively low CUP pressures, the case instantly reassumes the exact shape of the chamber, and the previously dented portions impact the chamber walls causing dents.

I guess what my question is, do you think that the ammunition would cause significant harm to the gun? Would that be good cause to return the ammunition?

I got this ammo from Cheaper than Dirt and their policy is that they don't accept returned ammunition.

Thank you for any advice you may have,

Jon S.

ok if 30-06 is so great why did the US army go to 308 Win and then 223 Rem

Mal Mac Rae

(I wanted to ad my two cents worth here. This question has been highly debated over the years...but my opinion is it has been a decision by Nato. For one, they want all Nato forces using the same ammo, which makes sense. However the general thought is that if you shoot a man with a 30-06 you're probably going to kill him right there, eliminating one man from the battle. However if you hit him with a 5.56 out of our current M-16s, you'll probably just injury him. This theory takes out of the fight that man, two more to get him to help, and then tons of money to care for him. Plus as we learned in Vietnam, dead bodies coming home only creates support for the troops and war....however crippled and paralyzed young men coming home creates despise for the war effort.

Just my thoughts, I'm not claiming for certain this was Nato's reasoning. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.

Sgt. Foster)

I wonder if NATO drives the US or the other way around though. Its like the ISO metric system. America just said..it sux and we wont use it.........simple rhetoric really.

Didn't the US use 308 Winchester in between 30-06 and their current 223 remington round?

I agree with the use of a small round for any military. They shoot just as well and tend to only wound. Thye are lighter to carry and therefore you can carry more of them.........My view is think that 308 is ballistically superior to 30-06.......... as in this country....... we replace 30.06 with 308 as it was ballistically better.

Mal

OK...another two cents worth from me. I am no expert by any means, but I have always been under the impression that the 30-06 was a balastically better round than the 308. However I recently was stationed at Ft. Benning pushing Basic Trainees and one of my fellow Drill Sergeants was a former Sniper School Instructor there at Benning, and a former Sniper with two confirmed kills. As you may assume, he was very adept at this stuff and he claimed the 308 was better. I would appreciate anyone's input and stats between the two. I guess I'd have to say that they're both damned good rounds I'd sure take either one over today's 5.56.

Sgt. Foster

To be fair, the .308 doesn't quite have the power the old 30-06 does, but it's more than enough to reliably do the job, and is a mile ahead of the .223. I have PERSONALLY seen gooks on opium absorb multiple hits from M-16's and still toss a satchel charge before they dropped. You bang a "zipper" with a .308 out of an M-14 or M-60 (which shoots the same round), and "Charlie" is down for the count. One round. One kill. Slightly shorter than the 30-06, the .308 also allowed for a slightly faster rate of fire in the M-14, than the Garand had.

But as a civilian now, I love my M-1, I even hunt with it, where the 30-06 cartridge is better-suited than the .308 for large game. My particular rifle is 1943 vintage, but you'd never know it by the way is continues to shoot and group today. The M-1 is a classic and is far superior to anything we have on the battlefield today.

Mike
Apache Junction, Arizona

Dear Mr. Foster:

I have a friend who owns, among many firearms, an '03. He is extremely
knowledgeable, however, I take issue with him on one point. He maintains that
the receiver sight of the '03 was calibrated to account for the earth's
rotation. He bases this on two points. One. He remembers the NRA publishing a
pamphlet on the '03, back in the early sixties, that mentioned it. And Two,
the sight has an "inscribed arc" that he feels allows for this adjustment. I
find this difficult to believe, for many reasons, and believe the sight may
indeed have been adjustable for windage, but that is all.

I hope you can put this question to rest for good.

Respectfully,

Douglas

Hello everbody

In Britain the 30-06 isnt that popular but I got one anyway a musgrave L90 what a brilliant round, I use it on all British deer species and every one has dropped to shot its very accurate and certainly has the stopping power,I have a few fellow deer stalkers now showing interest in that Yankee cartidge as they affectionatly call it

Regards
Paul
Yorkshire
England

Hi, I saw your web page while I was looking for a small varmint round for the 30.06. Do you know where I can get 55gr. bullets? The smallest and least expanding round I saw was a 110gr. spitzer solid. Here in Arizona you can't hunt with a metal jacketed bullet so I don't think old military rounds would work.
Anyway, the web site looked cool. Great job out there in the Army, we got some Army guys out here at Luke AFB in AZ gaurding our gates. They do a kick ass job!

Staff Sergeant Keith Jackson,
United States Air Force
ajk2cats@hotmail.com

I want to know if i could use a federal premium brand 30-06 trophy bond round through my M1 30. cal rifle for elk hunting.
and how well will it work for me.

JNaranjo@csu.org

Hello,
my name is nick burress. My father just recently gave my his Us Springfield 1903 30-06. I have been looking on the sights at the pictures. None of the pictures matched my gun. It is a bolt action, and i think that it can hold like 4 or 5 rounds in the belly of the gun. I don't remember it has been years since i have shot it. Is there a site that you or anyone might know of that might help me track the history of the gun and/or how to take it apart and clean it throughly. thank you.

nick burress chiefnickb@sbcglobal.net

First of all my apologies to Mal Mac. I wasn't trying to single you out.
The US Govt. is notorious for logistical Faux Paus. The Winchester repeater wasn't adopted by the Union Army During the Civil war because the General in charge of ammo distribution didn't want to track yet another type of cartridge. Weapons are generally designed by civilian contractors. When tested and approved the powers that be may not have thought to change the cartridge. Or the weapon may have been spec'd to NATO standards as before mentioned. Either way both rounds can and have killed the enemy.

Semper Fi!

Always'
Sean

I need help. I have the 1903 Springfield 30-06 that my father bought in
1963. I use it deer-hunting and love the gun. BUT my problem is that when
I was hunting Saturday and went to load it the bolt lever broke. Dad said
it had been modified at one time for easier ejection of spent rounds and
thinks it broke in the weld. He may have another bolt and is going to look.
Does anyone out there have an idea where I can get a replacement if he can't
find extra bolt.


Candy P.
candacep@misschem.com
phone 662-751-2284

In an attempt to solve any uncertainties about military cartridge
selection I have prepared the following information:

The 30-06 in military form (M2 Ball) is technically inferior ballisticly
to the 7.62 NATO (.308). This is due to the fact that that M2 ammo,
designed around powders of 1906, fired a 150-grain flat base bullet at a
little over 2700 fps. Whereas the 7.62, although ? inch shorter, was
designed around more modern powders of the 1950?s; thus with the same
pressures as the M2, the latter?s 147 grain boat tail bullet actually
exceeded the formers velocity. Given that velocity is squared in the
calculation for kinetic energy, the 7.62?s very slight speed increase
results in more downrange energy. However, in modern hunting loads the
30-06 prevails over the 7.62 through the use of modern powders and of
coarse?more powder space. The development and acceptance of the 5.56
NATO (.223), was the result of a study done by the US government after
Korea, which analyzed wound characteristics and combat use/effectiveness
of current small arms. This study reviewed medical journals and other
information sources, including actual soldier testimonials, from WW1, WW2
and Korea. The study concluded that over 90% of battlefield casualties
occurred within 300 meters (beyond that range most soldiers can?t hit a
man-sized target in battlefield conditions) and that unaimed rapid fire
was actually more affective in achieving a hit than precision sighted
fire. Therefore what was needed (dictated by the study results) is a
small caliber, high velocity, and lightweight cartridge that enabled the
average soldier to carry two or three times the ammunition load and
control recoil in automatic fire.

I hope this helps.

Mr. Rob

I shoot em all. To me the 5.56 is a varmnt rifle, the 308 is a black bear and deer killer, the 06 can do it all from rabbits to rhino's, as far as combat effectivness is concerned, my vote goes to the .308.-------- Here is an urelated story I would like to share. I had heard a rumor that the AK 47- 7.62X39 could shoot the 5.56. Not the 223 AKM but the original 7.62. No way I thought, the cartridge dimmensions are'nt even close. quess what the AK 47 chambered for the 7.62 will indeed sucessfully fire the .223 round. The extractor holds the .223 firmly enough to ignite the primer and the .223 case expands back beyond its shoulder somewhat to fireform to the chamber of the AK. The guns was tied up because the .223 cartridge was stuck in the chamber but it did shoot and not blow up. Whow, I do not think I will do this again but the next time you hear that the AK will shoot the M-16 cartridge, dont bet that it wont.-----THE 30.06 RULES

Hi,
I'm new here. The 30-06 has larger case capacity therfore it can be loaded to higher velocities. However, the 308 can be loaded with less air space creating a more accurate round. This isnt my opinion but that of Jack O'Conner and others. I have an M1 and other 30-06's and love them.

Ameuseall

I fought in VN in 67/68. With the 223 you could carry more ammo in the field. The 30.06 has more of a variety of bullet grains for different situations. Compare the ballistics between the 30.06 and 308. What is your objective? I'll take the 30-06 any day of the week. The round comes in enough grain weights to duplicate the 308. the 5.56, 223, and then some. It's the supreme all around cartridge for hunting or competition shooting. To sell it short, is to display your lack of knowledge.

ok, the .308 in itself is a fine round, but is not ballistically superior to the 30.06. They are in fact very similar with 30.06 having a slight edge. The .308 makes more efficient use of case space/ powder volume. this is does not make it "ballistically" superior to the 30.06 but just makes more better use of case design. still round for round, with bullets of the same weight the 30.06 has a very slight lead on the .308. All this just to say the 30.06 isnt inferior....I do prefer .308. The .308 with its new(at the time) rim design and shorter case length made it ideal for use in MACHINE GUNS also. as far as the switch to .223 , I belive this was not done with any ballistic or wounding potential information . Logistical reasons were at the forefront of this one. if we could supply x amount of soldiers with 30 rnds of ammo with a weight savings of x compared to the bigger bulkier ammo....blah..blah..blah. Now the .223 is an accurate round that is easy to shoot, I just dont think the .223 has the hydrostatic shock and wounding potential of a 30 cal. projectile. I will hedge a bit and say the wound characteristics of the .223 can be quite remarkable for the little round. still i say bigger holes let more air in and more blood out..end of story.

I was an ammunition specialist in the army, 62-65. I recall the specs on the .30 AP as being required to penetrate 1/4 inch of face hardened armor at 30 degrees obliquity at 100 yards, and 25 inches of white oak at 300 yards. These were the minimums and by testing in the field, seemed low. The .30 AP would usually clean a half-inch steel plate at short range, and penetrated better at around 300 yards, after the bullet had stabilized. The 7.62 NATO would, and should, perform marginally below this. The 5.56, compared to either of the .30's, is crap for penetrating any kind of armor or cover besides comoflage netting. And troops put everything they can between themselves and hostile fire. Dr. Bruce Ragsdale, a pathologist who did extensive research in wound ballistics for Desert Samaritan Hospital in Phoenix, Az about 15 years ago, published a paper on the relative wounding power of the 5.56 compared to the 7.62 on unobstructed targets, where the 5.56 is supposed to shine. He found that the 5.56 did indeed exhibit slightly greater wounding power inside 125 yards. After that, it was all 7.62, with the difference in favor of the 7.62 growing very rapidly as range increased. And we're not talking gelatin blocks here, folks, Dr. Ragsdale was, as I said, a pathologist conducting bona fide medical research and he fired at human material with great precision. A part of his research was in developing computerized wound modeling systems for use by ER physicians treating gunshot wounds, but that's another story. Suffice to say that if the military is interested in using weapons that are dangerous to enemy soldiers that are behind cover or at any distance, something with the mass, energy, and ranging characteristics of the 30-06 is necessary.

Dear Sergeant Foster,
My name is Bill Tanneberger. I am trying to find about three spent 30-06 cal. casings to add to my military service memorabilia. I have assembled a shadow box to display my collection that includes 45 cal. and 50 cal. casing, my dog tags, my insignias and patches, along with my ribbons and medals. I served six years in the US Navy with a tour of duty in Vietnam. The M-1 Garand was our standard service rifle for landing parties, topside security, and military ceremonies. I would greatly appreciate any help or information for a source and cost for these casings. Thanks.

Bill Tanneberger
251 Oakdale Dr
Cornelia, GA 30531

My weapon of choice has been the Enfield MK4 in british 303 ,but finding a rifle in good cond. is hard to find so I've desided to "bite the bullet" and get a rifle in a more popular cal. So after much looking I had to deside on the 30-06 as its easily made to match my brit. 303 balistic. something the 308 could only dream of.


C.O. Shafer
shafer982@yahoo.com

Hi I love shooting the rifle its my fav.
I got in a discussion at work and I was told when I was younger that a 30-06 round could go 5 miles is this true? Thanks Jim

After reading these posts, I would like to point out the burning characteristics of the powder in the respective cases. The 30-06 is using a slower burning powder, for historical reasons, and can produce the volume of gas necessary to launch a heavy bullet at a rate marginally better than the .308, which uses a faster burning powder and produces a smaller volume of gas due to the shorter case capacity. This is proven in the reloading manuals. It produces a situation where the .308 can launch a bullet that is lighter weight faster than the 30-06. Most of the manuals I have studied indicate 165 grain bullets in both calibers being the crossover point. For hunting deer, I like the 06 with heavier bullets. This is an effort to not walk to far to find the animal. Those of you that think a spitzer tip is going to make it easy to bring home a deer may find field use less practical than one would think as those bullets tend to be meant for paper deer or other purposes, passing to far into an animal before mushrooming if they mushroom at all. Restated, the force the bullet can impart is coming from the mass of the bullet and the acceleration that bullet undergoes. The day may come when the receivers on the 30-06 are strengthened for use with faster burning powders, producing higher pressure levels, but with the existence of the 300 win or the 338 there is not much need. In either caliber, increased recoil decreases the accuracy of the gun for people that can't hang on like they can a .308 or 06. And the ability of the guns to be used in their point blank ranges is the most important thing of all.

The 30-06 Springfield is a fine caliber. It is great for hunting at least from whitetail to rhino.

NO CARTRIDGE IS AS DIVERSE, ACCURATE, OR HAS AS MUCH KNOCK DOWN POWER AS THE 30-06.

bullets in its class that is

.300 + calibers and you are firing cannons with stocks

Hello,

I own a Springfield model 710 30.06, my interests lie in a versatile gun, like an all season firearm. All I can find for the 30.06 is ammo of 150 grains or larger. Where do I find these 30.06 varmint rounds that you mentioned on your site. I am looking for the smallest I can get. Also I was wondering if the 30.06 is so versatile has anyone ever made it into a scout rifle. I appreciate your help.

From one gun lover to another,
Joshua

Hi,
Can I ask a reloading question?
I am presently loading 48 gr of IMR 4064 behind a 168 gr bolt tail bullet.
I was told that this load is too hot. I was also told that this is the NRA listing for this particular load. I get very good results with it though.
Can anyone comment?
Thanks.
David
Alaska
millerer@mosquitonet.com