.30-06 vs. .338 win mag vs. 300 win mag
01-15-2012, 06:39 PM
#71
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location:
Posts: 5,130
01-17-2012, 06:57 AM
#72
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,079
This from an old man whose "big game" is midwest deer. For many years I used a peep-sighted 30-30, a great gun for close deer. Then I discovered low-powered scopes and went to a good bolt action 3006. It is very accurate and I would not want anything bigger if I went after elk or moose. I would use 180 grain bullets instead of 150's, tho. I will not be hunting big bear. If one was hunting me I would want a really powerful rifle, but if I had the 3006 with 220 grain bullets I would not feel naked. The 3006 has all the recoil that I want to put up with, I have a good recoil pad on mine so it is not noticeable. It is a very versatile caliber, accurate and quite powerful at reasonable ranges.
01-17-2012, 06:25 PM
#73
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Renfrew County, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,392
I would take the 30-06 as well. It will kill any animal in North America. If it is too far away, become a better hunter and get closer. As far as the big bears are concerned, put it behind the shoulder they will die. Up close put it between the peepers and it will die. They are not tanks as the gun writer's would have you believe. 30-06 are available everywhere. 300's and 338 not so much.
HA
HA
01-18-2012, 04:35 AM
#74
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WY
Posts: 2,056
Some of us are convinced that a .30-06, with a proper projectile, will kill anything on this continent. Now, I have to be honest and admit that I didn't always think that way. There WAS a time in my life when bigger was always better. Maybe I was jealous that all my friends were hunting with .270s and 7mm Magnums and I was hunting with a puny .243? Maybe I was thinking that the animals I'd hit poorly would've died "better" if I'd simply used something bigger? And not to mention, I read a LOT or gun rags back in the day and they tended to support the aforementioned ideas. And though I didn't believe it then, looking back today, I can confidently assess my shooting skills then as "crappy."
Evolution. Fortunately, I recognized over the course of the years that those factors weren't nearly so important as my own marksmanship abilities were. Although I've since acquired some of the very same chamberings as well as some significantly larger, and have hunted all over North America, I recognize that if I can't play the role I need to, it doesn't matter WHAT rifle or caliber I'm using. Now, will I carry a .243 into Sunlight Basin after elk when I have a .30-06 or .300 Weatherby available? Let's not be rash and think so. Do I pack a .375 H&H because a black bear was spotted in my deer woods? Let's be realistic.
Some of us probably aren't at the point where our own experiences can call into question the paid endorsements of the gun rag writers (you don't think they spend their own money on those trips, do you?). And, although I'm certain there are some competent marksmen within this community, some of us may never be able to place the same stamp of quality on our marksmanship efforts as we require of our firearms, our ammunition, or our optics - as if simply spending more will compensate for our own incompetencies.
So for those of us who've yet to encounter a 1000-pound Kodiak in our deer or elk woods where the most common predator is a coyote, the .30-06 (or less?) is probably fine. For those who see as many 500-pound inland grizzlies as they do 6x6 or better bulls in the Bob or the Wind Rivers - a .300 or .338 might be justifiable. And for those who think their incompetencies (we'll rarely air them here, but we know in our heart of hearts) will be cleansed away with a more powerful chambering, we can hope that one day a gun rag writer will be on a trip and announce to us that a manufacturer has finally come up with a lightweight, sporting .50 BMG.
Last edited by homers brother; 01-18-2012 at 04:38 AM.
01-19-2012, 03:29 PM
#75
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 105
In all likelihood, this is a debate that'll never go away. It's common in many hunting camps, subject of countless articles in gun rags, and it sells a lot of firearms to a lot of people.
Some of us are convinced that a .30-06, with a proper projectile, will kill anything on this continent. Now, I have to be honest and admit that I didn't always think that way. There WAS a time in my life when bigger was always better. Maybe I was jealous that all my friends were hunting with .270s and 7mm Magnums and I was hunting with a puny .243? Maybe I was thinking that the animals I'd hit poorly would've died "better" if I'd simply used something bigger? And not to mention, I read a LOT or gun rags back in the day and they tended to support the aforementioned ideas. And though I didn't believe it then, looking back today, I can confidently assess my shooting skills then as "crappy."
Evolution. Fortunately, I recognized over the course of the years that those factors weren't nearly so important as my own marksmanship abilities were. Although I've since acquired some of the very same chamberings as well as some significantly larger, and have hunted all over North America, I recognize that if I can't play the role I need to, it doesn't matter WHAT rifle or caliber I'm using. Now, will I carry a .243 into Sunlight Basin after elk when I have a .30-06 or .300 Weatherby available? Let's not be rash and think so. Do I pack a .375 H&H because a black bear was spotted in my deer woods? Let's be realistic.
Some of us probably aren't at the point where our own experiences can call into question the paid endorsements of the gun rag writers (you don't think they spend their own money on those trips, do you?). And, although I'm certain there are some competent marksmen within this community, some of us may never be able to place the same stamp of quality on our marksmanship efforts as we require of our firearms, our ammunition, or our optics - as if simply spending more will compensate for our own incompetencies.
So for those of us who've yet to encounter a 1000-pound Kodiak in our deer or elk woods where the most common predator is a coyote, the .30-06 (or less?) is probably fine. For those who see as many 500-pound inland grizzlies as they do 6x6 or better bulls in the Bob or the Wind Rivers - a .300 or .338 might be justifiable. And for those who think their incompetencies (we'll rarely air them here, but we know in our heart of hearts) will be cleansed away with a more powerful chambering, we can hope that one day a gun rag writer will be on a trip and announce to us that a manufacturer has finally come up with a lightweight, sporting .50 BMG.
Some of us are convinced that a .30-06, with a proper projectile, will kill anything on this continent. Now, I have to be honest and admit that I didn't always think that way. There WAS a time in my life when bigger was always better. Maybe I was jealous that all my friends were hunting with .270s and 7mm Magnums and I was hunting with a puny .243? Maybe I was thinking that the animals I'd hit poorly would've died "better" if I'd simply used something bigger? And not to mention, I read a LOT or gun rags back in the day and they tended to support the aforementioned ideas. And though I didn't believe it then, looking back today, I can confidently assess my shooting skills then as "crappy."
Evolution. Fortunately, I recognized over the course of the years that those factors weren't nearly so important as my own marksmanship abilities were. Although I've since acquired some of the very same chamberings as well as some significantly larger, and have hunted all over North America, I recognize that if I can't play the role I need to, it doesn't matter WHAT rifle or caliber I'm using. Now, will I carry a .243 into Sunlight Basin after elk when I have a .30-06 or .300 Weatherby available? Let's not be rash and think so. Do I pack a .375 H&H because a black bear was spotted in my deer woods? Let's be realistic.
Some of us probably aren't at the point where our own experiences can call into question the paid endorsements of the gun rag writers (you don't think they spend their own money on those trips, do you?). And, although I'm certain there are some competent marksmen within this community, some of us may never be able to place the same stamp of quality on our marksmanship efforts as we require of our firearms, our ammunition, or our optics - as if simply spending more will compensate for our own incompetencies.
So for those of us who've yet to encounter a 1000-pound Kodiak in our deer or elk woods where the most common predator is a coyote, the .30-06 (or less?) is probably fine. For those who see as many 500-pound inland grizzlies as they do 6x6 or better bulls in the Bob or the Wind Rivers - a .300 or .338 might be justifiable. And for those who think their incompetencies (we'll rarely air them here, but we know in our heart of hearts) will be cleansed away with a more powerful chambering, we can hope that one day a gun rag writer will be on a trip and announce to us that a manufacturer has finally come up with a lightweight, sporting .50 BMG.
Shut your eye's and just lay back and think about that! I think it would be a nightmare!
01-19-2012, 04:57 PM
#77
Spike
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 18
If you have not read it, here is a pretty good piece by John Barsness on Getting the Most out of Your 30-06."
GETTING THE MOST OUT OF YOUR .30-06
by John Barsness
TODAY THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE of most handloaders seems to be accuracy, with muzzle velocity closely behind, though we still run into guys who claim to get 100 or even 200 ft/sec more than most loading manuals suggest might be realistic. In my experience these experimenters are often into hot cars as well as hot handloads, but most of us recognize that if we want a .300 magnum we should buy one, rather than attempt to turn our .30-06 into a .300 WSM.
by John Barsness
TODAY THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE of most handloaders seems to be accuracy, with muzzle velocity closely behind, though we still run into guys who claim to get 100 or even 200 ft/sec more than most loading manuals suggest might be realistic. In my experience these experimenters are often into hot cars as well as hot handloads, but most of us recognize that if we want a .300 magnum we should buy one, rather than attempt to turn our .30-06 into a .300 WSM.
01-20-2012, 12:23 AM
#79
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WY
Posts: 2,056
01-20-2012, 09:06 AM
#80
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,952
30/06. It will kill anything, you might want to eat. The ammo is cheap, and available everywhere. Bullet choices alone, make it the most versatile of the three mentioned. Honestly, what else is there to consider?
ATB
ATB