.30-.30 v. .308

Doug C said:
Surprise. :)
Click to expand...

Not yet- you've basically brought a cake, but I'm waiting to see if it has a pretty girl in it. Then I'll be surprised. I emailed the host of the site requesting information on his source.

Again, for people who wish to cling to this notion, I want to see a source directly connected to the development of the 7.62mm NATO cartridge, either official Army documentation or a statement confirmed to be from a member of the design team. Everything you folks have waved about is hearsay, you've provided no evidence to support your claim.

The reason why I ask for official documents is the Army documents that I have copies of in my collection don't say word one about the .300 Savage. I've always found the development of powders and propellants interesting and the evolution of .30-03 to .30-06 (military version) to the T65 to the final NATO specification and the .308 Winchester and various offshoots is actually rather interesting. If you have access to a valid, documentable source, I'd love to see it. But so far... All you've given me is along the lines of proto-encyclopedias from 16th, 17th and 18th centuries that insisted that unicorns and dragons were real becuase they were mentioned in the bible- that's not evidence, thats folklore that's been repeated.
 
But where are your sources that the .308 is based on the .30-06?

When I was looking for sources of info I found these two stating the .30-06 theory. But in my book they're slightly above wikipedia in credibility. But not above the sierra reloading manual.
http://www.reloadbench.com/cartridges/308w.html
http://www.surplusrifle.com/m14m1a/pdf/m14m1aammunition.pdf


ironraven said:
Not yet- you've basically brought a cake, but I'm waiting to see if it has a pretty girl in it. Then I'll be surprised. I emailed the host of the site requesting information on his source.

Again, for people who wish to cling to this notion, I want to see a source directly connected to the development of the 7.62mm NATO cartridge, either official Army documentation or a statement confirmed to be from a member of the design team. Everything you folks have waved about is hearsay, you've provided no evidence to support your claim.
Click to expand...
 
30-30 was my first rifle. I love the Martin level action. It is my favorite and perfer it to anything for deer size hunting. Well except my reflex bow. I enjoy reading on the interesting history from others.
 
ironraven said:
Not yet- you've basically brought a cake, but I'm waiting to see if it has a pretty girl in it. Then I'll be surprised. I emailed the host of the site requesting information on his source.

Again, for people who wish to cling to this notion, I want to see a source directly connected to the development of the 7.62mm NATO cartridge, either official Army documentation or a statement confirmed to be from a member of the design team. Everything you folks have waved about is hearsay, you've provided no evidence to support your claim.

The reason why I ask for official documents is the Army documents that I have copies of in my collection don't say word one about the .300 Savage. I've always found the development of powders and propellants interesting and the evolution of .30-03 to .30-06 (military version) to the T65 to the final NATO specification and the .308 Winchester and various offshoots is actually rather interesting. If you have access to a valid, documentable source, I'd love to see it. But so far... All you've given me is along the lines of proto-encyclopedias from 16th, 17th and 18th centuries that insisted that unicorns and dragons were real becuase they were mentioned in the bible- that's not evidence, thats folklore that's been repeated.
Click to expand...

i keep waiting for you to post a link validating your theory and you still havent done so, why not?? could it be that its because you dont have anything to back you up?? it seems to me all you want to do is argue.......you arent interested in the facts, just an arguement.


if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its a duck, not a dragon.

and again, if ya are so interested in it do some research and "suprise me" like you said previously.

i'm satisfied with the info provided, others also seem to be, why in the world would YOU expect OTHERS to do YOUR research? if ya are so "interested" in it it should be a joy to wade thru all the info available on the 7.62 nato/.308 winchester. so, if the info provided doesnt meet your standards do some research and provide us all with whatever it is that would meet your criteria, all you are providing so far is an arguement with nothing to back it up. or i suppose ya could just drop it lol.

on one hand you criticise others info and call it bullshit and make jokes but then fail to provide ANYTHING but arguement/your "opinions" while you and only you are the judge of what is/what is not valid.

jeez, give me a break dude, look at the big picture, its not a big deal you act like its some big conspiracy or something lol.
 
No your wrong it was made from the predecessor of the 30-06 the 30-03. But the also Incorporated the 458 win mag and the 22 hornet cases into the mix to perfect it. My God who cares the 308 win is a great round so is the 30-06. I don't care for the 300 savage to much but it also works OK. None of these rounds are interchangeable. The 30-30 cannot match the ballistics of the 308 but it has killed more deer than the 308. I killed my first 11 deer with a marlin 336 30-30 and it never let me down. Through hand loading I have turned the 30-30 into a much better round than what you can get off the shelf. Also with the new Hornady ammo it also is a better cartridge than it was years ago. If you want to tag deer at 500 + yards then buy the 308 in a tactical configuration. If you are going to keep your shots down to 300 yards (you need the right loads for a shot this far in this caliber) Then buy the 30-30. Most people don't shoot deer at ranges over 150 yards. At this distance you wont notice the difference and the deer will die just as quick. I have shot deer and hogs with 30-30, 243 win, 7.62x39, 223, 30-06, 300 win mag, MM (HEAD SHOT ON A HOG) and it is hard to tell the difference between these rounds with good shot placement. In fact I tend to hunt with a 30-30 or a 243 these days. Buy what you are comfortable with.
 
ashtxsniper said:
Uhhh I believe the 30-30 was made from 50 BMG brass and yeah no ones gonna change my mind. LOL.
Click to expand...

Yeah man enybuddy kin take a micrometer and see for yerself 30-30 brass is just shortened .50BMG with all dimensions the same except fur length -- so that proooooves it wuz rilly descended from the .300 Savage, riiiiiiiiiiiiite?
 
Kinda it was but it wasn't designed from the 30-06. It has a lot of history you should research it. I also remember something about the the 30-06 being designed after technologies used in either the 7mm or 8mm Mauser.
 
chriss said:
actually the 50 cal is a bigger version of the 30-06
Click to expand...

JMB was a genius with firearms. Not very imaginative with the ammunition. :) But it's still hard to argue with something that's basically unchanges for 80 years.

And can throw a piece of lead that heavy, that far. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top