why .30cal sucks for long range?

[tvfreakarms]

http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/index_files/30cal_fullVersion.pdf

i wonder why bullet companies doesn't make 230gr bullets if that's considered optimal fir a .308cal.

[CSACANNONEER]

The real answer is simply that .50s rule!

[as_rocketman]

Short answer is that .30 U.S. Government wasn't designed exclusively for long range. It was, at the time, an infantry cartridge optimized for 0-500 meters -- medium range.

.30 caliber's saving grace is that it is very flexible. This is partly due to design margin of the original catridge, but more so because of its extreme longevity. All those surplus rifles and ammunition filtering into private hands made a great testbed for new technologies.

While your basic M2 Ball is a pretty poor cartridge for thousand-yard shooting, you can of course load up with 175 gr SMKs and do pretty well. But for basic military needs, this isn't a good trade -- the ammunition is much more expensive, and you need tighter quality control. The M2 Ball load was specified for about 3 MOA of accuracy, which is plenty for a battle rifle, but insufficient for long distange target shooting. Also, the match load is slower and has more arc in its near-field trajectory, making it actually less effective with battle sights. Battle rifles and target rifles aren't the same.

So why aren't there 230 grain loads for .30 '06? There are... but you probably won't be able to stabilize them in a normal barrel. With a custom high-twist barrel, you may still run afoul of Cartridge Overall Length (COAL) problems. There are 220 grain .30 loads, but they're practically flat-nosed for hunting thick-skinned animals. You should consider a different cartridge if you want to shoot massive bullets optimized for distance.

By comparison, 6.5mm has been long known as a good choice for long-range shooting, and this has impacted the military as well. One of the great calibers of the world, rarely seen here, is the 6.5x55 Swedish ("Swedish Mauser"), which is a fine long-distance hunting round, and thoroughly obsolete in military use. There's no reason why you couldn't still use it in battle, but the cheap military ammo offers poorer terminal effects that more than outweigh its potential at longer range.

Another example is the .303 British caliber -- on paper, worse across the board than even .30 US, but still used to devastating effect. The sniper variant of the SMLE was one of the best sniper rifles of the war, and was used into the 1970's. There's more to life than an ideal ballistic coefficient.

There are also upgraded versions of .30 US, notably the .300 Win Mag cartridge, which is still an upper tier long-range platform. The advantage here is that the larger case size permits heavier bullets -- closer to the "ideal" -- without sacrificing the faster, flatter trajectory. The combination of heavier rounds and higher speeds also staves off the accuracy-devouring transonic transition to well beyond a thousand meters.

If I were to build a precision rifle today, it would be in .260 Remington. But nothing stops me from shooting good ol' .30'06 at long distance. Sometimes good enough is good enough.

Along the same lines, I've come to really wonder why high-velocity .22 LR ammunition is so popular. Standard-velocity is vastly superior, giving up only a tiny bit of flatness in close for much longer effective range.

[russ69]

http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/...ullVersion.pdf

i wonder why bullet companies doesn't make 230gr bullets if that's considered optimal fir a .308cal.

There are plenty of 230 and 240 grain 30 caliber match bullets. Just not a lot of guns and shooters that want to be behind that kind of abuse.

[SDgarrick]

you dont need 230gr for many kinds of long range shooting. lots of other 30 Cal projos do the job just fine. some people have higher standards, but for me minute of gong at 1k is fine.

[Jester3]

Most folks have forgotten that .30 range caliber weapons were made for war or hunting, even 500 meters is to far. My grandpa, bless him, who taught me the fine art of hunting, never used a scope and always told us, if you can't see your game clearly with your own eyes you should not try to take him down.
I learned more of that mentality in the military. No scopes, quick acquisition. Helped me come home in one piece.
I fire mainly my 30-30 or .270 and try to keep it under 150 yards.
The only paper I shoot at is to sight in a new load.

[Ahhnother8]

We just fired a 1000 yard match today. Many of us using a .308 with 155 grain bullets. They work just fine. Yes, smaller calibers are easier to shoot, but where's the challenge? The match winner used a .308.

BTW, Bryan Litz shoots on the U.S. Palma Team, where we all shoot a .308, with 155 grain bullets.

[hermosabeach]

So a heavy bullet benefits from a faster twist rate.

As the 5.56 was initially a 1/14" twist (maybe 1/16") and then dropped down to the 1/7" twist today with heavier bullets and shorter barrels



So many factory 30 cal bolt guns would not necessarallity be as accurate as they were not designed with a twist rate to stabilize the heavy bullet.

If not stabilized the better BC becomes irrelevant.

To get a 220 up to an ideal velocity equates to a lot mor recoil to the shooter.

More recoil hurts and can limit group size as the recoil pushes the shooter past the natural point of aim.


Lastly- gas guns are generally designed around a set of factory loads


You can quickly ruin a Garand by shooting heavy loads unless you modify the gas system.

So unless you are shooting a FAL or L1A1 with an adjustable gas block, you again would need to get some type of aftermarket adjustable gas block.


So for 1k-2k shooters, they look at a lot of factors

Barrel life
Recoil
Accuracy at their desired range.

The original purpose behind the .308 rifle was a different purpose than long range target shooting.

You can do a lot with the platform... It just depends on your budget.

[hermosabeach]

Oh. And limited case capacity

Even with the 300 win mag, it is difficult to get heavy bullets going fast enough...

[russ69]

...BTW, Bryan Litz shoots on the U.S. Palma Team, where we all shoot a .308, with 155 grain bullets.

Duh, because you have to.

[DannyInSoCal]

I'd love to find .30 Carbne rounds in 230gr -

For my 7" LongSlide AMT 1911 clone.....

[postal]

Most long range guys are using 243, 260, 6 creedmoor, 6xc, 6dasher?, 6.5creedmoor. (for smaller cartridges... then you move up to magnums, 338, 50)

There is an obvious sweet spot in 6 and 6.5 mm for high drag coefficient and high velocity.

A lot of people interested in long range, are often told to buy a 308 to learn on. Because ammo is cheaper and usually available. Once they learn, they usually know what better cartridge they want to move to... which in most cases is still a 308 based cartridge. Same action, same bolt face, same magazines- just change out the barrel and feed it some ammo which is hard to find, so you really should be reloading. (except 6.5 creedmoor- hornady loads quality ammo for that.)

[Fjold]

The 1,000 yard benchrest record is owned by a 300 Hulk (Wildcat)

[highpower790]

Oh. And limited case capacity

Even with the 300 win mag, it is difficult to get heavy bullets going fast enough...

Palma shooters load 47 gr of varget with a 155,my Garand match load is 46gr of varget with a 175.

[Ahhnother8]

Most long range guys are using 243, 260, 6 creedmoor, 6xc, 6dasher?, 6.5creedmoor. (for smaller cartridges... then you move up to magnums, 338, 50)

Actually, most long range guys use a .308. Most of the long range shooting done around the world is with a .308. Though not perfect, it is more than adequate to determine who is the better marksman.

In long range F-class, about half use a .308. To be competitive in Open, they are using BIG 7mm's or BIG .30's with 200-230 grain Berger's at 2900-3000 fps.