Bought an ‘06… again.

[JackstrawIII]

I’m somewhat of a gun aficionado and have owned all sorts of gun for all sorts of hunting purposes. If you saw my previous post about the “ideal” rifle for each use, you’ll know that I’m a firm believer in having the best tool for the job. 
 

I’ve owned several 30-06 rifles over the years but have always sold them because I had something “better”: 
- the 270 shoots flatter 

- the 308 recoils less 

- the 6.5’s buck the wind a bit better

- the 7mm’s are trendier 

- the 35’s make a bigger entrance wound

 

Etc. 

 

But, the more I hunt, research, and calculate (big Excel formula geek

over here), the more I realize that the 30-06 is somewhat of a unicorn and is truly remarkably versatile. 
 

For example, I can shoot just as flat to 400 yards as the 6.5 PRC, while actually recoiling LESS. Don't believe me? Do the math comparing a 125 grain copper bullet (which is an awesome deer bullet) at 3400fps from an 06 vs a 118 copper bullet (also a great load) at 3200 fps from a 6.5PRC. The improved BC of the 6.5 bullet doesn’t catch the 30 cal until after 400 yards. 
 

At the same time, the 06 can shoot a 168 grain copper bullet at almost 3000 fps, which is nipping at the heels of legendary 300 Win Mag performance at substantially less recoil. I don’t live in a “big game” area, but this would be an incredible load for elk+. 
 

So, I just talked myself into trying the 06 again. This time I found a Pre64 Winchester Model 70 Featherweight with a Brown Precision stock already on it. Should be a handy little rifle that can handle anything and I will hopefully have the chance to use it on more than just deer someday 🙏🏻
 

PS. Will upload some pics when it arrives. 

 

[wvhunt]

People in my area want to bash on the 30-06 for some reason.  I think it's just the trendy thing to do. But I'm a fan and the 30-06 will do anything I'd ever need it to do.  With the right bullet it will kill anything in North America but isn't overkill for whitetail. 

 

I bought inventory of a closed gun shop and got several new Bergara Timber rifles.  I've sold all the ones I don't want to keep other than one 30-06.  Several locals have told me "anything but an 30-06 and I'd buy that".  I just don't get it.

[12poundbass]

Almost everyone that I’ve hunted with over the years had a 30-06. Like mentioned above it’ll take down any big game animal in North America. It suits me in the woods here in Michigan and I’ve taken a few white tail in the plains of NW Nebraska. It’ll reach out there and touch them if needed. Perfect rifle for me! 

[JackstrawIII]

47 minutes ago, wvhunt said:

Several locals have told me "anything but an 30-06 and I'd buy that".  I just don't get it.

The gun culture today is very interesting. About 1/4 of people fall directly into the “newer is better” mindset. They (like me) often chase the latest and greatest rifles and cartridges in order to get “maximum efficiency”. They’re not wrong, but I think it’s very easy to over complicate this whole thing. 
 

Then you have 1/4 of people who are the opposite. They love everything old. They EDC a 1911 and refuse to hunt with a rifle that doesn’t have a walnut stock. They’re not wrong either, but I think they’re missing. 
 

Then you have the remaining 1/2 of people who are essentially clueless. They use a 270 cuz their dad did… because his dad did. They don’t know that a 300 win mag shoots the same bullets as a 30-06 (to reference the original post) or that a 6.5 PRC isn’t the same thing as a 6.5 Creedmoor. When explaining simple ballistics to these folks at the shooting range they look at me like I’m some sort of alchemist who’s gone off the deep end. And they’re not really wrong either, but I think they’re also deeply missing out. 
 

So, who is right? None of them, all of them? 
 

I started in group 3… but have spent the last 15 years bouncing back and forth between the first two groups. As of today, I want the 30-06 with a nice fiberglass stock 👌🏻

[Woody B]

It doesn't matter if we're talking firearms, fishing stuff, or pretty much anything else.  I believe a BIG factor in pretty much anything is confidence.   If I'm correct each group is right, as long as they have confidence in their beliefs.   

 

I believe the 30-06 is a great round.   I killed my first Deer and Bear with an -06.  Both of my Grandsons killed their first Deer with the same rifle.   

 

[JackstrawIII]

46 minutes ago, Woody B said:

I killed my first Deer and Bear with an -06.  Both of my Grandsons killed their first Deer with the same rifle.   

That is super cool. My family has no hunting history, I’m the first generation. Hoping to establish some of these traditions for the future generations in my family. 

[clayton86]

I’ve often thought about getting one but don’t really have a “need” for it. I barely deer hunt and when I do I’m in hard woods or brushy terrain so the 45-70 wins there. I mostly coyote hunt where the 06 will be to much and I don’t need another coyote gun I have hard time deciding what to take as it is (.243, .20practical, .17-223, 17hornet, 12ga w/ 4buck) 

[Functional]

Every time I catch myself getting caught up in the "which round is best" debate with hunting I remember just about everything we talk about hunting in NA has been taken with a bow. 

 

Regardless of the caliber I believe bullet selection for the FPS you expect the bullet to have, the game you are hunting and shot placement are most important.

 

For example the 6.5x47L is routinely used to hunt Elk over in Europe. Its a fantastic round but by comparison to the 6.5creed and 6PRC its slow. 

 

Personally I want the flattest shooting with the least recoil and still have some mass in a bullet to handle elk. That usually puts me into a 6.5creedmoor with a TTSX bullet. A 6.5 TTSX is proven on everything I'd hunt, and opens at a lower velocity than most if I ever needed to take a far shot. The 300wm, 6.5prc, 30-06 etc. are similar but the recoil that comes with them in a light hunting rifle puts me off them. Part of an ethical hunt for me is knowing where I hit so I can better track what I shot God forbid everything went wrong and it was a poor shot. 

 

Having said that, moose and bear are the only two I'd want something like a 300WM, 30-06, 300PRC, 338LM, etc. Those are some TOUGH animals and I want the meatiest bullet I can smack em with. Everything else 6.5creed or 308 (and others) is plenty IMO.

[JackstrawIII]

2 hours ago, Functional said:

Every time I catch myself getting caught up in the "which round is best" debate with hunting I remember just about everything we talk about hunting in NA has been taken with a bow. 

Good point, and good post. 

For me, the goal is to match impact velocity, mass, and bullet design. Like you, I've come to appreciate all-copper bullets, but the trick is to make sure you have enough velocity left at whatever range you plan to impact your game. 

This is why the comparison to elk/moose hunting in Europe isn't really accurate in my opinion. From what I've read, the shot distances over there are almost always sub-200 yards... while most guys that hunt elk/moose in the American west plan to shoot their game at much farther distances, which changes the projectile energy/mass requirements completely. 

Nate Foster (ballisticstudies.com) uses 2600 FPS as a general guideline for impact velocity in order to get optimum performance out of all-copper projectiles on smaller thin-skinned game such as deer. Hence my reluctance to use the 6.5 Creedmoor, which has a relatively modest powder capacity. With that said, I do think I could get 2600 fps out to about 300 with a 105 grain copper bullet... which would be more than enough for any deer around. So maybe I should reconsider...

[Functional]

14 minutes ago, JackstrawIII said:

Good point, and good post. 

For me, the goal is to match impact velocity, mass, and bullet design. Like you, I've come to appreciate all-copper bullets, but the trick is to make sure you have enough velocity left at whatever range you plan to impact your game. 

This is why the comparison to elk/moose hunting in Europe isn't really accurate in my opinion. From what I've read, the shot distances over there are almost always sub-200 yards... while most guys that hunt elk/moose in the American west plan to shoot their game at much farther distances, which changes the projectile energy/mass requirements completely. 

Nate Foster (ballisticstudies.com) uses 2600 FPS as a general guideline for impact velocity in order to get optimum performance out of all-copper projectiles on smaller thin-skinned game such as deer. Hence my reluctance to use the 6.5 Creedmoor, which has a relatively modest powder capacity. With that said, I do think I could get 2600 fps out to about 300 with a 105 grain copper bullet... which would be more than enough for any deer around. So maybe I should reconsider...

Agreed on most everything. 

 

Something to expand on a little is you mention impact velocity and also possibly a 6.5 with a 105gr bullet. Velocity is one component but you need to also look at the energy at the given distance. I'll put a comparison of the 107gr (closest I could find that was a similar bullet to the 147) at 3000fps and I'll put a 147gr at 2800fps (both realistic numbers I've achieved). While the 107 is faster the 147 is the better choice PROVIDED the bullet is rated to expand at the velocity you run (or impact if the manufacturer gives it). The lighter bullet will shed speed much faster. With the greater mass the 147 catches up in speed but EASILY out paces it in energy at impact. Within 400yrds there is a 400-500 ft-lb advantage for the heavier/slower 147. If you are interested I can run tables for you. I have a few ballistic solvers that spit this all out nicely. 

 

107 (yrds/FPS/ ft-lbs)

200-2596-1601

400-2223-1174

600-1883-843

 

147 (yrds/FPS/ ft-lbs)

200-2499-2039

400-2219-1607

600-1956-1249

 

*these figures are just pulled from 2 similar style bullets closest to the weight you mention, BC of the bullet will play into this but it gets the point across. When you do this with short barrels there is a crossover where too heavy IS too slow. 

[JackstrawIII]

4 hours ago, Functional said:

Something to expand on a little is you mention impact velocity and also possibly a 6.5 with a 105gr bullet. Velocity is one component but you need to also look at the energy at the given distance. I'll put a comparison of the 107gr (closest I could find that was a similar bullet to the 147) at 3000fps and I'll put a 147gr at 2800fps (both realistic numbers I've achieved). While the 107 is faster the 147 is the better choice PROVIDED the bullet is rated to expand at the velocity you run (or impact if the manufacturer gives it). The lighter bullet will shed speed much faster. With the greater mass the 147 catches up in speed but EASILY out paces it in energy at impact. Within 400yrds there is a 400-500 ft-lb advantage for the heavier/slower 147.

 

Functional, you're 100% correct and make a good point that applies to the use of traditional lead/jacket bullets.

I think, however, the rules change a bit for copper, especially on deer-sized game. Because copper bullets lose no weight upon expansion, you get significantly more penetration from a copper bullet of a given weight as compared to a traditional jacketed lead bullet. As such, I don't worry about the "energy" factor as much, because I know I'll still get full penetration with a lighter bullet. In my opinion, this gives the performance edge to a faster/lighter bullet which transfers its energy to the game more quickly (again, we're talking deer-size game, specifically).

 

Also, it takes quite a while for a slower/heavier bullet to surpass a lighter/faster bullet when it comes to energy. In my case, I compared a 105 and 118 grain copper bullets out of the 6.5 PRC. Side note, I realize these are lighter weights than most would use in this cartridge, but copper changes things. These are the MKZ by Cavity Back Bullets. I really like them, as well as their 125 grain bullet out of a 308. Hammers on deer. Anyways, if you compare the two:

 

105 grain bullet at 3500 fps muzzle velocity gives you 2867 fps at 300 yards with 1916 f/lb of energy.

118 grain bullet at 3200 fps muzzle velocity gives you 2631 fps at 300 yards with 1813 f/lb of energy.

 

I'm not sure at what point the heavier bullet overtakes the lighter (300 yards is as far as I normally take my calculations when planning hunting loads), but you're right that it would happen eventually.

 

In summary: for deer hunting with copper bullets at ranges I'm comfortable with the lighter bullet almost always wins. 

 

 

[DaubsNU1]

Back in 2000 I was in the market for a rifle...being left handed my options were pretty limited. I read, researched, picked up books, talked to other hunters, gunsmiths, my uncle, friends, Digested everything I could get my hands on.

 

Mind you, my options were pretty limited in a left handed gun that fit my budget:

• 300 Win Mag
• 30-06
• 270 Winchester
• 7mm Rem MAG

I will admit, I am a pansy when it comes to recoil.

 

So i opted for the good-old 30-06. Easy to find ammo, can bullet-up for bigger game, scale down for smaller game. Not horrible on recoil. Been a great gun for 23 years. 

 

I did run in to a bit of luck, winning two fantasy football leagues in the early 2000's, and found $650 burning a hole in my pocket. Found a barely-used Winchester Model 70, stainless with a red-ish stock, chambered in 7mm Rem MAG. Had trouble dialing it in...then a buddy recommended slightly larger bullets...and it's been a tack-driver ever since.  

 

Both guns have served me well. I cannot complain. Every once and a while I get to looking a ballistic charts, bullet weights, FPS, range, drop, muzzle velocity, muzzle energy, etc., etc., etc.

 

I think the 30-06 is a wonderful caliber. Enjoy!!

[gim]

1 hour ago, DaubsNU1 said:

Mind you, my options were pretty limited in a left handed gun

My Father shoots left handed but he has a right handed bolt action. It’s a complete Mickey Mouse operation watching him reload that rifle.

 

He’s too stubborn to replace it and get a left handed model though, so the clown show continues every season.

[12poundbass]

@gimruis I’m left handed and have owned all right handed guns. My guns are pump or semi auto so I’ve never (that I can remember) used a bolt. I could see if you’re shooting free hand it would be a pain, but from a rest I’d think it wouldn’t be an issue would it? 
 

The only issue I’ve had is shooting a semi auto rifle, once in a while I’d have a random shell hit the bill of my hat. 

[DaubsNU1]

@gimruis, my first deer hunting trip was with a right handed 270 Win borrowed from my uncle. I looked like the sniper from Saving Private Ryan, shucking shells from the wrong side. Worked...

 

 

@12poundbass, my first shotguns were right handed...Winchester 20 ga. Pump, and then a Remington 1100 12 ga. magnum. Working the safety was tricky...but got used to it. 

 

In 2001 picked up a left handed Benelli Super Black Eagle. Love it! No more shells bouncing off the bill of my hat : ) 

[scaleface]

My Dad traded a car for a bolt action 30 06 Springfield that had a handsome, blonde, modern Monte Carlo stock. It was the one gun I wanted to inherit.   After years of hunting I guess he grew tired of it and traded  it off. I was bummed that day.

[gim]

9 hours ago, DaubsNU1 said:

I looked like the sniper from Saving Private Ryan, shucking shells from the wrong side. Worked...

Haha, yep that's kinda what it is.  Not efficient to say the least.

 

Now, instead of reaching over top to operate the bolt with his left hand, he lowers the entire rifle, switches hands, reloads, switches hands, and then raises the gun again.  By the time all of this is completed, that 10 point buck he was shooting at is in the next county.

 

He also has a right handed shotgun when he used to go bird hunting but that was an even bigger disaster because it was spitting empty casings into his line of vision every time he reloaded.  Instead of addressing the problem, he just quit bird hunting.

 

Stubborn as a mule.

10 hours ago, 12poundbass said:

I could see if you’re shooting free hand it would be a pain, but from a rest I’d think it wouldn’t be an issue would it? 

I'll tell you what.  Next November when this occurs again, I'll take a video and send it to you.  You be the judge.

 

Hint: are you gonna do is shake your head.

 

My advice is this.  If you shoot left handed, buy a left handed gun.  You wouldn't play golf or hockey left handed using right handed clubs or a right handed hockey stick would you?

[12poundbass]

@DaubsNU1 @gimruis

 

If you have a rest why wouldn’t someone keep their left hand on the gun and rack the bolt with their right hand. Doesn’t seem bad or awkward to me. No rest or support sure it would be a pain. Keep in mind I’ve never shot a bolt action so maybe I’m missing something.

[gim]

1 hour ago, 12poundbass said:

If you have a rest why wouldn’t someone keep their left hand on the gun and rack the bolt with their right hand.

 

Quite often you don't have a full "rest" like at a range.  You're either free hand shooting or using what I refer to as a "leaner" against a tree branch or part of the deer stand.

 

My Father doesn't use his left hand to reach over and operate the bolt anymore; he lowers the gun, switches hands, and then operates the bolt with his right hand.  Then he has switch hands again, raise the gun, and find the target.  That whole process takes about 5-8 seconds when it should take about 1 or 2.  The goal is to keep the rifle on plane, pointed at the target.  When you lose that, you lose time.  When you lose time, you lose the target aka a deer or other big game animal.

 

A deer standing broadside within range is ideal, obviously.  Then you just make a good first shot to the vitals and its over with no follow up shooting.  But sometimes a deer is walking, running, etc.  That's where the problem occurs.

[Bird]

My very 1st deer rifle was a bolt action " Belgium " 30 06 that I used for over 40 years...... extremely accurate.

[12poundbass]

3 hours ago, gimruis said:

A deer standing broadside within range is ideal, obviously.  Then you just make a good first shot to the vitals and its over with no follow up shooting.  But sometimes a deer is walking, running, etc.  That's where the problem occurs.

I see what you’re saying.

 

I’ve shot one deer on the run and that’s the only deer I’ve shot at more than once. The deer ended up dead but I’ll never shoot at a deer moving faster than a walk, not my style. When I’m out hunting I’ll hear multiple shots from the same person and some I even hear them unload the whole gun. When I pull the trigger I have 100% confidence my shot was well placed and even though the deer almost always takes off I know the bullet hit its mark, it’s not going far, so there’s no need for a follow up shot.

[gim]

@12poundbass most people stand or blind hunt these days but it didn’t used to always be like that. People would hunt in groups and put together drives. I haven’t done it for years but it was very effective at getting deer on the move. Everyone sits and waits now, sometimes for a deer that never shows up.

 

I don’t do drives anymore, as I don’t have anyone to do them with because it’s just my Father and myself. I used to hunt in a big group of 10 though. You had to establish posters and safe shooting positions ahead of time. I kind of miss doing them, sitting for days on end gets old.

 

I also prefer a standing shot but it’s not always presented that way either.

[JackstrawIII]

11 hours ago, 12poundbass said:

I’ll never shoot at a deer moving faster than a walk, not my style.

Same here. Have never shot a moving deer… and most likely never will.

 

I’m a very cautious hunter. Probably too cautious, as I’ve passed up opportunities I probably could have capitalized on, but I have a very high value for clean kills. 

9 hours ago, gimruis said:

sitting for days on end gets old.

This is 100% true. I often feel very jealous of the guys who hunt out west on large tracts of public land. The spot and stalk style of hunting very much appeals to me, but there’s nowhere to do that in NY where I live. 
 

Instead I shoot deer off my back deck or out of a blind on a bean field. It works, but it’s not the most satisfying experience. 

[Functional]

@JackstrawIII You may (and likely are) right on terminal performance of solids. I've never honestly looked hard into them but I've heard great results with solids. Ballistics are ballistics though and a lighter bullet absolutely will shed speed faster than a heavier one regardless of makeup. Inside 400 though the different isnt huge and again this is more in the weeds than its needs to be. People have taken deer with a 223 with a decent bullet in the right spot!

[gim]

2 hours ago, JackstrawIII said:

Have never shot a moving deer… and most likely never will.

 

When you conduct a drive with a bunch of other hunters, you don't get any shots at standing deer.  They're all running.  Making a fatal shot on a running target with a rifle at distance is a challenge to say the least.  I was never that great at it myself.  But I have relatives that are very mastered with that type of shot because they spent years hunting coyotes on the prairie.  They would do the same thing; someone would bump them out of the cover, and the yotes would hit the open ground running.  Coyotes can haul a** when they are on the sprint too.  Just like anything else, it takes practice.  They all used a 22-250 caliber to hunt them.  They would always tell me that shooting at a deer was like trying to hit a house compared to a coyote.

 

The drive tactic was never very effective for tagging bucks though.  They were too smart.  They did not try to escape the piece in the same route that antlerless deer did.  They would sneak out at another point that wasn't covered or double back on the drivers.  I saw a nice 8 pointer swim across a lake to escape us once.

 

Unfortunately, as I already stated, you need a sizable group of hunters to deploy this tactic - you need several posters and at least 5 or 6 drivers/walkers.  We used to do it at the end of the season every year, but the other hunters in our traditional group have either 1) died, 2) gotten too old to walk, or 3) stopped hunting.  That's why no one does it anymore.  Most people sit and wait because they don't hunt in large groups.