Shooters Forum banner

Full Power Rifle vs 308 vs 303 vs mid range

15K views 57 replies 31 participants last post by  So Dakota  
Just to throw this into the "Mix":
I believe the M1903 .30 Caliber Cartridge used a 220 Grain Round nose projectile. This was teh "parent for the M1906 .30 caliber round that first used a 176 grain 'Spitzer' style projectile (M1) and later a slightly lighter projectile (M2).
Yes the 220 seemed overkill at the time and going to the Lighter projectile allowed an increased Range then the military kept both the M1 and M2 versions in production, with the M1 used in Machine guns and the M2 used in Service rifles. WW2 Post war studies of actual battle use found that the 1000-1200 yard range/shots were very few for the Service Rifles but the machine guns seemed give very good effective fire out beyond those distances.
Eventually the ".308" was developed to more closely match actual Battle use and allow greater number of rounds to be carried within the same weight. Machine guns for a time still used the .30-06 M1 round but eventually were replaced with Squad Automatic Weapons using the ".308" cartridge. Vietnam again showed a lessor range Infantry Cartridge would be practical, and the ".223" was adopted which gave the desired Range, light recoil and greater cartridge numbers for the Same carry weight.

Note how the Cartridge design changed with the Last war fought?

Is the Modern ".223" the equivalent of the old .30 M1903 round?
How about the .30 M1906 M! round?
I know it is not equivalent to the .30 M1906 M2 round by personal use and observation.

Yes, the .223 Round was much more destructive of flesh within its effective range, but that has been reduced by later versions redesigns.
But when we had to "reach out and touch" the enemy at longer ranges the .30 M1906 M2, and sometimes the M1, round were used "in Theater".

Just saying,
Chev. William
 
The 3006 is 100 years old this year and has spawned countless popular cartridges. I often hear people saying that rimmed cartridges won't feed properly but I have never had a problem yet with a 303 feeding. Loading them properly in the mag is necessary but very easy.
I thought the 'Caliber .30 M1906' was adopted in 1906?
Wouldn't that make it 110 years old as of the end of 2016?

Chuckling,
Chev. William