Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Rifles

7mm-08 vs .308

Uploaded on February 11, 2010

if you were to use these two guns for long range target shooting and elk hunting, which one would you have to choose from?

Top Rated
All Replies
from Edward J. Palumbo wrote 4 years 9 weeks ago

There are excellent Match bullets available in .284 and .308 diameter. For targets, either of these cartridges is an excellent choice. Either of them, with quality hunting bullets and proper placement, will drop an elk. In my opinion, however, with elk as an equally high priority, I would opt for the .280 Rem and .30-'06 if I was starting with a standard-sized (long) action. Given a shorter action, the 7mm-08 and .308 are good choices for the dual purpose (target/hunting), with a personal preference for the .308 because of the great spectrum of thirty caliber bullets (compared to the 7mm selection) which permits me, as a handloader, a greater selection for experimentation and load development, which I enjoy very much.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from BigBboy25 wrote 4 years 9 weeks ago

Well said Ed, i agree with all of the above. I too prefer the .308.

I do think that the 7mm-08 is about the perfect beginners cartridge for youth and women though. I think it offers a very balanced platform in terms of recoil, energy, bullets selection, and ballistics to handle anything from varmints to Elk. Can't go wrong with either.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from stanleyda wrote 4 years 8 weeks ago

I can't add much to those good points, both are great rounds.The 130gr barnesTXS in the 308win now makes it even a better all around gun,with light or heavy bullets.Taking away a little of the 7/08's appeal.For elk the 308 would be better with heavier rounds 150,165,grain bullets.I've never seen factory rounds for the 7/08 on the shelf heavier than 140gr..

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 4 years 8 weeks ago

I'll take the 308 over the 7mm-08 any day. Works fantastic in the field as well as on the range at the 1000 yard line for me and plenty of ammo to find and shoot!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from 308scout wrote 4 years 8 weeks ago

I just went to the trouble of building a custom 308 on a ruger action. it is not done yet but I am very excited. I have used the 308 on deer and pronghorn with excellent results and am planning to use it on elk soon. I think the 7/08 is an excellent cartridge as well but i think you can't go wrong with the 308.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckblastads wrote 4 years 6 weeks ago

I have a 308 win. and I used a 7mm 08 for my first deer no dout they are both good

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 4 years 6 weeks ago

There is a bit more to interior ballistics than meets the eye. Quite often you cannot obtain the same level of performance with different bore diameters with same weight bullets and nearly identical case capacity, even with the same propellant.

Without writing reams on the subject, that is why you see the lighter bullet weights used in the 7mm-08 and not the heavier/longer bullets like 160 and 175 grainers. Most cartridge manufacturers really do have a clue as to what they are doing.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 4 years 6 weeks ago

Happy .308 Winchester owner since 1978, a slightly reworked Remington 788, with no regrets. There's a pic in my profile of it laying across a decent 7 pt. if you're interested.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from PAShooter wrote 4 years 6 weeks ago

If I had to choose between these rounds for target and elk it would be .308 win.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from BuckMaster4 wrote 4 years 5 weeks ago

I would choose .308win.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 4 years 5 weeks ago

If I was going to go with the 7mm-06, I'd go with the 260 Rem/6.5-308.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sarge01 wrote 4 years 5 weeks ago

I have hunted with both. I probably lean to the 308. It has always been a favorite of mine. I have tried 130 Hornady in my 308 and have shot several deer with them. They have done a fine job of killing deer and have a little less recoil than bigger bullets. It seems to me like there is a better selection of bullets in 30 caliber.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from keen one wrote 4 years 4 weeks ago

.308. An elk is a large deer. 7-mm08 is great for whitetails but lacks the energy and bullet mass to be as reliable on the heavier skinned/hair of the elk.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from bberg7794 wrote 3 years 50 weeks ago

I own and have used both, but if elk is a priority, then one should probably choose the .308 as you would be less limited in the range and type of shot you could take. The 7mm-08 does not lack the energy and bullet mass to reliably kill elk, but it will not be effective as far as the .308 will. This is not due to trajectory but energy on target and the fact that all factory loads save one for the 7mm-08 are designed for deer. For elk with a 7mm-08 one should reload 154 to 160 grain controlled expansion bullets. I would want an elk within about 150 yards and broadside with the 7mm-08. With a .308 using 165 or 180 grain loads, you can go to 250 yards and have enough energy and a bit more flexibility on shot angle. For long range target shooting I would pick the 7mm-08, but that's me. You can purchase good target ammunition over the counter for the 308, but not so for the 7mm-08.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from woodsmanj35 wrote 3 years 45 weeks ago

308 any day of the week.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gtbigsky wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Listen, both the 7mm-08 and the 308 are great calibers and are similar in many ways. If you reload they become even better. The fact is that the .284 bullet and .308 are not the same bullet and are not ballistically equal with the same weight bullets. siearra reloading manual lists the .284 boat tail soft point as having a section density of .266 and a BC of .436. The sierra reloading manual lists a .308 as having a sectional density of .226 and a BC of .380. Sierra also lists the .284 with a 160 grain bullet as having a sectional density of .283 and a BC of .472. The .308 with a 165 gr sectional density .248 and a BC of .409. It is pretty easy to see that with lighter bullets the .284 will out perform the .308 in all areas. Both are good calibers. Both will kill anything in north america with the correct setup and reasonable range etc. If i had my choice i would take the round with higher sectional density and better ballistic coefficent een if it meant going with a lighter/ flatter shooting bullet. .284 is pretty hard to beat.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from RES1956 wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Oh to defame my beloved 7mm/08, the greatest whitetail cartridge of all time, with such comment is akin to blasphemy, but true. Long range target shooting (500-1000) 168 gr Hornady match in the .308, elk neither, although I would feel more comfortable with a .308, but would rather have a more substantial caliber for the big ungulates. I would want some hot loaded 165 gr premium bullets to undertake this task. Will a 7mm/08 kill an elk? Yep, but not with the resolve it dipatches whitetail deer, but that was not the question. The .308's track record at the 1000 yard range cannot be questioned or disputed and I am sure that a bunch of elk have been slain with this caliber, but again, it ain't my first choice of caliber.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Either one would be fine. I always get a kick out reading that the 7mm-08 is no good for elk. The 7mm-08 is simply the modern day 7x57. You think any elk were ever taken with the 7x57? Tell that to my son who has taken 3 elk with his 7mm-08. Todays bullet designs with their high weight retention make the bigger is better argument less of an issue than in the past.

To be perfectly frank I own both a 7x57 and a 7mm-08 and I like them both. I also own 4 .308's 3 of which I use to shoot competition (F-class) and 1 I hunt with. For hunting purposes it won't matter which.

For long range shooting...what do you consider long range? Are you plinking or do you plan to shoot competition? Remember true long range rigs are set up completely different from hunting rigs.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Beekeeper wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

The 7-08 is a fine cartridge and suitable with the proper bullet for ungulate in the lower 48.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from strat1080 wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

keenone and bberg, the .284 caliber bullets will always have a higher BC than a .308 bullet of the same SD. It is a flat out lie that the 7-08 lacks the energy and bullet mass of the 308. Past 200 yards the 7-08 is actually outperforming the 308 and nipping at the heels of the 30-06 due to the high BC that are inherent to the 7mm class of bullets.

I agree with bberg that the 7-08 suffers as commercially loaded because the bullets are mainly intended for deer. The 7-08 isn't really a good option if you don't reload. A 160gr 7-08 will do anything the 308 can do. Only better.

It amazes me how so many hunters are misinformed. They seem to think that bigger calibers penetrate better for some odd reason. Its really quite simple. Penetration has to do with SD, velocity, and bullet design. It is a myth that 30 caliber bullets penetrate better than smaller caliber. They obviously have more frontal area and cause bigger wound channels but we are comparing a .28 to a .30 caliber bullet. There isn't a lick of difference. A 30-06 is better than both of these calibers for Elk but I will call out anybody that questions the 7-08 for Elk yet thinks the 308 is a good Elk cartridge. You will get better trajectory and better penetration from the 7-08 compared to the 308. The SD of bullets can't be overlooked. That is what truly defines penetration. A 160 gr 7mm bullet will penetrate as well as a 190 gr .308 bullet. You need to look at how "long" the bullet is. Not how much it weighs. Too many people make that assumption. Bullet weight must be kept in perspective to caliber.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

7mm-08 would be good for long range target shooting.

As for hunting, the 308 as Ed said more variety of bullet choices and delivers more wallop leaving a much larger wound channel.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Amflyer wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

The 7mm would be a bit better for long range target shooting, but the 308 would do almost as well.

The 308 would be a much better choice for elk hunting (180 gr bullets) but the 7mm would work if pressed.

So my logic would dictate that the 308 would be a better choice, in that it's pros outweigh the cons in a more important task. I would rather have a tougher time shooting paper perfectly than track a wounded animal up and down the great divide.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Beekeeper wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

The 7-08 in my opinion leaves very little to nothing to the .308 Winchester in practical application. I've owned and shot the daylights out of both. I don't see how anyone can look at the wide variety of bullets available in 7mm and say the 30 cal selection is much better. Most folks choose 150 to 165 grain bullets in the .308 and I think that is the sweet spot for the round. Heavier 180's can be used but they are not the forte of the .308, again in my opinion. In the 7-08 typical hunting bullets are in the 140 to 160 grain range with a 175 available, again not the forte of the round either. Accuracy wise you would need a bench rest gun to sort them out. Of the game I've taken with the two rounds (deer and feral hogs) I can tell no difference in performance. Exit wounds are the same for comparable bullets and energy levels comparable out to sane hunting ranges. Recoil for the 7-08 may be slightly less but again blindfolded with comparable slugs up the spout, in the same weight gun, it's a tossup. It comes down to what you like. Over the years I've grown quite fond of the 7-08. I no longer own a .308 Winchester.

As far as Elk rifles go, neither the .308 nor the 7-08 would be my first choice even though both are used with great lethality for the task.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

Well put Bee!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Steve in Virginia wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I like the .308, but since we're lacking for Elk here in Virginia, can't really say which round is better.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Res1956,

You won’t make 1000 yds. with a 168gn in the .308. It’s not possible to keep it supersonic to a 1000. If you want a 1000 yards from a .308 you’ll have to go with a 155 or a 175...then it's no problem.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Don't know what planet you got your info on 308 is subsonic at 1000 yards, they still have a pretty good crack (loud as my 22 pistol) when passing over my head!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from DonHuff wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Ditto Clay: BeeKeeper is right, plus the old argument regarding "wound channel" size doesn't hold water when the diameter comparisons are so minute. The hydraulic shock of the .284 vs. the .308 is virtually the same. With proper bullets both will mushroom back to almost the exact same diameter and drive bone and tissue in front of it creating a tennis ball size exit wound (presuming a well placed pass through shot,of course). Jack O'Connor and Elmer Keith spent almost all of their respective writing careers arguing the killing abilities of Smaller/Faster vs. Heavier/Slower bullets (.270 vs. .35 Rem) Jack always felt less recoil and consequent better bullet placement was preferable to Elmer's advocacy of big bullets and their attendant archery-like trajectory.

I've reloaded and hunted with both the 7mm-08 and the .308, toss a coin, pick one and learn to shoot it inside and out and you won't go wrong.

As for a proper elk gun..., get a 7Mag.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

DonHuff

You're absolutely right about, "pick one and learn to shoot it inside and out and you won't go wrong"

Young Hunters shoot 7mm Mag,

Old Hunters just "GET R' DONE" with a 338 Win Mag

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Clay,

My information comes from 14 years of shooting the .308 in competition. The only way to keep a 168gn match bullet supersonic not subsonic as you described (although you subsonic description works for the 168 at a 1000 yards) is 2700 fps+ (good luck with that.) the 168 and 180 match bullets are great to 600…beyond that you need the BC of the 155, 175 or 190 for a 1000. Unless you aren’t bothered by keyholes, erratic groups, or missed targets that is.

For years the 168 gn was my favorite for mid range matches (600 yards.) and I have shot thousands of them. But for long range matches (1000 yards) I shoot 175s and for convenience sake I now shoot 175s for both long and mid range.

But you don’t have to take my word for it. There is a ton of documented proof on this very subject done by both civilian shooters and the military. I’m sure if you do a search you’ll find it. Where does your information come from?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Aside from being a favorite rifle, why on earth would an older hunter want a .338 Win Mag over a proper 7mm magnum for elk and deer? Even the big .300's have too much blast and recoil than necessary IMO. Hunting in big bear country changes the equation.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from FirstBubba wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

WAM

I saw you took the "Gun IQ" test!
Congratulations on a superb finish!
Just out of curiosity I took it too. There were enough questions on militaria that it pretty much took me out of the equation. I expected to finish VERY poorly. I wasn't disappointed, in that respect anyway! I only got 20/50 correct! LOL!!
The sad part?
I still ranked 192 out of 1783!!! That's in the top 15%!! Ain't that a bit sad!!! LOL!!

Bubba

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from FirstBubba wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

WAM

I agree, that's why I shoot a .270!

Bubba

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I started it at my break at work and the darn thing was so slow looading between questions that I had to quit before I got to the end. Looks like someone hacked it multiple entries finishing in 3 or 4 minutes! Gimme a break.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from FirstBubba wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I'm on dial-up. Talk about taking forever! More than once I watched it tick off 5 to 15 seconds between answer and reload.
Wish they would at least tell you which numbers you got right or wrong.
To finish in 3 or 4 minutes, AND place well would take a.......? Oh, I don't know, but they wouldn't be normal! LOL!!!

Bubba

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358normamag

Then explain the sonic crack when a 168grain 308 fired from a M14, M1A or bolt gun passes over my head at 1000 yards

The Palma International Match Team shooters use 308 bolt guns with 1-11 twist with 155 Grain match at 1000 yards.

Shooting a 308 Palma Rifle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zELQsgZ16gk

Obvious Sir, you've been hanging around the wrong crowd

By the way, WAM has very good crow recipes and a new one I didn't get. I'm sure he will share it with you

crow and dumplings, chicken fried crow, Buffalo Crow Hot Wings, fried, baked, griled, and might I suggest that crow thinly sliced with a little shaved fresh ginger dipped in wasabi?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Clay,

Exactly, palma shooters use the 155gn not a 168gn.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358normamag

You don’t have a clue what you’re talking about

If 155 is superior at 1000 yards, then explain why the rest of the world is shooting 180 weight range.

Need to fix that hole in the bottom of you cup, doesn’t hold coffee very well!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Clay,

You may want to bone up on your ballistics a bit. I didn't say the 168gn wasn't capable of shooting 1000 yards. I said it doesn't work in the .308 win at a 1000 yards. If you could start a 168 gn faster than 2700 fps in a .308 you could use it...but that's pretty tuff to do unless you like hot loads (which don't often offer the best accuracy)The rest has to do with BC. Since the 175gn and 190gn offer a higer BC then the 168gn they don't need to start as fast. The 155gn works because you can start it fast. The 168gn would work fine in a .300 win mag or even the 30-06 but not the .308 win.

Once again don't take my word for it. There is a ton of published stuff on this very topic.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358

Used 308 Federal 168gr Gold Medal Match, courtesy of the US Air Force. Works great and when the wind picks up, I switch to M118 7.62 NATO.

358, your over your head!

You say you have 14 years of shooting the .308 in competition. Again hanging around the wrong people and to say the 308 doesn't work at 1000 yards proves it hands down.

Listening to the "Arm Chair Experts" (ROFLMAO)is one of the worst things to do. If you never experienced it, perhaps you should listen to those who have!

I can say I did this and I did that all day, but I do know through actual experience you don't have the 308 does a fairly good job on the 1000 yard line and a cartridge to be reckoned with!

Instead of referencing something, why don't you go and try it or are you one of those "FLAT EARTH PEOPLE"?

Bottom line, I would love to get you out on the 1000 yard line and even provide the ammo!

Don't knock something until you tried it yourself!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Ton of published stuff of misleading crap!

I find it amazing how easy to find videos and information for the 308 / 7.62 NATO at 1000 yards.

Father & Son Team, check it out!

http://www.accu-shot.com/testimonials2.html

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Clay,

Apparently you don’t understand English or you are just too thick to understand what I’m saying. I never said the .308 wasn’t a 1000 yard cartridge. I have been shooting it at 1000 yards for many years…just not with a 168gn bullet. As I said for mid-range matches the 168 is great but not for a 1000.

Every time you get on here and insult me it just shows how little you really know about it. I’m sure you’re an expert on everything guns in your own mind so I won’t try to explain it to you anymore. Good luck to you at the matches this year.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Now boys, play nice!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Less filling....Tastes great!

Tastes great ....Less filling!

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358 you are so funny!

Tell me 358, if I lack so much knowledge, then explain to me Sir why the largest Sportsmen's Association in Alaska came to me to be there Director for High Power Competition

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

155 or a 175...then it's no problem?

So let me get this right, 155 will work but a 168 will not, but a 175 will?

Oxymoron comes to mind

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358 USE WHAT YOU THINK IS BEST!

I will use 168's and when the wind kicks up, I'll switch to M118 7.62 NATO.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Tried to find an old article tonight I had but after 4 moves, no telling what happened to it. I did find a blog which has the same information the article did.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

By: Bart B., Senior Member

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=347835

Busted Myth: Don't Shoot Sierra .308 168's at 1000 Yards

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Sierra Bullets came out with their 30 caliber 168-gr. International hollow point boattailed match bullet in 1958 designed for 300 meter free rifle matches. It soon became popular for high power matches in both bolt guns and the M1 Garand for use at 200 through 600 yards. It did well at 1000 yard matches, too, when leaving the barrel at 2800 fps which it did with maximum loads in the .30-06 in proper dimensioned (tight groove diameter; .3078 or smaller) barrels at least 24 inches long.

Along came the M14 with its 22 inch barrel and in 1963, its cartridge was first allowed at the US National Matches. The 172-gr. .3086-in. diameter military match bullet used in M118 ammo did well in the M14 as well as the 7.62MM NATO Garands. A lot of the barrels on these rifles were a bit over sized (.3082 or more) compared to groove diameters needed for best accuracy, but that "fat" military match bullet caused enough chamber pressure to push it out fast enough that it did well in the 1000 yard matches.

When Lake City Arsenal began using Sierra's 168 in their new M852 match ammo, things still went good, often better, when tight. But only through 600 yards. Some M14, M1A commercial and M1 rifles shooting it had barrels enough oversize that the bullet didn't leave fast enough. Those 168's would go transonic at 800 t0 900 yards and become unstable enough to change direction. Elongated holes on paper showed they had done so.

Meanwhile, folks shooting these bullets fast enough through tight barrels had no problem. But that wasn't good enough for most folks and pressure on Lake City Arsenal's engineers convinced them to make a change. They came out with the M118LR round using Sierra's 175-gr. HPMK bullet. These would stay supersonic through 1000 yards...even in loose barrels didn't shoot them very fast.

So, yes, Sierra 168's can be used in a .308 Win. for 1000 yard matches. I've won a few using 7.62 Garands and bolt guns using 168's. Some folks have done the same using M1A's with match-tight 22-inch barrels. All you need to do is shoot them fast enough. But then, that's the rule with any bullet in any caliber for long range matches.

Myth busted.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I remember just when AR15's started to take hold, rumor had it, “the bullet comes out of the muzzle tumbling” and everyone one including Vets and Law Enforcement was singing this tune. Well, now we all know now that isn’t true!!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Clay,

I love your selective reading. (I could post 10 blogs that say the opposite, but I won’t bother) I don’t suppose you read the whole thread that you copy and pasted from. Only the original poster says that the 168gn is acceptable but only in a tight barrel and only if propelled fast enough….kind of sounds just like what I was saying huh? Note: the rest of the posters go on to say that while there are exceptions to the rule why take the chance.

If you want to shoot 168s at over max be my guest. (Good luck with that in a gas gun) You’d better do it with Lapua brass though, (They cost real $$$) because you won’t be able to stuff enough 4895 into a Lake City to get it done. Sounds like you better have a tight match barrel also. (I guess that weeds out the new F-T/R shooters running factory rifles) I’ll keep shooting my 175s at mild pressures and enjoy the benefits of longer barrel and brass life, as well as knowing that my bullet will always make it to the target supersonic even if my barrel has loosened up a bit.

Here’s your “oxymoron”, see which one has the lowest BC. (These were taken from the Sierra web site) http://www.sierrabullets.com/index.cfm?section=bullets&page=rifle&brandI...
155gn Palma SMK BC .504 @ 2700fps and above
168gn SMK BC .462 @ 2600fps and above
175gn SMK BC .496 @ Between 2800 -1800fps
190gn SMK BC .533 @ 2100fps and above

It’s beyond me why you would want to shoot the bullet that was developed for 300 metre ISSF shooting and has the lowest BC of the bunch at a 1000, but…I say have at it if it makes you happy.

Once again good luck at the matches this year.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358, if you would upgrade your equipment, we wouldn't be talking about this!

CRACK ME UP!

You remind me of those who complain about the cold, wind & rain.

There is never a bad day when you have the right equipment!

CASE CLOSED!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

I remember shooting Berger once, watched the fella take the jacket and the core and make the bullet by hand and place it in the box I was to buy and they were located in Phoenix Az at the time. My Hornady 190's were more accurate on the 1000 yard line than the Berger VLD's. The variance of each Berger VLD was almost 2 grains variance but what can you expect on hand cut and manually made bullet at the time. I'm sure they have come along way since then.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jere Smith wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Between those two choices I would go for .308 , shot but I 30/06 in an M-1 Garand first and trust it more for elk/moose.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jere Smith wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

typo .. but I shot...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

The ammunition I used on Team Matches is the same the US Marine Snipers used for 1000 yd+, good enough for them, good enough for me!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ida No wrote 2 years 34 weeks ago

Yea but wicth is better
308 or 7mm-08

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ida No wrote 2 years 34 weeks ago

Yea but witch is better
308 or 7mm-08

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from curtis85 wrote 2 years 33 weeks ago

.308 has cheaper ammo

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from reddog1 wrote 2 years 28 weeks ago

Gentlemen playing nice just isn't any fun.
All your pros and cons about the 7MM VS 308 was very interesting and I learned something new.
I myself shoot a savage 308 lite hunter. For grins and giggles I purchase 12 boxes of remington 150 gr core locks. Sat down at my bench and started shooting. After an afternoon of shooting and playing with my big boy toy. I was placing three shot groups the size of a baseball at 900 yrds.
My training comes from years of truly being a hillbilly and being a gunners mate in the brown water navy during vietnam.

Back to my roots. Its not the bullet or the equipment. Its practice, patience and the man or woman behind the weapons.

With my savage 308 I'll take elk all day long, for less $$$$$$$ than all the best built bench rest rifles on Gods good earth.

Good arguments educate, needless arguments confuse the masses.

Placement Placement Placement. 7MM08 will do almost everything a 308 will in capable hands.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from miner89 wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I love both rounds, but lets face it, the 284 flies better, and hits harder. I'll take the 7mm-08.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gtbigsky wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

150 gr 308 corelocks are not a good bullet for elk. .308 150 bullet's sectionaly density is less than desireable when trying to get superb penetration. if you are going to shoot a 308 win then get the benefits from some of the heavier .308 caliber bullet. if you want to shoot a 308 platform but with 140-160 gr bullets shoot a 7mm-08. Nosler accubond .284 140 gr BC= .485 SD= .248 compare to a Nosler Accubond .308 BC= .435 SD= .226. Enough said!!! and yes, it make a difference!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from MaineBuck52 wrote 2 years 4 days ago

I like the 7mm08 with 139 gr. Hornaday SuperPerformance SST ammo flying at over 3,000 fps.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from DakotaMan wrote 2 years 4 days ago

Both are great cartridges. I would tend to use the .308 for hunting deer and larger game within ranges of a couple hundred yards where most game is taken. If you live on the prairie, the 7mm-08 gets a clear advantage because of the speed you can get. I load my nephew's with 120g bullets traveling 3350 fps. That works well for running coyotes, antelope and deer. It minimizes holdover, lead and can smack a deer out to 500 yards quite well. I no longer worry about the quality of the bullets available because there are plenty of great bullets for each. In the woods, it would be a .308 for me. On the prairie it would be a 7mmm-08.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jr9893 wrote 1 year 51 weeks ago

i love the 7mm08 but the 308 has more punch which could come in handy for an elk beyond 300 yards. out to 200 it would be fine. I know elk guides that shoot elk with .243's if 200yds or less

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from muleyjim wrote 1 year 51 weeks ago

howis a 165 grain fat bulet goinng to kill an elk any deder then a 160 grain skinny bullet if anything the 7mmm will have better penatration especialy in a say 160grn nosler acubond moveing 2800? to me that tellls me the 7mm wil droop less then the 308 bullet at longer rainges and actualy at a certen dsitenc maintain more speed less sholder to slow it down.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 1 year 51 weeks ago

7mm-08 160 2600 fps

308 180 2600 fps

Have you ever field dressed a Moose shot by both calibers?

Obvious not, .308 does more damage than the .284 as the .338 does more damage than the .308

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 1 year 51 weeks ago

PS 308 can thump a 200 grain at 2500 fps, match that with a 7mm-08 ;)

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 1 year 51 weeks ago

I think the only advantage for the 7mm-08 is a higher BC when shooting light for caliber bullets, say 130 or 140 grain. 130 gr or lighter .308 projectiles generally have lower B.C.'s. 150's or heavier is where the .308 Win shines IMO. Give me a 165 gr .308 for bigger critters.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from huntinbud wrote 1 year 44 weeks ago

As with all things the debate over size matters is and always will be ongoing. The 7mm.08 with a 140gr will do the job nicely on elk if shot placement is good. The .308 will do it slightly better with same shot placement and heavier bullet; however, dead is dead. @Clay Cooper....saying a .308 w/200 gr bullet can thump at 2500 while we are comparing REASONABLE loads against a 7mm.08 is like comparing a .308 to a .300 mag. Different bullet weights for different uses. If I wish to throw a big chunk at something I will do it with my .300 mag and not a .308 win. As the original poster was asking I take it he meant with med/low gr bullets at deer and elk. A 7mm.08 with a 140 gr will do the job fine IF you do your part. I shoot mule deer on our ranch with my 22-250 and 6mm rem. They both die BUT everything within reason. I use the 22-250 for head and neck to 100 yds out of my Howa that shoots .5 moa everyday with my pet loads...I know I can get the head or neck easily....past that I use my 6mm...past 250 yds I use the 7mm.08 and past 400 I use my .300. And to a point I have taken moose at 300 yds with my 6mm and 100gr....in the engine room and they get sick real quick. BUT again....shot placement and no quarter shots with the 6mm on big critters.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from capper336 wrote 1 year 26 weeks ago

you know it cracks me up how many people on the forums all over are 600 - 1000 yd shooters....funny thing whenever i go out to my range i see more people missing the 400 yd plates ... interesting! Just cause you can shoot it doesnt mean you can hit it!

As for the debate every one seem to think ya have to have a cannon to shoot a elk.

Well here is a lil sample from Remington for these calibers

So with that in mind what do you all feel is the best and why. Now before anyone gets up here and starts spouting off about 600 + yd shots on game, I for one have never felt the need to take shots that far, in fact most are at the longest of 225-300, and that's pushing it (usually on "lopes". "spd goats" whatever ya wanna call them, haven't had a need to really do much more than a 200 yd'r on deer and usually most are under 130. Just been my experience. Just my opinion but if ya feel like ya have to take 500+ yd shots on game ya need work work on your hunting skills. Again not flaming just stating my opinion.

Now from what I have been able to gather comparing loads ( Remington - Ballistic tables were handy) between the 3 all 140 grs, except the 30.06 which was a 150 gr. ( I know apples to apples but was as close as i could keep it. They were as follows:

.270 (140 gr) 100 yds 2667 Vel / 2211 Energy 300 yds 2193 Vel / 1495 Energy 500 yds 1771 Vel / 975 Energy

7MM-08 ( 140 gr) 100 yds 2625 Vel / 2142 Eng 300 Yds 2189 Vel / 1490 Eng 500 yds 1718 Vel / 1005 Eng

30.06 (150 gr) 100 yds 2617 Vel / 2281 Eng 300 yds 2083 Vel / 1445 Eng 500 yds 1622 Vel / 876 Eng

All 3 held Zero drop at 200 yd for the Long Range Trajectory and at 300 they were (270 -7.6, 7-08 -7.8, 30.06 -8.2 ) all close enough that I don't think you will notice a difference.

So this tells me that if everyone thinks ya can take out a elk here with a 30.06, 270, 308 well guess what to 500 yds so will the 7MM-08 actaully has more Velocity and Energy at 500 yds with less drop than the 30.06.

NOW with that said, I have none of the calibers yet, i use 336 and a 308MX.

If I were to get a Bolt it would probably be a 7MM-08 due to the fact that you can get off the shelf ammo easy where i live, lighter recoil mean lighter gun you can carry and not kill your shoulder mean less fatigue. But I'll tell ya what I have yet to need a shot longer than either the 336 or 308MX can take.

Maybe I'm just lucky....but I'm guessing not

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Glen Rounds wrote 21 weeks 23 hours ago

For true long-range? Neither... Get yourself a 7mm Remington Magnum. You'll be glad you did. Watch "SNIPER 101 Part 3 - Cartridge Selection -- Rex Reviews" on Youtube. If you feel real "gung-ho" watch videos 1-5. If I HAD to use one or the other, I would choose the 7mm-08 Remington with either handloads or factory loads that utilize a controlled expansion bullet to attain deep penetration. This is even more of a requirement with the lighter bullets to which both are best suited because of the limited powder space they offer. Both are at best 300yd rifles IMO, and for elk I would be hesitant to exceed 250yds with either one.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Glen Rounds wrote 21 weeks 22 hours ago

On a further note... the vast majority of hunters have NO BUSINESS shooting to even 300yds, let alone 400-1000yds. This requires the proper equipment and extensive man-hours of actual range time under the same conditions as one would experience in the field. Only the truly experienced should even attempt such long-range feats on live game. A true hunter is willing to use his legs and skill to stalk within a safe and reasonable distance of his quarry, not "poke and hope" by slinging lead down-range. Those who do such, have no respect for the sport or the game they hunt and do all sportsmen a great dis-service.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Reply

from Edward J. Palumbo wrote 4 years 9 weeks ago

There are excellent Match bullets available in .284 and .308 diameter. For targets, either of these cartridges is an excellent choice. Either of them, with quality hunting bullets and proper placement, will drop an elk. In my opinion, however, with elk as an equally high priority, I would opt for the .280 Rem and .30-'06 if I was starting with a standard-sized (long) action. Given a shorter action, the 7mm-08 and .308 are good choices for the dual purpose (target/hunting), with a personal preference for the .308 because of the great spectrum of thirty caliber bullets (compared to the 7mm selection) which permits me, as a handloader, a greater selection for experimentation and load development, which I enjoy very much.

+8 Good Comment? | | Report
from Beekeeper wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

The 7-08 in my opinion leaves very little to nothing to the .308 Winchester in practical application. I've owned and shot the daylights out of both. I don't see how anyone can look at the wide variety of bullets available in 7mm and say the 30 cal selection is much better. Most folks choose 150 to 165 grain bullets in the .308 and I think that is the sweet spot for the round. Heavier 180's can be used but they are not the forte of the .308, again in my opinion. In the 7-08 typical hunting bullets are in the 140 to 160 grain range with a 175 available, again not the forte of the round either. Accuracy wise you would need a bench rest gun to sort them out. Of the game I've taken with the two rounds (deer and feral hogs) I can tell no difference in performance. Exit wounds are the same for comparable bullets and energy levels comparable out to sane hunting ranges. Recoil for the 7-08 may be slightly less but again blindfolded with comparable slugs up the spout, in the same weight gun, it's a tossup. It comes down to what you like. Over the years I've grown quite fond of the 7-08. I no longer own a .308 Winchester.

As far as Elk rifles go, neither the .308 nor the 7-08 would be my first choice even though both are used with great lethality for the task.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sarge01 wrote 4 years 5 weeks ago

I have hunted with both. I probably lean to the 308. It has always been a favorite of mine. I have tried 130 Hornady in my 308 and have shot several deer with them. They have done a fine job of killing deer and have a little less recoil than bigger bullets. It seems to me like there is a better selection of bullets in 30 caliber.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gtbigsky wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Listen, both the 7mm-08 and the 308 are great calibers and are similar in many ways. If you reload they become even better. The fact is that the .284 bullet and .308 are not the same bullet and are not ballistically equal with the same weight bullets. siearra reloading manual lists the .284 boat tail soft point as having a section density of .266 and a BC of .436. The sierra reloading manual lists a .308 as having a sectional density of .226 and a BC of .380. Sierra also lists the .284 with a 160 grain bullet as having a sectional density of .283 and a BC of .472. The .308 with a 165 gr sectional density .248 and a BC of .409. It is pretty easy to see that with lighter bullets the .284 will out perform the .308 in all areas. Both are good calibers. Both will kill anything in north america with the correct setup and reasonable range etc. If i had my choice i would take the round with higher sectional density and better ballistic coefficent een if it meant going with a lighter/ flatter shooting bullet. .284 is pretty hard to beat.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Less filling....Tastes great!

Tastes great ....Less filling!

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from BigBboy25 wrote 4 years 9 weeks ago

Well said Ed, i agree with all of the above. I too prefer the .308.

I do think that the 7mm-08 is about the perfect beginners cartridge for youth and women though. I think it offers a very balanced platform in terms of recoil, energy, bullets selection, and ballistics to handle anything from varmints to Elk. Can't go wrong with either.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from bberg7794 wrote 3 years 50 weeks ago

I own and have used both, but if elk is a priority, then one should probably choose the .308 as you would be less limited in the range and type of shot you could take. The 7mm-08 does not lack the energy and bullet mass to reliably kill elk, but it will not be effective as far as the .308 will. This is not due to trajectory but energy on target and the fact that all factory loads save one for the 7mm-08 are designed for deer. For elk with a 7mm-08 one should reload 154 to 160 grain controlled expansion bullets. I would want an elk within about 150 yards and broadside with the 7mm-08. With a .308 using 165 or 180 grain loads, you can go to 250 yards and have enough energy and a bit more flexibility on shot angle. For long range target shooting I would pick the 7mm-08, but that's me. You can purchase good target ammunition over the counter for the 308, but not so for the 7mm-08.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from strat1080 wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

keenone and bberg, the .284 caliber bullets will always have a higher BC than a .308 bullet of the same SD. It is a flat out lie that the 7-08 lacks the energy and bullet mass of the 308. Past 200 yards the 7-08 is actually outperforming the 308 and nipping at the heels of the 30-06 due to the high BC that are inherent to the 7mm class of bullets.

I agree with bberg that the 7-08 suffers as commercially loaded because the bullets are mainly intended for deer. The 7-08 isn't really a good option if you don't reload. A 160gr 7-08 will do anything the 308 can do. Only better.

It amazes me how so many hunters are misinformed. They seem to think that bigger calibers penetrate better for some odd reason. Its really quite simple. Penetration has to do with SD, velocity, and bullet design. It is a myth that 30 caliber bullets penetrate better than smaller caliber. They obviously have more frontal area and cause bigger wound channels but we are comparing a .28 to a .30 caliber bullet. There isn't a lick of difference. A 30-06 is better than both of these calibers for Elk but I will call out anybody that questions the 7-08 for Elk yet thinks the 308 is a good Elk cartridge. You will get better trajectory and better penetration from the 7-08 compared to the 308. The SD of bullets can't be overlooked. That is what truly defines penetration. A 160 gr 7mm bullet will penetrate as well as a 190 gr .308 bullet. You need to look at how "long" the bullet is. Not how much it weighs. Too many people make that assumption. Bullet weight must be kept in perspective to caliber.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from DonHuff wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Ditto Clay: BeeKeeper is right, plus the old argument regarding "wound channel" size doesn't hold water when the diameter comparisons are so minute. The hydraulic shock of the .284 vs. the .308 is virtually the same. With proper bullets both will mushroom back to almost the exact same diameter and drive bone and tissue in front of it creating a tennis ball size exit wound (presuming a well placed pass through shot,of course). Jack O'Connor and Elmer Keith spent almost all of their respective writing careers arguing the killing abilities of Smaller/Faster vs. Heavier/Slower bullets (.270 vs. .35 Rem) Jack always felt less recoil and consequent better bullet placement was preferable to Elmer's advocacy of big bullets and their attendant archery-like trajectory.

I've reloaded and hunted with both the 7mm-08 and the .308, toss a coin, pick one and learn to shoot it inside and out and you won't go wrong.

As for a proper elk gun..., get a 7Mag.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Aside from being a favorite rifle, why on earth would an older hunter want a .338 Win Mag over a proper 7mm magnum for elk and deer? Even the big .300's have too much blast and recoil than necessary IMO. Hunting in big bear country changes the equation.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Clay,

You may want to bone up on your ballistics a bit. I didn't say the 168gn wasn't capable of shooting 1000 yards. I said it doesn't work in the .308 win at a 1000 yards. If you could start a 168 gn faster than 2700 fps in a .308 you could use it...but that's pretty tuff to do unless you like hot loads (which don't often offer the best accuracy)The rest has to do with BC. Since the 175gn and 190gn offer a higer BC then the 168gn they don't need to start as fast. The 155gn works because you can start it fast. The 168gn would work fine in a .300 win mag or even the 30-06 but not the .308 win.

Once again don't take my word for it. There is a ton of published stuff on this very topic.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from stanleyda wrote 4 years 8 weeks ago

I can't add much to those good points, both are great rounds.The 130gr barnesTXS in the 308win now makes it even a better all around gun,with light or heavy bullets.Taking away a little of the 7/08's appeal.For elk the 308 would be better with heavier rounds 150,165,grain bullets.I've never seen factory rounds for the 7/08 on the shelf heavier than 140gr..

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 4 years 8 weeks ago

I'll take the 308 over the 7mm-08 any day. Works fantastic in the field as well as on the range at the 1000 yard line for me and plenty of ammo to find and shoot!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from 308scout wrote 4 years 8 weeks ago

I just went to the trouble of building a custom 308 on a ruger action. it is not done yet but I am very excited. I have used the 308 on deer and pronghorn with excellent results and am planning to use it on elk soon. I think the 7/08 is an excellent cartridge as well but i think you can't go wrong with the 308.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckblastads wrote 4 years 6 weeks ago

I have a 308 win. and I used a 7mm 08 for my first deer no dout they are both good

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 4 years 6 weeks ago

There is a bit more to interior ballistics than meets the eye. Quite often you cannot obtain the same level of performance with different bore diameters with same weight bullets and nearly identical case capacity, even with the same propellant.

Without writing reams on the subject, that is why you see the lighter bullet weights used in the 7mm-08 and not the heavier/longer bullets like 160 and 175 grainers. Most cartridge manufacturers really do have a clue as to what they are doing.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from keen one wrote 4 years 4 weeks ago

.308. An elk is a large deer. 7-mm08 is great for whitetails but lacks the energy and bullet mass to be as reliable on the heavier skinned/hair of the elk.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Either one would be fine. I always get a kick out reading that the 7mm-08 is no good for elk. The 7mm-08 is simply the modern day 7x57. You think any elk were ever taken with the 7x57? Tell that to my son who has taken 3 elk with his 7mm-08. Todays bullet designs with their high weight retention make the bigger is better argument less of an issue than in the past.

To be perfectly frank I own both a 7x57 and a 7mm-08 and I like them both. I also own 4 .308's 3 of which I use to shoot competition (F-class) and 1 I hunt with. For hunting purposes it won't matter which.

For long range shooting...what do you consider long range? Are you plinking or do you plan to shoot competition? Remember true long range rigs are set up completely different from hunting rigs.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

Well put Bee!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Clay,

My information comes from 14 years of shooting the .308 in competition. The only way to keep a 168gn match bullet supersonic not subsonic as you described (although you subsonic description works for the 168 at a 1000 yards) is 2700 fps+ (good luck with that.) the 168 and 180 match bullets are great to 600…beyond that you need the BC of the 155, 175 or 190 for a 1000. Unless you aren’t bothered by keyholes, erratic groups, or missed targets that is.

For years the 168 gn was my favorite for mid range matches (600 yards.) and I have shot thousands of them. But for long range matches (1000 yards) I shoot 175s and for convenience sake I now shoot 175s for both long and mid range.

But you don’t have to take my word for it. There is a ton of documented proof on this very subject done by both civilian shooters and the military. I’m sure if you do a search you’ll find it. Where does your information come from?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from FirstBubba wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

WAM

I saw you took the "Gun IQ" test!
Congratulations on a superb finish!
Just out of curiosity I took it too. There were enough questions on militaria that it pretty much took me out of the equation. I expected to finish VERY poorly. I wasn't disappointed, in that respect anyway! I only got 20/50 correct! LOL!!
The sad part?
I still ranked 192 out of 1783!!! That's in the top 15%!! Ain't that a bit sad!!! LOL!!

Bubba

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Now boys, play nice!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

155 or a 175...then it's no problem?

So let me get this right, 155 will work but a 168 will not, but a 175 will?

Oxymoron comes to mind

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 4 years 6 weeks ago

Happy .308 Winchester owner since 1978, a slightly reworked Remington 788, with no regrets. There's a pic in my profile of it laying across a decent 7 pt. if you're interested.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from PAShooter wrote 4 years 6 weeks ago

If I had to choose between these rounds for target and elk it would be .308 win.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from BuckMaster4 wrote 4 years 5 weeks ago

I would choose .308win.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from woodsmanj35 wrote 3 years 45 weeks ago

308 any day of the week.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from RES1956 wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Oh to defame my beloved 7mm/08, the greatest whitetail cartridge of all time, with such comment is akin to blasphemy, but true. Long range target shooting (500-1000) 168 gr Hornady match in the .308, elk neither, although I would feel more comfortable with a .308, but would rather have a more substantial caliber for the big ungulates. I would want some hot loaded 165 gr premium bullets to undertake this task. Will a 7mm/08 kill an elk? Yep, but not with the resolve it dipatches whitetail deer, but that was not the question. The .308's track record at the 1000 yard range cannot be questioned or disputed and I am sure that a bunch of elk have been slain with this caliber, but again, it ain't my first choice of caliber.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Beekeeper wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

The 7-08 is a fine cartridge and suitable with the proper bullet for ungulate in the lower 48.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

7mm-08 would be good for long range target shooting.

As for hunting, the 308 as Ed said more variety of bullet choices and delivers more wallop leaving a much larger wound channel.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Amflyer wrote 2 years 42 weeks ago

The 7mm would be a bit better for long range target shooting, but the 308 would do almost as well.

The 308 would be a much better choice for elk hunting (180 gr bullets) but the 7mm would work if pressed.

So my logic would dictate that the 308 would be a better choice, in that it's pros outweigh the cons in a more important task. I would rather have a tougher time shooting paper perfectly than track a wounded animal up and down the great divide.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Steve in Virginia wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I like the .308, but since we're lacking for Elk here in Virginia, can't really say which round is better.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Res1956,

You won’t make 1000 yds. with a 168gn in the .308. It’s not possible to keep it supersonic to a 1000. If you want a 1000 yards from a .308 you’ll have to go with a 155 or a 175...then it's no problem.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Don't know what planet you got your info on 308 is subsonic at 1000 yards, they still have a pretty good crack (loud as my 22 pistol) when passing over my head!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

DonHuff

You're absolutely right about, "pick one and learn to shoot it inside and out and you won't go wrong"

Young Hunters shoot 7mm Mag,

Old Hunters just "GET R' DONE" with a 338 Win Mag

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from FirstBubba wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

WAM

I agree, that's why I shoot a .270!

Bubba

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I started it at my break at work and the darn thing was so slow looading between questions that I had to quit before I got to the end. Looks like someone hacked it multiple entries finishing in 3 or 4 minutes! Gimme a break.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from FirstBubba wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

I'm on dial-up. Talk about taking forever! More than once I watched it tick off 5 to 15 seconds between answer and reload.
Wish they would at least tell you which numbers you got right or wrong.
To finish in 3 or 4 minutes, AND place well would take a.......? Oh, I don't know, but they wouldn't be normal! LOL!!!

Bubba

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358normamag

Then explain the sonic crack when a 168grain 308 fired from a M14, M1A or bolt gun passes over my head at 1000 yards

The Palma International Match Team shooters use 308 bolt guns with 1-11 twist with 155 Grain match at 1000 yards.

Shooting a 308 Palma Rifle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zELQsgZ16gk

Obvious Sir, you've been hanging around the wrong crowd

By the way, WAM has very good crow recipes and a new one I didn't get. I'm sure he will share it with you

crow and dumplings, chicken fried crow, Buffalo Crow Hot Wings, fried, baked, griled, and might I suggest that crow thinly sliced with a little shaved fresh ginger dipped in wasabi?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Clay,

Exactly, palma shooters use the 155gn not a 168gn.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358normamag

You don’t have a clue what you’re talking about

If 155 is superior at 1000 yards, then explain why the rest of the world is shooting 180 weight range.

Need to fix that hole in the bottom of you cup, doesn’t hold coffee very well!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358

Used 308 Federal 168gr Gold Medal Match, courtesy of the US Air Force. Works great and when the wind picks up, I switch to M118 7.62 NATO.

358, your over your head!

You say you have 14 years of shooting the .308 in competition. Again hanging around the wrong people and to say the 308 doesn't work at 1000 yards proves it hands down.

Listening to the "Arm Chair Experts" (ROFLMAO)is one of the worst things to do. If you never experienced it, perhaps you should listen to those who have!

I can say I did this and I did that all day, but I do know through actual experience you don't have the 308 does a fairly good job on the 1000 yard line and a cartridge to be reckoned with!

Instead of referencing something, why don't you go and try it or are you one of those "FLAT EARTH PEOPLE"?

Bottom line, I would love to get you out on the 1000 yard line and even provide the ammo!

Don't knock something until you tried it yourself!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Ton of published stuff of misleading crap!

I find it amazing how easy to find videos and information for the 308 / 7.62 NATO at 1000 yards.

Father & Son Team, check it out!

http://www.accu-shot.com/testimonials2.html

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Clay,

Apparently you don’t understand English or you are just too thick to understand what I’m saying. I never said the .308 wasn’t a 1000 yard cartridge. I have been shooting it at 1000 yards for many years…just not with a 168gn bullet. As I said for mid-range matches the 168 is great but not for a 1000.

Every time you get on here and insult me it just shows how little you really know about it. I’m sure you’re an expert on everything guns in your own mind so I won’t try to explain it to you anymore. Good luck to you at the matches this year.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358 you are so funny!

Tell me 358, if I lack so much knowledge, then explain to me Sir why the largest Sportsmen's Association in Alaska came to me to be there Director for High Power Competition

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358 USE WHAT YOU THINK IS BEST!

I will use 168's and when the wind kicks up, I'll switch to M118 7.62 NATO.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Tried to find an old article tonight I had but after 4 moves, no telling what happened to it. I did find a blog which has the same information the article did.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

By: Bart B., Senior Member

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=347835

Busted Myth: Don't Shoot Sierra .308 168's at 1000 Yards

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Sierra Bullets came out with their 30 caliber 168-gr. International hollow point boattailed match bullet in 1958 designed for 300 meter free rifle matches. It soon became popular for high power matches in both bolt guns and the M1 Garand for use at 200 through 600 yards. It did well at 1000 yard matches, too, when leaving the barrel at 2800 fps which it did with maximum loads in the .30-06 in proper dimensioned (tight groove diameter; .3078 or smaller) barrels at least 24 inches long.

Along came the M14 with its 22 inch barrel and in 1963, its cartridge was first allowed at the US National Matches. The 172-gr. .3086-in. diameter military match bullet used in M118 ammo did well in the M14 as well as the 7.62MM NATO Garands. A lot of the barrels on these rifles were a bit over sized (.3082 or more) compared to groove diameters needed for best accuracy, but that "fat" military match bullet caused enough chamber pressure to push it out fast enough that it did well in the 1000 yard matches.

When Lake City Arsenal began using Sierra's 168 in their new M852 match ammo, things still went good, often better, when tight. But only through 600 yards. Some M14, M1A commercial and M1 rifles shooting it had barrels enough oversize that the bullet didn't leave fast enough. Those 168's would go transonic at 800 t0 900 yards and become unstable enough to change direction. Elongated holes on paper showed they had done so.

Meanwhile, folks shooting these bullets fast enough through tight barrels had no problem. But that wasn't good enough for most folks and pressure on Lake City Arsenal's engineers convinced them to make a change. They came out with the M118LR round using Sierra's 175-gr. HPMK bullet. These would stay supersonic through 1000 yards...even in loose barrels didn't shoot them very fast.

So, yes, Sierra 168's can be used in a .308 Win. for 1000 yard matches. I've won a few using 7.62 Garands and bolt guns using 168's. Some folks have done the same using M1A's with match-tight 22-inch barrels. All you need to do is shoot them fast enough. But then, that's the rule with any bullet in any caliber for long range matches.

Myth busted.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I remember just when AR15's started to take hold, rumor had it, “the bullet comes out of the muzzle tumbling” and everyone one including Vets and Law Enforcement was singing this tune. Well, now we all know now that isn’t true!!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 358normamag wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Clay,

I love your selective reading. (I could post 10 blogs that say the opposite, but I won’t bother) I don’t suppose you read the whole thread that you copy and pasted from. Only the original poster says that the 168gn is acceptable but only in a tight barrel and only if propelled fast enough….kind of sounds just like what I was saying huh? Note: the rest of the posters go on to say that while there are exceptions to the rule why take the chance.

If you want to shoot 168s at over max be my guest. (Good luck with that in a gas gun) You’d better do it with Lapua brass though, (They cost real $$$) because you won’t be able to stuff enough 4895 into a Lake City to get it done. Sounds like you better have a tight match barrel also. (I guess that weeds out the new F-T/R shooters running factory rifles) I’ll keep shooting my 175s at mild pressures and enjoy the benefits of longer barrel and brass life, as well as knowing that my bullet will always make it to the target supersonic even if my barrel has loosened up a bit.

Here’s your “oxymoron”, see which one has the lowest BC. (These were taken from the Sierra web site) http://www.sierrabullets.com/index.cfm?section=bullets&page=rifle&brandI...
155gn Palma SMK BC .504 @ 2700fps and above
168gn SMK BC .462 @ 2600fps and above
175gn SMK BC .496 @ Between 2800 -1800fps
190gn SMK BC .533 @ 2100fps and above

It’s beyond me why you would want to shoot the bullet that was developed for 300 metre ISSF shooting and has the lowest BC of the bunch at a 1000, but…I say have at it if it makes you happy.

Once again good luck at the matches this year.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

358, if you would upgrade your equipment, we wouldn't be talking about this!

CRACK ME UP!

You remind me of those who complain about the cold, wind & rain.

There is never a bad day when you have the right equipment!

CASE CLOSED!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

I remember shooting Berger once, watched the fella take the jacket and the core and make the bullet by hand and place it in the box I was to buy and they were located in Phoenix Az at the time. My Hornady 190's were more accurate on the 1000 yard line than the Berger VLD's. The variance of each Berger VLD was almost 2 grains variance but what can you expect on hand cut and manually made bullet at the time. I'm sure they have come along way since then.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from reddog1 wrote 2 years 28 weeks ago

Gentlemen playing nice just isn't any fun.
All your pros and cons about the 7MM VS 308 was very interesting and I learned something new.
I myself shoot a savage 308 lite hunter. For grins and giggles I purchase 12 boxes of remington 150 gr core locks. Sat down at my bench and started shooting. After an afternoon of shooting and playing with my big boy toy. I was placing three shot groups the size of a baseball at 900 yrds.
My training comes from years of truly being a hillbilly and being a gunners mate in the brown water navy during vietnam.

Back to my roots. Its not the bullet or the equipment. Its practice, patience and the man or woman behind the weapons.

With my savage 308 I'll take elk all day long, for less $$$$$$$ than all the best built bench rest rifles on Gods good earth.

Good arguments educate, needless arguments confuse the masses.

Placement Placement Placement. 7MM08 will do almost everything a 308 will in capable hands.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from DakotaMan wrote 2 years 4 days ago

Both are great cartridges. I would tend to use the .308 for hunting deer and larger game within ranges of a couple hundred yards where most game is taken. If you live on the prairie, the 7mm-08 gets a clear advantage because of the speed you can get. I load my nephew's with 120g bullets traveling 3350 fps. That works well for running coyotes, antelope and deer. It minimizes holdover, lead and can smack a deer out to 500 yards quite well. I no longer worry about the quality of the bullets available because there are plenty of great bullets for each. In the woods, it would be a .308 for me. On the prairie it would be a 7mmm-08.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 1 year 51 weeks ago

I think the only advantage for the 7mm-08 is a higher BC when shooting light for caliber bullets, say 130 or 140 grain. 130 gr or lighter .308 projectiles generally have lower B.C.'s. 150's or heavier is where the .308 Win shines IMO. Give me a 165 gr .308 for bigger critters.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from huntinbud wrote 1 year 44 weeks ago

As with all things the debate over size matters is and always will be ongoing. The 7mm.08 with a 140gr will do the job nicely on elk if shot placement is good. The .308 will do it slightly better with same shot placement and heavier bullet; however, dead is dead. @Clay Cooper....saying a .308 w/200 gr bullet can thump at 2500 while we are comparing REASONABLE loads against a 7mm.08 is like comparing a .308 to a .300 mag. Different bullet weights for different uses. If I wish to throw a big chunk at something I will do it with my .300 mag and not a .308 win. As the original poster was asking I take it he meant with med/low gr bullets at deer and elk. A 7mm.08 with a 140 gr will do the job fine IF you do your part. I shoot mule deer on our ranch with my 22-250 and 6mm rem. They both die BUT everything within reason. I use the 22-250 for head and neck to 100 yds out of my Howa that shoots .5 moa everyday with my pet loads...I know I can get the head or neck easily....past that I use my 6mm...past 250 yds I use the 7mm.08 and past 400 I use my .300. And to a point I have taken moose at 300 yds with my 6mm and 100gr....in the engine room and they get sick real quick. BUT again....shot placement and no quarter shots with the 6mm on big critters.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from capper336 wrote 1 year 26 weeks ago

you know it cracks me up how many people on the forums all over are 600 - 1000 yd shooters....funny thing whenever i go out to my range i see more people missing the 400 yd plates ... interesting! Just cause you can shoot it doesnt mean you can hit it!

As for the debate every one seem to think ya have to have a cannon to shoot a elk.

Well here is a lil sample from Remington for these calibers

So with that in mind what do you all feel is the best and why. Now before anyone gets up here and starts spouting off about 600 + yd shots on game, I for one have never felt the need to take shots that far, in fact most are at the longest of 225-300, and that's pushing it (usually on "lopes". "spd goats" whatever ya wanna call them, haven't had a need to really do much more than a 200 yd'r on deer and usually most are under 130. Just been my experience. Just my opinion but if ya feel like ya have to take 500+ yd shots on game ya need work work on your hunting skills. Again not flaming just stating my opinion.

Now from what I have been able to gather comparing loads ( Remington - Ballistic tables were handy) between the 3 all 140 grs, except the 30.06 which was a 150 gr. ( I know apples to apples but was as close as i could keep it. They were as follows:

.270 (140 gr) 100 yds 2667 Vel / 2211 Energy 300 yds 2193 Vel / 1495 Energy 500 yds 1771 Vel / 975 Energy

7MM-08 ( 140 gr) 100 yds 2625 Vel / 2142 Eng 300 Yds 2189 Vel / 1490 Eng 500 yds 1718 Vel / 1005 Eng

30.06 (150 gr) 100 yds 2617 Vel / 2281 Eng 300 yds 2083 Vel / 1445 Eng 500 yds 1622 Vel / 876 Eng

All 3 held Zero drop at 200 yd for the Long Range Trajectory and at 300 they were (270 -7.6, 7-08 -7.8, 30.06 -8.2 ) all close enough that I don't think you will notice a difference.

So this tells me that if everyone thinks ya can take out a elk here with a 30.06, 270, 308 well guess what to 500 yds so will the 7MM-08 actaully has more Velocity and Energy at 500 yds with less drop than the 30.06.

NOW with that said, I have none of the calibers yet, i use 336 and a 308MX.

If I were to get a Bolt it would probably be a 7MM-08 due to the fact that you can get off the shelf ammo easy where i live, lighter recoil mean lighter gun you can carry and not kill your shoulder mean less fatigue. But I'll tell ya what I have yet to need a shot longer than either the 336 or 308MX can take.

Maybe I'm just lucky....but I'm guessing not

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 4 years 5 weeks ago

If I was going to go with the 7mm-06, I'd go with the 260 Rem/6.5-308.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jere Smith wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

Between those two choices I would go for .308 , shot but I 30/06 in an M-1 Garand first and trust it more for elk/moose.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jere Smith wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

typo .. but I shot...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 2 years 39 weeks ago

The ammunition I used on Team Matches is the same the US Marine Snipers used for 1000 yd+, good enough for them, good enough for me!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ida No wrote 2 years 34 weeks ago

Yea but wicth is better
308 or 7mm-08

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ida No wrote 2 years 34 weeks ago

Yea but witch is better
308 or 7mm-08

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from curtis85 wrote 2 years 33 weeks ago

.308 has cheaper ammo

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from miner89 wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I love both rounds, but lets face it, the 284 flies better, and hits harder. I'll take the 7mm-08.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gtbigsky wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

150 gr 308 corelocks are not a good bullet for elk. .308 150 bullet's sectionaly density is less than desireable when trying to get superb penetration. if you are going to shoot a 308 win then get the benefits from some of the heavier .308 caliber bullet. if you want to shoot a 308 platform but with 140-160 gr bullets shoot a 7mm-08. Nosler accubond .284 140 gr BC= .485 SD= .248 compare to a Nosler Accubond .308 BC= .435 SD= .226. Enough said!!! and yes, it make a difference!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from MaineBuck52 wrote 2 years 4 days ago

I like the 7mm08 with 139 gr. Hornaday SuperPerformance SST ammo flying at over 3,000 fps.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jr9893 wrote 1 year 51 weeks ago

i love the 7mm08 but the 308 has more punch which could come in handy for an elk beyond 300 yards. out to 200 it would be fine. I know elk guides that shoot elk with .243's if 200yds or less

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from muleyjim wrote 1 year 51 weeks ago

howis a 165 grain fat bulet goinng to kill an elk any deder then a 160 grain skinny bullet if anything the 7mmm will have better penatration especialy in a say 160grn nosler acubond moveing 2800? to me that tellls me the 7mm wil droop less then the 308 bullet at longer rainges and actualy at a certen dsitenc maintain more speed less sholder to slow it down.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 1 year 51 weeks ago

PS 308 can thump a 200 grain at 2500 fps, match that with a 7mm-08 ;)

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Glen Rounds wrote 21 weeks 23 hours ago

For true long-range? Neither... Get yourself a 7mm Remington Magnum. You'll be glad you did. Watch "SNIPER 101 Part 3 - Cartridge Selection -- Rex Reviews" on Youtube. If you feel real "gung-ho" watch videos 1-5. If I HAD to use one or the other, I would choose the 7mm-08 Remington with either handloads or factory loads that utilize a controlled expansion bullet to attain deep penetration. This is even more of a requirement with the lighter bullets to which both are best suited because of the limited powder space they offer. Both are at best 300yd rifles IMO, and for elk I would be hesitant to exceed 250yds with either one.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Glen Rounds wrote 21 weeks 22 hours ago

On a further note... the vast majority of hunters have NO BUSINESS shooting to even 300yds, let alone 400-1000yds. This requires the proper equipment and extensive man-hours of actual range time under the same conditions as one would experience in the field. Only the truly experienced should even attempt such long-range feats on live game. A true hunter is willing to use his legs and skill to stalk within a safe and reasonable distance of his quarry, not "poke and hope" by slinging lead down-range. Those who do such, have no respect for the sport or the game they hunt and do all sportsmen a great dis-service.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 1 year 51 weeks ago

7mm-08 160 2600 fps

308 180 2600 fps

Have you ever field dressed a Moose shot by both calibers?

Obvious not, .308 does more damage than the .284 as the .338 does more damage than the .308

-1 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Reply