Gunboards Forums banner

What Rifle is good for Caliber .308???

30K views 47 replies 33 participants last post by  WAREAGLE318 
#1 ·
I want a new .308 rifle....what rifle would be a good bolt action or semi???? As for the price just reasonable under 500 ish..thanks thanks
 
#5 ·
It's hard to beat the off-the-shelf accuracy of a Savage Model 110 rifle (there are many variations, but all are based upon the original 110 action). The AccuTrigger™ is pretty sweet, too. Usually they come with a decent (at best) scope in the 3-9x34mm range, but they can be fitted with any of a variety of optics. Some come with iron sights, some not. Some are heavy/bull contour, others are slender sporter contours. Some are fitted with wood stocks, others synthetic. And, you can get one at most any shop anywhere in the U.S. for $300-500 depending upon model.
 
#8 ·
I agreee...the economy Savage 110, althought the cheap scopes will break you can always upgrade as time and money allow. Plus, you don't have to worry about banging it up on those hunting trips like the treasured Weatherby.
 
#9 · (Edited)
Skywarp made an excellent suggestion. Those had slipped my mind and I was thinking on the high-dollar side of semi-autos, which is outside your given parameter. Another sturdy rifle that you may encounter in 7.62 NATO/.308 Winchester is the modified Chilean Steyr M1912/61 bolt action short rifle. It is a solid M98 Mauser and unlike most of the current Israelis, the bores are usually in excellent condition. Prices seem to be in the $225. to $300. range. Semi-autos are just relatively pricey, but you might want to get one before availability could change.

Note: When looking for a .308 Win.-chambered weapon, avoid "Guardia Civil" M1916 carbines (basicly a M93/M95 type action) that are marked "7.62". (They were originally chambered for the 7x57mm Mauser cartridge.) Notice that they are not marked for the "NATO" cartridge. I believe that they were chambered for the 7.62x51mm "CETME" cartridge, a "lighter" round safe for them. Also, some .308 Winchester loads will exceed the chamber pressure of the 7.62x51 NATO round. Both will chamber and fire in the M1916, but that action was designed for about 38K to 40K PSI. Some .308 Win. rounds can have chamber pressure approaching 60K PSI. If you get a M1916 carbine, use appropriate light loads in it. Use your head for something other than a hat rack. :) DDR
 
#12 ·
Skywarp made an excellent suggestion. Those had slipped my mind and I was thinking on the high-dollar side of semi-autos, which is outside your given parameter. Another sturdy rifle that you may encounter in 7.62 NATO/.308 Winchester is the modified Chilean Steyr M1912 bolt action short rifle. It is a solid M98 Mauser and unlike most of the current Israelis, the bores are usually in excellent condition. Prices seem to be in the $225. to $300. range. Semi-autos are just relatively pricey, but you might want to get one before availability could change.

Note: When looking for a .308 Win.-chambered weapon, avoid "Guardia Civil" M1916 carbines (basicly a M93/M95 type action) that are marked "7.62". (They were originally chambered for the 7x57mm Mauser cartridge.) Notice that they are not marked for the "NATO" cartridge. I believe that they were chambered for the 7.62x51mm "CETME" cartridge, a "lighter" round safe for them. Also, some .308 Winchester loads will exceed the chamber pressure of the 7.62x51 NATO round. Both will chamber and fire in the M1916, but that action was designed for about 38K to 40K PSI. Some .308 Win. rounds can have chamber pressure approaching 60K PSI. If you get a M1916 carbine, use appropriate light loads in it. Use your head for something other than a hat rack. :) DDR
Thanks for the education DDR.

Are the Steyr 1912s rebarrelled to 7.62 NATO, or were the chambers sleeved and bored out to 30 cal? I heard there was some erosion concerns with the barrels that were sleeved.
 
#14 ·
I believe I saw an add recently for bolt action .308s from Russia; I believe they are Izmash. I do love my Savages, however. Mine are 7mmMag and 30-06, but I "need" to get a .308. Also, a 6mm and a 6.5mm just to keep a good balance. My 7mm especially is a real tackdriver. Mine came before the Accu-Trigger, so if you see a good buy on an earlier one w/o the AT don't pass on it.
 
#18 ·
The Howa 1500 in .308 is great gun with a good trigger right out of the box. You can buy them in various barrel lengths and profiles. I have a 24" heavy barreled version, and the emphasis is on heavy. You would have to be a really big Mountie to take one hunting.

I agree with the other posters that a new Savage with the Accutrigger wins hands down when it comes to value for money.

The Saiga in .308 is also a lot of gun for the money IF you get one with a good trigger.
 
#19 ·
The Howa 1500 is also sold as the Weatherby Vanguard. Less than $400 at Walmart. I love mine - but the one I got is in 300 Weatherby Magnum, not a wussy .308 - but the ammo cost makes reloading mandatory.
A very slick, uncomplicated design, and very accurate. Thanks to early complaints about the factory trigger pull Weatherby's made it easier to adjust and also lightened and made much crisper the factory setting.
 
#21 ·
I 2nd DDR's advice about the Chilean 1912 modified with the o3-a3 barrel to 7.62 Nato, mine is exceptionally accurate although the exterior is a little rough, mine came with a great trigger and fast firing pin spring too. The Savage 110 is a great choice too, my heavy barreled 100fp in .308 is easily way sub-moa with handloads.
 
#24 · (Edited)
You could always go for a Tikka T3 Lite in .308. I have one and it shoots wonderful. You won't get the rifle and a good scope for $500, but I think the extra money would be well worth it. The first two rounds I ever put through it went through the exact same hole at 50 yards. I got some 3/4 M.O.A. groups with it one day with my anemic (and archaic) 4x40 Tasco I have mounted to it.

I did adjust the trigger down to 2 lbs, but that's the only "modification" I did to it. Reducing the trigger weight is covered in the manual, and is as easy as rotating a hex-key bolt.
 
#25 · (Edited)
MilSurpFan: Just where did you see me use or get the idea that I was comparing PSI with CUP? I am comparing apples with apples - PSI with PSI. To do what you suggest would be an erroneous and worthless comparison...I agree.

"DDR,

I know this is going to start yet another long thread about 308 vs. 7.62x51 pressures, but you can't, repeat... can't compare CUP to PSI readings. They cannot be directly compared. The two systems of measurement are not compatible, despite the fact that the numbers look similar.

The only way you can compare the pressures is to measure ammo samples in the same pressure test barrel using the same methods and equipment.

Someone else here may be able to provide actual test data, but my understanding has been that some lots of military 7.62x51 are actually higher pressure loadings than commercial 308 rather than the more commonly held belief of the opposite condition."


Here's what I know from sources that I trust...


7.62x51 NATO and U.S. commercial .308 Winchester are technically not the same cartridge, nor or they necessarily interchangeable. Here are the differencies:


.308 Winchester chamber headspace:

Go: 1.630"
NoGo: 1.634"
Field reject: 1.638"


U.S. Army 7.62x51 chamber headspace:

Go: 1.635"
Field reject: 1.6455"


SAAMI .308 Winchester chamber pressures:

MAP: 62,000 PSI
MPSM: 66,000 PSI
Minimum proof pressure: 83,000 PSI
Maximum proof pressure: 89,000 PSI

U.S. Army 7.62x51 chamber pressure:

Maximum: 50,000 PSI
Proof: 67,000 PSI


This is why some early 20th century milsurp Mauser rifles converted to "7.62" and not using the 7.62mm CETME cartridge could have very short lives when used with some .308 Winchester ammo or 7.62.51 NATO ammo. Those cartridges exceed the design parameters of the original cartridge (7x57mm Mauser). Those cartridges were never intended to be used in that action. DDR
 
#27 ·
MilSurpFan: Just where did you see me use or get the idea that I was comparing PSI with CUP? I am comparing apples with apples - PSI with PSI. To do what you suggest would be an erroneous and worthless comparison...I agree.

"DDR,

I know this is going to start yet another long thread about 308 vs. 7.62x51 pressures, but you can't, repeat... can't compare CUP to PSI readings. They cannot be directly compared. The two systems of measurement are not compatible, despite the fact that the numbers look similar.

The only way you can compare the pressures is to measure ammo samples in the same pressure test barrel using the same methods and equipment.

Someone else here may be able to provide actual test data, but my understanding has been that some lots of military 7.62x51 are actually higher pressure loadings than commercial 308 rather than the more commonly held belief of the opposite condition."


Here's what I know...


7.62x51 NATO and U.S. commercial .308 Winchester are technically not the same cartridge, nor or they necessarily interchangeable. Here are the differencies:


.308 Winchester chamber headspace:

Go: 1.630"
NoGo: 1.634"
Field reject: 1.638"


U.S. Army 7.62x51 chamber headspace:

Go: 1.635"
Field reject: 1.6455"


SAAMI .308 Winchester chamber pressures:

MAP: 62,000 PSI
MPSM: 66,000 PSI
Minimum proof pressure: 83,000 PSI
Maximum proof pressure: 89,000 PSI

U.S. Army 7.62x51 chamber pressure:

Maximum: 50,000 PSI
Proof: 67,000 PSI


This is why some early 20th century milsurp Mauser rifles converted to 7.62x51 NATO can have very short lives when used with some .308 Winchester ammo. DDR
Fair enough, I did not explain myself sufficiently... you didn't specifically meniton CUP, however the 38,000 - 40,000 figure you mentioned for the Mauser actions is CUP, not PSI measured using modern methods and equipment. I should have specifically mentioned that to avoid ambiguity.

I've been told that the pressure figures listed by the Army were measured with a copper crusher (CUP) as that was all they had to use at the time. So, despite the "PSI" in the documents, it is CUP.

My understanding is that when tested side by side in the same pressure test equipment, military 7.52x51 and commercial .308 loadings have very similar pressures with many lots of military ammo actually being higher than commercial. That's the only way to accurately compare the loads since the specs are not using the same measurement methods.

There are a variety of sources that I have gotten this from. I have run across a number of articles and posts from people who test ammo professionally, and they indicated that the pressure differences are much smaller than indicated by just comparing the raw numbers out of context.

Notice that 308 in a 7.62x51 rifle is not listed by SAAMI as an unsafe combination though 5.56 in a .223 is:
http://www.saami.org/Unsafe_Combinations.cfm

Also, the current specs for 7.62 NATO list a "Service Pressure Pmax" of 60,190 psi:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_EPVAT_testing

Also, there are less formal descriptions available:
http://www.smellysmleshooters.net/ammopressure.htm


So, though I do agree 100% with you that firing full-house loads in a Guardia Civil 1916 or FR-7 is poor choice, it is not because commercial ammo is loaded to a higher pressure specification.
 
#26 ·
I had a Savage 110 in 7mm Rem Mag. It shot sub MOA groups right out of the box. That was way before the accu trigger. the Accu trigger is very sweet and is standard on Savages now.

That said I'm seriously eyeing up a Saiga! :D
 
#29 · (Edited)
And I did not witness the tests, so I cannot/will not vouch for the method used or the accuracy of its calibration. In principle, we are on the same page - being safe and not foolish. I think that I recall a DSA steel receiver withstanding over 100K PSI during testing. There must have been a reason for going to such a high level. DDR
 
#34 ·
The Savage 110 and its variants are cheaper (comparing like rifles) than the Remington, have an excellent reputation for accuracy and have a number of safety features for gas venting during case failure that the competition simply cannot match. Not to mention the nice trigger.

Now that being said, I still haven't bought one myself yet. ;) These Mosins keep distracting me. Even so, as a former mechanic, I always look at the Savage rifles and think "such an effective mechanical design".
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top