A general 30-06 Question for the SMEs

[Lex Luthier]

The two things that come to mind with @JDB 's comments about his dad's 1640 accuracy wobbles are 1) if the muzzle crown is in good shape, as that can make or break even the best barrel, and b) if he's done any comparison of different bullet weights and charges, as outlined by @okie john above.

[okie john]

SNIP if the muzzle crown is in good shape...

Good point. Someone who cleaned that rifle from the muzzle easily could have damaged the crown, especially if they used a jointed rod.


Okie John

[WDR]

A poster on another site used to say that a thousand things can happen when you shoot at game beyond 300 yards and only one of them is good. He was right.

Which is why I've always been an advocate of actually hunting game (IE getting as close as you can), instead of turning a hunt into a long range feat of fancy. Most folks can't shoot even 2 MOA in the field. And I say that, having taken, and made some fairly long shots on big game. I've also had shots go bad, and not been happy with myself, or the results. But if you hunt long enough, it will happen to you. Generally its not the rifle, or the MOA size of the group it'll shoot that is the issue. It's the nut behind the butt.

If a barrel crown is an issue from poor cleaning practices, it can be fixed, usually, by a competent smith.

[JDB]

Just being real here: Is there some kind of deer hunting you do that your dad’s old rifle, at 2 MOA, won’t take care of? I mean, 300 yards, that’s still a kill shot on any deer …

I do a fair bit of close range deer hunting, but even more alpine deer hunting. Also some alpine sheep, goat, black bear, moose. The last few years shots have averaged 300yds.

I might try have the crown worked on if it's cheap. That husky is such a lovely rifle to carry, I hate to give up on it. It's perfect for my late season SE Alaska deer hunts...except that I'm moving to suppressors for such work. Those shots tend to happen fast, without time to put ear pro in.

[JDB]

Or hunt with the 1640 and spend the Tikka money on ammo, tags, and licenses.

It's easy to get wrapped around the axle on group size. Deer have an 8" vital zone and elk are even bigger, but few hunters ever see either beyond about 175 yards. At that range, 2 MOA is still less than half the size of the deer's vital zone, so a 2 MOA rifle will put a lot of meat on the table IF you shoot it well.

So, yeah, marksmanship...

I have a rifle that's consistently sub-MOA from the bench. As soon as I get a zero, I train from field-expedient positions. Even that rifle cannot save me from a bad trigger squeeze in offhand, kneeling, sitting, prone over a brush pile, etc.

Shooting steel changed my mind on this: I know instantly whether I hit something that's the size of the vital zone on the animal I'm hunting. Instead of losing sleep over fractions of something, the issue becomes getting hits. And as soon as you get the MOA monkey off your back, you can work on getting hits quickly, which matters far more when you have a deer in your crosshairs.

A poster on another site used to say that a thousand things can happen when you shoot at game beyond 300 yards and only one of them is good. He was right.


Okie John

I don't disagree with any of this, and take the marksmanship side pretty seriously, shooting bullseye pistol, hi-power rifle and PRS the last 2 years, as well as the military EIC matches. My big shooting goal is to be double distinguished this season, 12 more rifle points left.

That old husky is such a lovely gun, it just grinds on me not being able to shoot it as well. I'd love to take a Mtn Goat with it this year (my dad got one out of Skagway back in the 60's). But looking at where I"ll be hunting, odds of 300 yd plus shots are pretty high. Ditto the places I"m deer hunting in Aug/Sept.

For the open country goat/sheep, suppressors aren't such a big deal...they are major treks in. For the alpine deer, it's not such an expedition, so don't mind the weight of the suppressor.
Hmm.

To all, thanks for all the replies

[Super77]

@JDB, just another thought, but a new barrel wouldn’t have the rollmark that says “Husqvarna Vapenfabrik” in a long lost italic font.

[Dorsai]

In my experience, any thread that goes past 1 page it looks like a branching tree rather than a telephone pole so far as staying on topic. We all have different experiences and more often than not our experience may not be specifically on point but still useful. I grew up in Alaska and the rifle my family used most often was a Winchester M70 in .30-06, mfg in 1949. My father used it, my mother shot it, I shot it, and so did my brother. Later on my father got a .300 Win Mag. My experience must be understood in the context that I never weighed more than 140lbs and that rifle has a steel buttplate. I still have it. Anyway, at some point my father wanted to make it handier and took it to a smith and had the barrel cut down to (I think 20", but I'll have to measure it later), and put a Herter's muzzle brake on it. I can't say that I remember the recoil being any different with the brake. I only used it for hunting moose and I don't recall ever getting a shot at over 100yds. So any loss in velocity and energy didn't make a difference. Mom and Dad used it on Caribou and they always came back with kills so I can only assume they had good hits and enough power. If it was good enough on Caribou, it should be easily good enough for deer, even with a shorter barrel. On moose, Dad taught us to shoot for the neck. Less waste of moose and we ALWAYS had one shot kills.

[okie john]

In my experience, any thread that goes past 1 page it looks like a branching tree rather than a telephone pole so far as staying on topic. We all have different experiences and more often than not our experience may not be specifically on point but still useful. I grew up in Alaska and the rifle my family used most often was a Winchester M70 in .30-06, mfg in 1949. My father used it, my mother shot it, I shot it, and so did my brother. Later on my father got a .300 Win Mag. My experience must be understood in the context that I never weighed more than 140lbs and that rifle has a steel buttplate. I still have it. Anyway, at some point my father wanted to make it handier and took it to a smith and had the barrel cut down to (I think 20", but I'll have to measure it later), and put a Herter's muzzle brake on it. I can't say that I remember the recoil being any different with the brake. I only used it for hunting moose and I don't recall ever getting a shot at over 100yds. So any loss in velocity and energy didn't make a difference. Mom and Dad used it on Caribou and they always came back with kills so I can only assume they had good hits and enough power. If it was good enough on Caribou, it should be easily good enough for deer, even with a shorter barrel. On moose, Dad taught us to shoot for the neck. Less waste of moose and we ALWAYS had one shot kills.

What loads did you use?


Okie John

[Dorsai]

What loads did you use?


Okie John

My best memory is Remington 180gr PSP. For Moose and Caribou, it was always 180gr. For Bear, 220gr SP, though I never shot a Bear and the only one that Dad came home with was a Black Bear. So no Grizzly or Brown Bear. But that was why we had the 220gr. We moved to Alaska in June 1964, so my hunting experience there was the 60's and 70's.

[okie john]

My best memory is Remington 180gr PSP. For Moose and Caribou, it was always 180gr. For Bear, 220gr SP, though I never shot a Bear and the only one that Dad came home with was a Black Bear. So no Grizzly or Brown Bear. But that was why we had the 220gr. We moved to Alaska in June 1964, so my hunting experience there was the 60's and 70's.

Thanks. I kinda figured it was something like that.


Okie John