30-06 and other military cartridges

I have a random question about the 30-06: why is the case so long!? If you compare it to other contemporary military cartridges, all the others are shorter, some more so than others. Take the 7.62 Russian for example, developed about 15 years before the 30-06, and yet much shorter. Then look at the 7 and 8 mm Mauser, and .303 British. And all modern military cartridges follow the same pattern; meanwhile the US adopted a long-cased cartridge for how many decades (albeit a GREAT round), and finally caught on to short cartridges with the 7.62x51 (.308).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by t-train

why is the case so long!?

---

Presumably to fit the powder in to provide the intended energy at the appropriate filling level to keep the chamber pressure below a prescribed maximum.

I am not joking - the powder used in developing the original 1903 case may have had very different characteristics to modern powders. And the case capacities of the Swiss 7.5 and Japanese 7.7mm cartridges are only about 10% less. The Lebel 8mm is almost as large - but very much fatter (as is the Russian). The volume (determined by the powder) and the maximum diameter compatible with a "rimless" near-parallel sided design for a compact magazine (like the Swiss) will have led to the length.

All these cartridges are designed that way. To hold the propellant to suit the demand prescribed for the cartridge.

A good read on the study of ballistics is the Bullets Flight By Mann ABE books are a source copies can vary in price but he did conduct some very good experiments and photographed the results I have only graze read my copy but he lined up 200yds of either canvas/paper targets all lined up perfectly and fired a round from a mounted rifle to show the oscillations before it stabilized in flight pretty good book.

Post script - also from memory again that the projie oscillated around its path of flight (Lets not forget he was doing this pre 1900) he had a cross on every one of those targets and it showed the bullets strikes differing along the longitudinal axis (not yaw) really a great read I must say he did all sorts of stuff with rounds.

Over the past few years, the CMP has sold on auction, a number of Mann test rifles, calibers being 7,62x51 and 30-06. Most of these actions are M1903A3 with short very heavy bull barrels, the stocks are cut-off in back and front. A fixture is use to fire the rifle. These make excellent bench rest and long distance rifles when restocked and are scope mounted. Maybe someone can find a photo of a Mann test rifle from the CMP auctions

Here's an article with pics... http://www.odcmp.org/1001/mann_inc.asp

Thanks Jim, for posting the article on the Mann actions & barrels. Some collectors just leave them alone as a collector item while others restock them, remove the collar and mount a large power scope. They are quite accurate when built-up

I saw one once I thought was one of these, turned out it was a .30 MG barrel. 1919 barrel modified for the action. What a club...be very stiff though.

I have also seen the Browning Model 1919A4 barrel used on bolt actions too. These barrels can be used with a bushing threaded inside for the 1919 barrel and outside for the Model 1917 receiver. Often the barrels will have a liner which is very difficult to cut with a chamber reamer. After all the work to fit such a barrel, often they are not that accurate and some use lead bullets.

They are what they are after all.

The 30.06 was developed from the 8mm Mauser and this also produced the Springfield.
The Spanish–American War of 1898 the us found out the hard way that the 30.40 Kraig had its faults.
The Spanish had Mausers.

The case was longer because ........
Comprehensive tests were conducted in 1904, '05 and '06 which brought about our adoption of the M1906 bullet. This very closely resembled the German bullet of 1904, being 150 grains in weight, flat-based, pointed and having a cupronickel jacket over a lead core. When this new bullet was first tried in the Model 1903 rifle it posed a very interesting chambering problem. Since the ogive of the pointed bullet placed the full diameter 0.2-inch farther back than the old round-nosed type, the new projectile had a jump of this distance to touch the rifling. This factor permitted gas leakage around the point during this interval and caused erratic positioning in the bore, with the result that accuracy was poor. Correcting the difficulty by seating the bullet farther out in the case left a seating depth of only a sixteenth of an inch - far too little for field service. This also made the cartridge length exceed the permissible limits for use in the magazine. The solution to this problem was attained by cutting 0.2 inch off the rear end of the barrel and rechambering it with a reamer having a shorter leade. This in effect moved the rifling leade to the rear so that a bullet with adequate seating depth was properly aligned with the bore in close proximity to the rifling. With the increased seating depth, the long neck of the 1903 case overhung the bullet ogive, so 0.07 inch of the neck was trimmed, resulting in a revised case 2.49 inches in length and having a capacity of 4.35 cc. This combination gave good accuracy, and all 1903 rifles then in service were recalled and altered to the new specifications, although the rifle's designation of "Model 1903" was retained. The official designation of the new ammunition as noted on contemporary box labels was "Ball Cartridge, Model of 1906, For U.S. Magazine Rifle, Model of 1903".

excert taken from The Rifleman's Journal

So basicly it is a 8mm maiser case with a longer neck in 30 cal.
Trying to keep up with the Germans and it did a goo job.
Went on to become the 30 M1 Bal.

By the way a us court ruled that royalties were to be paid to Paul Mauser as the 30.06 and Springfield 1903 rifle were mauser copies.

Here is the line-up:

left is 30-03, 30-06. 30M1 and 30M2Attachment 57467

After WWII rifle barrels were hard to get and were very expensive. The 1919A4 machine gun barrels were selling for about $5.00 each . I have one installed on a M70 Winchester action. I had it turned and polished to the contour of the original M70 barrel. Quite accurate for the time. Some of the were "stellite" lined to reduce erosion for the MG's. If you take an unaltered stellite lined barrel and examine it carefully you can often times, upon careful examination, detect a slight line just forward of the chamber. Stellite, plays havoc with chambering reamers. It was necessary to cut off the original tenon and re-cut as the original tenon was too small for the M1903, M70 or the GEW 98 action. Then the barrel had to be re-chambered. The barrel finished off at about 23 inches. I believe that the original barrel was large enough in diameter so that it was not necessary to "bush" the M1917 action - though I never used a M1919A4 barrel on a M1917 action.
A M190A3, M1903, or GEW 98 action, fitted with a M1919A4 MG barrel, a Lyman 48 sight, a Lyman 17A front sight, and a commercial target stock made a fairly good substitute for the M70 Target rifle that was very expensive and practically unobtainable. On the 03A3, riflemen usually replaced the stamped trigger guard and follower, with the forged or machined variety obtainable through the DCM for about $500.
I believe that the early 30-06 cartridge was loaded with Pyro DG powder which was a bit erosive.
FWIW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

To hold the propellant to suit the demand prescribed for the cartridge.

---

May have been the case with the original 220gr bullet, but when the 150gr spitzer was adopted as the '06 round, I reckon the capacity was a bit excessive. 48gr is the oldest charge weight I can find, dating to 1908. Oddly, even the 220gr load was backed off a bit before it was superceded, from 2300fps to 2200, in order to improve barrel life. (Info from History of Modern U. S. Military Small Arms Ammunition: Volume 1: 1880-1939)

I know the loading of 50 gr of IMR 4895 makes the case about full for the 150 gr FMJ.

The Hogden manual says 51 grains of the 4895's and Varget are a max load. So does my Lyman manual.