British .303 - How Powerfull?
I would like to get some unbiased opinions and facts about where the British .303 rates in relative range and knock-down performance among other common rifle rounds such as the 30-30, .308, and 30-06, etc.
I have my own opinions from actual range and hunting experience but wanted see what you all have to say. Thanks.
Pack slow, fall stable, pull high, hit dead center.
Don't fly the river!
I have my own opinions from actual range and hunting experience but wanted see what you all have to say. Thanks.
Pack slow, fall stable, pull high, hit dead center.
Don't fly the river!
0
-
More powerful than the 30-30, but not as potent as the 308 (just about dead center between the two).
Bert H.
Real Men use a SINGLE-SHOT!0 -
gunpaq--I haven't had any personal experience with the .303, but according to my NRA handloading book, you can get a 150 grain bullet out of the barrel at 2800 fps. That's comparable to the 30-06,but more like the .308. With comparable bullets, performance would be about equal.
Cheers,
OleDuk0 -
More punch than 30-30. Of the 4 cal. mentioned it's number 3.
Not a lot of options in factory ammo for hunting, and handloading choices in bullets offer a litle more flexibility.
IMHO ... good rile/round for deer sized game at ranges under 200 yards, and the closer to 100 the better.
Quite a few were rechambered to 308.
If you only have time to do two things so-so, or one thing well ... do the one thing!0 -
I've owned probably 15 different .303 Brits over the past 45 years. Most are about 2" or more rifles, power about like a .308. Most every game in the world has been taken with this round, so it is very versitle. Like others here, I would keep my shots under 200 yards with open sights. I've never had one with a scope, but susspect you could do some damage to 500 yards with a good scope and hand loads.
SEMPER FI MAC, SEMPER FI0 -
Ask some German veterans how far they will shoot accurately........[:D][:D] 0 -
Good caliber/cartridge. Used it extensively when younger, and bagged several deer with it. Never took more than one shot. The farthest shot was about 150 yds. This was with the old Rem. 215 gr. RNSP bullet. The brass seems to have a shorter reloading life than some other cartridges, probably because the Lee Enfield action, especically that of the No.1 Mk. III, is a little stretchy compared to a Mauser. The Hornady 174 gr. RNSP bullet over 39.3 gr. of H-4895 is a good all-around accurate load. I'd put it ahead of the .30-30, a little ahead of the .30-40 Krag (another favorite), but less than the .308. Many wildcats have been made from this cartridge in the Commonwealth Countries, some of them pretty good, but seldom seen here. 0 -
The Brit .303 is a darn good round. But to be honest I wouldn't want to be hit with the 30/30, .308, 30/06 or the russian 7.62x54R. I don't think I would be able to live on the difference between them. The 30/30 is well below the others but placed right it will do the job at 150 yrds. or under. The others have a decided advantage over it as the range increases mainly because they start out at about 600 to 800 fps faster. 0 -
A .303 story.... as a kid I bought a jungle carbine in really bad shape at a pawn shop for $15. It came with armor piercing rounds and would shoot clean through a 10" pine, (a.k.a. phone pole), at 50 yards. Wish I still had it. [:p]
Badges? We don't need no stinking badges!0 -
Picky, picky me...I just hate that term "knockdown power"...If it knocked down your quarry, it would also knock you down!!! No round blows game off their feet...This comes up now and again, just had to vent...And yea, the .303 gets my respect along with the others mentioned...[^]
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.0 -
Tapwater's right about 'knockdown power' being a myth. As far as the .303 being an effective round, that it is.
I've never seen anyone that was shot with a .303, or any of the other rounds mentioned in this post. But I have seen people that have been shot with a .30-30, and they were DRT (dead right there).
One incident in particular I remember was a guy that weighed about 250 pounds. He'd just beat up his live in GF, and she ran next door. She grabbed a .30-30 and stepped out on the porch. The guy was leaving, and she fired a shot just to 'scare' him. She did more that scare him. The shot hit him about midways on the left side of his ribcage. Through and through shot, dropped him like a rock. The distance was about 75 yards.
"If they won't give us good terms, come back and we'll fight it out."
-- Gen. James Longstreet0 -
For better words I used the term knock-down power. Probably should have used a better terms such as sustained velocity and energy. Knock-down power seemed more appropriate as I posted the question in response to a few fellows claiming that the .303 round was a weak and obsolete enemic round........as though it would arc to the ground 20 yards out from the barrel at best when fired.
I do recall a formula someone had in an article in Guns & Ammo several years ago to figure out a knock-down factor for particular rounds and loads. Different numerical factors were assigned for effective knock-down at various ranges for various living targets such as man, pig, deer, elk, bear, water buffalo, etc,. Seemed to make sense.
Pack slow, fall stable, pull high, hit dead center.
Don't fly the river!0 -
paq, I knew what you meant and no offense meant..I've caught myself using that term all too many times. mea culpa...
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.0 -
None taken[:)]
Pack slow, fall stable, pull high, hit dead center.0 -
gunpag, the term of "knock down power" was used in the late 1940's and up into the late 50's when relaoding was jsut really getting started in this country. Yes reloading goes back into the 20's and 30's but reloading gear was hard or next to impossible to find. Reloading never relly go off the ground until the late 50's and then into the 60's when it really took off like a rocket. Up until that time people like Joyce Hornady and Vernon Speer and others were struggling with bullet design. Factory ammo back then was a take what we sell or go to H--- proposition. FActories refused to sell components and to be honest the bullets they produced were un-reliable. Bruce Hodgdon started selling us reclaimed war surplus powder and things really started to come together. We got a lot of things wrong back then-it was trial and error. No computers, no chronographs, no strain gages(for testing chamber pressure) and very little reloading data itself. People blew rifles testing or through miscalculation, learned from it, and shared the information and moved on. I'm looking at an old Lyman manual from the early 1960's that has a formula in it for "striking energy" and here goes: E(energy) = W(weight of the bullet in grains) X v2(velocity squared) divided by 450240. I'm sure there are other formula's out there but this one was the bees knees in 1960. Times sure has changed for the better since way back then as far as the reloader is concerned-its no longer a matter of "can I find what I need" but "how the heck do I decide which one". Ramblings of an old man. Think about it. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
14 comments