why did the military choose .308 for its precision rifles in the past and now?

Your theory is absolutely correct. At the end of the Korean War when the decision to switch to the M16 was made there was all this .308 ammo lying around and the Sniper rifles in stock then (very few) were already .308. It is a good solid round and we have a lot of ammo so we can save a few bucks.

Simple as that.

308 Military Rifle

This Site Might Help You.

RE:

why did the military choose .308 for its precision rifles in the past and now?

I know this will probably bring up arguments of how the .30-06 is better and the .270 is almost the same... blah.. blah...blah. We've all heard that and read it multiple times by now. My question is, why did the military decide to use the .308 or 7.62 NATO as its basic precision rifle round?...

It is a standard Nato round plain and simple. The military did not want to use a non-Nato round. The .308 has an accuracy advantage over the 30-06. If you look at modern bench rest ammo the powder column is short and wide. The .308 is shorter than the 30-06 so it has an advantage. This is not to say all short cartridges are more accurate. But most will agree that on the Target range the .308 is more accurate than the 30-06. The .308 is just the 30-06 1/2" shorter. With the new ball powders they could equall the 30-06 in a shorter cartridge. Shorter cartridges are lighter and cycle machine guns faster.

The idea was simple. The 270 does not get the knock down power and the 30-06 has WAY to much arch for the distance desired out of a military sniper.

OH and both bullets (308 and 30-06 are exactly the same diameter 7.62mm). They are both 30 caliber rounds. 30-06 - 30 caliber manufactured in 1906.

Issuing a precision rifle to a service member also involves ensuring there will be enough ammunition to feed that rifle.

It is better to have a precision rifle that can utilize commonly available cartridges. Otherwise, if supply & logistics cannot keep up with the demand, the precision rifle is rendered nearly useless for lack of ammunition.

The standardization of ammunition among NATO members was for logistical reasons.

The selection of which cartridges to utilize involved plenty of debate.

The British were developing a .276 caliber cartridge that had (and still has) plenty of merit.

The U.S.A. wanted the 7.62x51mm cartridge.

NATO eventually adopted the 7.62x51mm cartridge.

But some might say that the adoption of the 7.62NATO cartridge was for political reasons as much as logistical reasons.

Later, the U.S.A. downsized to 5.56x45mm, but only for rifles. Machine guns still used the 7.62x51mm, and so did the rest of NATO because they preferred to postpone the headache of changing over to another new cartridge.

Nowadays, there are proponents of the 6.8mm SPC cartridge. It offers performance which is very similar to the .276 Pederson cartridge that was originally intended for use in the M-1 Garand rifle! Years ago the U.S. military had stockpiles of .30-06 and didn't want the headache of changing to a new cartridge at the time, so the Garand was re-designed for the .30-06 cartridge for logistical reasons.

The .45ACP vs. 9mmNATO is another good example. In this situation, the U.S.A. postponed the headache of changing over their equipment and adhere to a NATO ammunition standard.

The debates of performance versus cost continue to vex supply personnel and entertain armchair generals.

the marines were using the 30-06 in winchester model 70s in the Vietnam War for their sniping needs. Of course, in WW2, the US was using springfield 1903a3s in 30-06 for their sniper rifles.

The 7.62 NATO was designed to give 98% of the performance in 75% of the size of the 30-06, so the average soldier carrying X pounds of ammo would have more shots, same with average helo carrying X pounds of supplies to a forward base, etc etc. It was that same logic that made 7.62 NATO a good choice for sniping. Yes, in a pinch a sniper could utilize the same ammo as the M-14 trooper or M-60 machinegunner was using, or nowadays the M240 machinegunner, but in general the snipers are issued specialty ammunition.

Also, as mentioned above, when the military is not actively regaged in war, it looks down it's nose at the snipers as a waste of time and money, same with a lot of the special operations guys. Counter to what you see on TV, they really don't fit in the 'big green machine' I can understand both sides of it, those guys need a lot more support than the average troop, and while they are really handy when we are dealing with asymetrical warefare, whereas the US Army as an institution is more concered with being big enough and mobile enough to deal with any conventional threat by putting a ton of tanks and artillery on the ground and surround em with basic grunts...and then have the logistics lines in place to feed these guys a constant resupply of gear, weaponry, ammo, and food

Have you ever looked at a 308 barrel they are thick and able to handle a heavy load, accuracy better than a 30-06 or 270 and its true bullets are common but I do not believe that is the reason. Now they are using the new 50 cal sniper rifle go to you tube and search for snipers.

I watch a special on snipers on the discovery channel and most of them used the 308 especially in training.

i dont know where these guys are getting thier info that the 308 is more accurate than the 3006 or 270 none of my balistics charts shows that the 06 and 270 is much flatter shooting the 308 was and is a nato round and thats why it was used

Well, yes, they used 7.62x51 because it's what they had. There was no conscious decision to use it as opposed to a lot of cartridges available to civilians, and there was never any emphasis until very recently on precision rifles for use by snipers. Kids seem to think the position of the sniper is well entrenched in the US military, but it simply isn't so. The military have historically tried to get rid of their snipers, only having to resurrect them out of necessity with each new conflict. And with little use for snipers, there's never been any conscious thought about "precision rifle" cartridges. There's certainly nothing about that particular cartridge to make it the choice compared to many others, except for logistics.