This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Firearms Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: Technology / Weaponry / North America / United States This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military science, technology, and theory task force Weaponry task force North American military history task force United States military history task force United States Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contents of the .30-01 page were merged into .30-03 Springfield on 24 November 2020. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

Since the round is correctly .30-'03, the page should be moved. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 01:51, 29 March 2012 (UTC) reply

I have requested a reference citation for the addition of the .280 Remington to the statement about the .270 WCF, since I believe the ,280 does not use the original shoulder, but moved the shoulder forward to avoid chambering .280 cartridges in .270 rifles. Thewellman ( talk) 02:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Reading the article it sounds like the 30-03 were an original development, while in fact both the cartridge and the gun it was used in, were based on Mauser or other German developments.

AFAIK the 30-03 cartridge was designed by lengthening the 7 x 57 or 7.92 x 57 case. The design was done after the US army encountered the 7 x 57 in the Spanish American war. The aim was to produce a cartridge more powerful than the 7 x 57 or 7.92 X 57. You can compare the measurements of any of the 57mm Mauser cartridges, that are again based on the M88 pattern German cartridge or 8 x 57 I. The measurements are nearly identical, but the length. The agreed upon payments for patent infringement never happened because the advent of the great war.

The change from the 30-03 to 30-06 again copies the development in Europe. First the French changed the 8 mm Lebel to a 198 grain spitzer boat tailed bullet and than the German changed the 7.92 x 57 to a 153 grain spitzer bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2880 ft/s. Looking at those developments, the US changed the cartridge to the 30-06 version with a 150 grain spitzer bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2700 ft/s, about copying the performance of the 7.92 x 57 S. Jochum ( talk) 04:49, 23 September 2019 (UTC) reply

a reference for the above https://www.chuckhawks.com/great_cartridge_families.htm Jochum ( talk) 05:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC) reply