seafire:
I just sold my 338-06 - was a custom job on a 700 action with a Hart barrel. Sold off my 358 Win as well. Trying to sell my 35 Whelen and 8x57. Ever since Nosler starting making the 9.3 250 BT and 286 gr PT, all the others just got left in the closet. Both bullets are ballistic wonders for a "big bore". In fact, the 286 gr PT has the 3rd highest ballisitic coefficient of ALL partitions bullets Nosler makes, falling behind only the 284 175 gr and 264 140 gr - it even beats of the 308 200 gr and 338 250 gr!

I think the 250 gr BT too has the 3rd highest ballisitic coefficient of ALL Nosler ballisitic tips - losing only to the 277 150 and 308 180 (by very slim margins I might add).

Anyway, my 9.3 is my "big gun" - I use it rarely. My 250-3000, 6.5s, and 7s cover 90% of what I'll ever hunt.

Sounds like you are infested with 243s - try the little 250-3000, it really is a little wonder. My own is a 700 classic with a 24" standard sporter barrel. I dream of someday building a nice lightweight with a 22" featherweight barrel on a Rem or Win SA. Now you got me thinking...

9.3 x 62:

Recently I went to an estate auction of a man who was a gun dealer and started a Foundation here in Oregon.

I had to leave the auction to go to a Gathering at the home of a good friend of mine, a Doctor who was killed while out Varmint hunting in an accident.

However I was hoping they would get to a Winchester Featherweight action chambered in 250 Savage and another in a 257 Roberts. I had to leave before they got to them. But I have been having dreams about them.

guess back in the 1980s you could order actions and barrels with no stocks from Winchester.
Don't I wish now. All 5 of the 250 Savages and 7 of the 257 Roberts were featherweight barrels and brand new!!!

I'm miffed at your statement Mark D., so how fast can you drive a 115 or 120 gr. bullet in your 243....

I think I can honestly state the 250 is a better big game cartridge than the 243...at least I would prefer it for big mule deer or elk with the heavy bullets and have used it for such.

I have always liked cartridge and bullet discussions. When I used to read the stories in Outdoor Life I would skip thru to what cartridge was used first!

I have Larry Kohlers book "Shot's at Whitetails" and have read more than once. He was a skilled writer who was sold on the 250 Savage.

However when your in the woods and have the choice of having a 300 Savage or a 250 Savage for game I see no reason to buy a rifle in 250 Savage.

To me it's not a video game to see what the smallest bullet is that I can bag my game with. I really want to get something! Thus I carry the biggest load that makes sense.

So with all due respect I don't give a hoot which is "better" for game, the 250 or the 243.

Now if your on a public computer at the library and can't afford new tires either and the only rifle you have is a 250 and your hungry too then please blast a deer with it and eat!

Now any discussion of what's the smallest tool that will turn a screw or take game must be specific. I am talking about hunting where a shot may be taken at a running animal or one at longer range. There are other variables too but why limit yourself? There are many state laws on the hunting of game and the 6mm's are minimum in most places. There is a reason for this!

Now some have such a great place to hunt or maybe they are much better hunters than I am. I conceed these points and with an easy shot the subject cartridges would be ok I suppose most of the time. I always did find the hunting to be much harder than the shooting.

Ray--I am a bit miffed at your being miffed.......who the heck cares about how fast one could drive a 115 or 120 out of a 243!!!

I do know what the 95's will do and there isn't anyone in the world that is gonna tell me that the 250 is a better killer,it just aint so. Not with 100 or with 120's.

Either round is a nice deer and antelope round.

Can they both be used for game that is bigger sure they can-have they been used yes the have-will they be used again you bet. But, you and I both know affections be damned that they are both getting to the edge --it had better be about darned near perfect of a shot on a elk with either round, or it is gonna become a rodeo! And I am here to tell you my friend that the 115 or 120 out of the 250 is not gonna help out over the 243 and 95 or 100 if poor placement comes about. Either way one had better have his track shoes on.

So argue all you want about the little bit of extra weight-to me and there isn't any difference.
So lets micro manage a bit here.
The 100 Noz/243 bullet has a S.D. of .242--the 25o with the 115 Noz has a S.D. of .249 and the 120 has a SD of .260.-wowsa big difference. That to me Ray is kind of like saying that the 180 out a of 06 with its SD of .271 is a lot better killer than a 165 with it S.D. of .248 out of a 06. It just aint so buddy boy and anyone who thinks so had better do a serious predujice check at the door.

The bottom line to me is that there isn't spits worth of difference between the two to most of the real world. Oh yeah there are a few ardent fans of one of the other that will micro manage the differeneces but when it comes down to it that is just what it is micromanagement.

I tell you what you take your 250 to the hill with its 115's or 120 and I'll take my 243 with its 95's and guess what. We'll both bring home our elk/deer/bear/ lope or whatever. And it'll be a one shot kill if we do our job and it'll take more if we don't.

So sorry if I miffed you-didn't mean to

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

One more thought there for you to consider Ray-while I personally have no, none, zero interest in seeing how fast a 243 can run a 115 if my memory serves me right I do believe that Barnes made a 115.
I gotta believe if that is true, and I do believe it is. Then we could round up some old data somewhere or from someone on this.

It might be kind of interesting to find out-just for fat chewing conversation. Do you have an old Barnes manual?

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

Amen, Mark

The current Barnes manual will do - gives the 243 about a 100 fps advantage with 115 gr bullet. This assumes a substantial pressure difference in favor of the 243. Loading the 250-3000 to 50,000 CUP or even 52,000 CUP (in a good bolt rifle) would probably give the older round the marginal advantage. All this being said, the comparison is a bit uninteresting as the 243 bullet is a RN.

In most "penetration" studies I have seen, a few things arise. First, comparing section densities across calibers is not necessarily entirely accurate (though I am just as guilty of the next person of doing this). Sectional density, while helpful in eye-balling pentration ability, does not take into account the thickness of the bullet jacket. So, I would argue that a 120 gr. 257 bullet has both a sectional density advantage and a "bullet toughness" advantage over the 100 gr. 243s. To go along with these advantages is about a 6% increase in frontal area - perhaps an important increase given the (small) bore diameters we're talking here.

Second, it is not uncommon for the same bullet to pentrate more at standard round velocities than at magnum velocities. This actually makes sense after a bit of thought, but may initially surprise some magnum shooters.

Now, does this all add up in the field? Perhaps not on smallish whitetails or antelope, but on muleys or other equally-sized game or on brushier or bad-angled shots these "on paper" advantages may come home to roost.

The 243 and 250-3000 are far from "minimum" guns for whitetails. People often forget that the average whitetail isn't much larger than a big dog.

Thanks for your reply 9.3 (fli I used to shoot a 9.3x64)

So it appears that the 243 has a 100 fps advantage over a 250. Is this a big deal to me no-not in the favor of either one.

Taking apples to apples and both 115's having the same construcion (this would go without saying), personally I would favor the smaller bullet diameter when it comes to penetration.

As far as the 25 haiving a bigger diameter-true but in the realy world not enough to make a bit of difference-at least not to me or the game I've seen killed. Once again that is like saying that the 280 is superior to the 270 because it is a bit bigger-no I don't think so.

As far as bullets of similar constuction penetrating differently, when you take magnum velocities vs standard-yeah I do think there can be some difference. I've seen that a bit with my 340 vs my 338/06. Standard bullets at the slower speeds become more of a "preme" bullet than the books would allow. But 100 fps does not make a difference, nor does it to me amke it a magnum.

To me anyway you cut it they are both wonderful rounds-is one any better than the other-I go back to if you live in the paper micro management world then yes you could say so. I'd suggest you could micro manage advantages for both. However I believe that in the real hunting world, out there on the hill where it really counts neither one is better than the other.. At least not on the hills that I hunt on.

Thanks all for your time

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

All I suggest is that you buy a chronograph...and I only stated my opinnion from using both on game, never said you had to agree...

Mark:

Actually, the difference between the 257 bore and 243 bore is more comparable to the difference between the 264 and the 277 bore or the difference between the 358 bore and the 375 bore. Also, I would emphasize again that the 115 gr 243 bullet is round nose, so even if it started with an advantage it would disappear about 10 yards from the muzzle.

Bullet design aside, the 100 fps advantage (at the muzzle) of the 243 would disappear if both rounds were loaded to the same pressure, which is safe and easy in a bolt gun.

I am sure that they are two peas in a pod 95% of the time, but for the other 5% I'd prefer to be carrying a 250-3000.

Ray--why would you suggest I buy I crono?? I have one.

I am not suggesting that we need to agree either-personally I always feel that when two people always agree on something then one is not needed--grins.......

And 9.3 I see what you are saying about the differences--I feel as well that the differences between say a 264 and a 270 are a none issue--same with the 358/375. You get rounds that close and to me it is all about comfort and confidence with said rifle-it is not the round. It is not about the subtle little differences in the rounds. Now that is my opinion and that is all.

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

[ 07-13-2003, 04:57: Message edited by: Mark R Dobrenski ]

Well, I've shot deer-sized critters with the 250 Savage. They died handily. I've also had several 243's though I've primarily used them for varmints. In my current 22" bbl'd 243 I can easily hit 3,100 fps with a 95 grainer... that's something a 250 Savage can't do! Regardless, to me, any of these rounds can go in the same bucket and will spill out about the same. They're all pretty small in case size and bullet diameter. They're all at the bottom rung of power for big deer and bigger game. I honestly don't think there's spit for difference between these two. Better to jump to a 270 Win to get some bang on bigger stuff.

BA

According to the same Barnes manual referenced above, the 250-3000 gets about 3200 with a 90 gr (non-moly) and about 3050 (non-moly) with a 100 gr. So a 95 gr at 3100 fps is certainly obtainable with the 250-3000. Again, most all manuals underload the 250-3000 a lot more than than they underload the 243.

Here is a pressure test example (same barrel lengths). Using 760 (a good powder for a 243), an 85 gr bullet can be propelled at 3150 at 49000 CUP. Using 748 (a good powder for a 250-3000) The 250-3000 can send an 87 gr. bullet at 2950 at only 41000 CUP. To focus this comparison; most cases in this bore/powder size gain 30-35 fps for every 1000 CUP increase (in sensible pressure ranges). This puts them neck and neck.

I am willing to load 250-3000 cases up to 50000 CUP - 2800 fps with a 120 gr is plenty for deer and black bear at any sane range. For those so inclined, one can run it up 53000 CUP, though I would use necked up 22-250 cases in that circumstance (I know they are designed for a SAAMI average pressure limit of 53000 CUP).

Again, all this presumes that you have a 250-3000 bolt gun. Stick with 45000 CUP for all non-bolt guns or old bolt guns.

Having loaded "hot" for most of my life I have some thoughts on the 4350 powders, 308 size cases and heavy for caliber bullets.

A load of 46+ grains of any 4350 and a 100 grain 243 will fit. However pressure is high. I've experienced loose primer pockets after one firing, blown priners, and case seperation. With this comes gas and brass finding its way toward my face.

The slower 4831 is a better choice. Much less likely to get a 70000+ psi load before case is just too full.

Over the last couple of years I've begun to think maybe the gun magazines and reloading manuals are not published by wimps and lawyers. What can I gain, ballistically, loading a 243Win and a 100 grain to 32XX fps? Are the risks, the wear and tear on action and barrel, worth it? For a few pounds of energy down range or maybe 1/2 inch less drop at three hundred yards.

I'm beginning to think I lost my way as a Rifleman.

Wally

I got in late on this thread--sorry about that.

I have rifles in both calibers--a Rem 788 in 243 and a Savage 99 in 250. I don't get creative with either rifle--both mostly shoot cast bullets, but I do have deer loads and varmint loads for both using jacketed bullets.

The deer loads for both calibers use Nosler Partition bullets.

The 243 is SUPERBLY accurate with cast bullets, tearing ragged holes at 50 yards and at or under one inch at 100. The 250 is not quite as good with cast, but can do respectably enough to cartwheel ground squirrels.

The 243 dislikes ANY bullet under 85 grains, and this is the third 243 that has exhibited this quirk to me. The 250 (1-14" twist) delights in lighter varmint bullets, and does pretty well with 100 grainers. Anything heavier than 100 grains in the 250 WILL NOT SHOOT--PERIOD.

To me--the calibers are identical, due to the rifles each is chambered in. The 243 is my scoped light deer to varmint rig, and the 250 has a Lyman tang sight--so it serves as my light deer/varmint iron-sighted lever gun.

Deputy Al

I think every kid South of Dallas has a .243. Have seen lots of game hit with .243, .250 and .257. Have seen the most problems with .243's. Two reasons seem to be since velocity varies all over the board, 2700fps to 3100fps and inconsistant bullet performance. Have seen good close range hits either pencil through or fragment badly, both out of the same box of ammo. Most bullet makers will tell you that it is easier to make a .25 bullet perform consistantly than a .243. They have problems making one that will both open up yet hold together for the trip down the bore. .243 doesn't leave as much lead core to work with and makes the jacket thicknes and temper very critical. Just what I've seen for many years. I use .257, .308 and '06 with no problems (except plastic tip bullets that we quit).

I know they are both balistic twins, but like the above I have gotten better bullet performance from the 250 Savage at less velocity and it just kills game better in my opinnion and thats based on a lot of kills and some culling..bullet performance is the key to good results and I have have had some bad experiences with the 243....We all go by our experiences, and so be it...

I might add a fact of life and that is the .243 is more prone to blow up than any other caliber, it holds the records...According to the HP White Labatories of the American Rifleman, when the throat washes out of a 243 and you shoot 100 gr. bullets, the bullet jumps and stops and goes causing a double explosion and takes the gun apart..Of course the cure is to shoot 90 gr. bullets unless I got it backwards...you will have to write the Rifleman on that one...Its been awhile since I read that study.but I did stress a 243 hard enough to get a face full of little curly Q smoke rings once??

At any rate I do not begrudge anyone the use of any caliber and I'll reserve myself that same priviledge if you don't mind

Ray,

I'm with you on this whole thing. Two weeks ago, when I revived this post after a month of inactivity I made a point that had been left undiscussed: The 243 is a barrel-burner, high volume shooters can't expect a long life. I could also have mentioned the fact that it blows up more than any other cartridge. Maybe people blow up their 243s before they really start wearing out the barrel.

I'll add one more bit of incendiary commentary: After some data entry using an online recoil calculator I noticed that the 243 Win recoils about the same as a 257 Rob. So why not shoot something with heavier bullets, whatever the advantages you might get from S.D. or frontal area?
Energy (ft/lbs) levels looked very similar, but of course there is slightly more available with the 257.

The .243Win seems to be the favorite rifle purchased for women and children. Many times I've had folks complain about the "recoil". Since the recoil is approximately the same as a 250-3000 I think it must be the muzzle blast.

When loaned a 250 these same folks would comment on how light it recoiled.

On paper the .243Win looks like a ballistic twin of the 250. However for most of us who have shot and hunted both there just is no question of the superiority of the little 250 Savage.

Wally

I've been following this thread off and on since it started. I found the comments about the .243's blowing up more often than other cartridges most interesting.
I'd have to hunt for it, but there was an very interesting article in, I believe, HANDLODER Magazine by a Roy Smith on this. Seems he experienced several episodes of S.E.E. (Secondary Explosion Effect) while working up loads for his Model 88 Winchester in .243 Win. Thinking he had a rifle that showed high pressure with the starting loads, he lowered his charges below starting levels. Finally, he realized that maybe he was experiencing S.E.E. and started upping his charges above the published starting loads and the problem went away. I wonder if some of those blowups might not just be caused by the same thinking. (I got high pressure signs. I better reduce the load before I get into trouble.)
I'm not sure I like the .243 for deer sized game, but I'll probably have to use one this year, whether I like it or not. Either that, or I'll have to learn to shoot left handed.
Paul B.

paul,
The reason for 243 blow ups has been accredited by H.P. White Labs and the American Rifleman to SEE caused by throat erosion in the .243 specificly and only with a certain weight bullet...As long as the theory is understood and not practiced then they will not have these problems......This study was conducted to find out why more 243's blow up than all other calibers combined...

SEE can and does happen with almost any caliber with reduced loads of H4831 or other very slow burning powders.

I have an old Savage 110 in .243Win. It's my favorite long range varmint rifle. Boy, that sucker will really reach out there a ways. I heard it said it is a great/lousy deer killer, but prefer to stay out of a subjective argument of that type. Deer in my area tend to be large ones, and I prefer something heavier. I have noticed that barrel is life is rather short in the 243Win. so I don't load it quite so hot as in times past. With 70 to 85 grain bullets you can get enough velocity that there's no need to smoke them. I'm ready to send this one off to Hart for a new SS barrel. Incidently I use the same rifle for all antlered animals including moose, a Remington Classic in 6.5x55 with the 160gr. Sierra bullet. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

Cal have you ever recoverd any of those 160's? I use a 6.5 quite a bit and have often wondered about them.

Thanks for your time

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

Quail Wing,
What you read in magazines most times is a commercial for whatever is new on the market. I have never owned or even fired a .250 Savage, but I have considerable experience with a .257 Roberts and the .257 Ackley Improved and also have used .243 Winchesters and .244/6mm's and the 25's have killed better than any 6mm that I have witnessed.We have two 6mm's in the safe as I write this, but facts are facts.
And Mr. Atkinson has witnessed more bullet/caliber performance in a season than most do in a life time.
Last fall my son lung shot his buck with his 6mm Remington and it went 75yds. before it dropped, I have never had a deer take a step with a Roberts or A.I. I have gut shot a couple and had the same result. Stepchild

Quail Wing,
Without going into a long explanation, I have used both and the 25's get the job done better. I have both in my safe, but facts are facts.
Bullets out of both have been driven at top velocities and from what I have seen the 25's rule. I have gut shot a couple, same result.
And Mr.Atkinson has witnessed more bullet/caliber kills in a season, than most see in a life time.Respect your elders.
The demise of the .257 Roberts was at the hands of the gun rags, for the feeble minded that believed it. It's all about money, if everyone based thier decisions on experience, rather than what is published monthly, the profits would drop sharply. Think about it. Stepchild

Savage99,
The next time you're at the public library using the computer, see if they have any books by Parker Ackley, Jack O'Conner,Warren Paige or Fred Huntington, and if they do, and you read them, instead of your Peterson's Hunting every month, maybe you'll gain a little insight as to whats going on in the real world.
All the above mentioned men, proved over sixty years ago what it takes to kill game.Animals only die so dead and after that it's tissue destruction.
Aren't you DonMartin29 operating under an alias?I remember in one of your earlier posts, you badmouthed the .257 Roberts. You've never shot one at paper or game, have you?
Have a nice day.
Stepchild

Stepchild2,

Jack O'Connor never shot a deer with a 243 so I am way up on him and I find that it's a quick killer when it works, leaves little blood trail when it barely works and it does not leave a big enough hole as larger bullets. A friend of mine shot a small buck in the ribs with a 100 gr Powerpoint out of his M 70 Featherweight and it ran off. It was raining just a little and we could not find any blood at all. Finally he found the deer. I don't know how he did it as it was a 1/4 mile away. The bullet did not expand much at all and we had a hard time finding the entrance and exit holes. It was even harder dragging that deer out.

When they build bridges the criteria is that there is a safety factor. Since the 6mm is the legal minimum caliber in my state that tells me something. It tells me that it's on the minimum size. Now I subscribe to the thinking that a bigger hole in a beast's vital area will kill it faster.

Now there is a report called the South Carolina deer report or such that shows numbers that the distance that deer ran was not relavant to the bullet size. But that report does not mention deer that ran off and were not found.

I suggest that anyone interested in the effect of bullets on game read www.mindspring.com/~ulfhere/ballistics/wounding.html.

You should read O'Connor in "The Hunting Rifle" on what he says about deer cartridges for hunting in a forest. He stays far, far away from small bullets like the .25's!

Savage99,
I have Jack O'Conners book entitled "The Complete Book of Rifles and Shotguns" He has a complete chapter on 24's and 25's and on page 192,in chapter 12 he tells of a Yukon outfitter named Jean Jacquot who used a 250/3000 to kill many moose and grizzly bears, I guess nobody told old Jean that it wouldn't work.
Oh by the way, you didn't answer my questions.This could go on but whats the use, you have your mind made up and nothing me or anyone else says is going to change your mind set.
Stepchild