Jump to content

Photo

22-250 Or 243?


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 sloppyfoos

sloppyfoos

    Varminter

  • Member
  • 2 posts
  • Local time: 02:07 AM

Posted 15 August 2003 - 06:08 PM

Hello! I can't decide between a 22-250 and 243 for coyote hunting and had a question concerning the recoil between these two calibers. Is there a noticable difference or is it just slightly noticable? Does anyone have a strong recommendation for one caliber vs. the other? Thank you for your replies. --Tim

#2 Rick

Rick

    Varminter

  • Member
  • 370 posts
  • Local time: 02:07 AM

Posted 16 August 2003 - 08:36 AM

The 243 has alittle more recoil than the 22-250 but the best one to use would be a 223 or a 17cal of some kind less you are going for the really long shots then go with a 243 or 22-250.

Just my 2 cent.

#3 Glen Shaffer

Glen Shaffer

    Varminter

  • Member
  • 409 posts
  • Local time: 02:07 AM

Posted 16 August 2003 - 03:15 PM

sloppyfoos-- Depends on whether or not you are keeping the hides. Some guys on another board swear by the .17 Rem or machIV with 25gr berger non-moly bullets for very minimal pelt damage. Can't remember the name of the site as I was reading some posts & realized they had a bunch of smart a$$e$ that talked down & even smarted off to some people in their beginner section. I left. The 243 can be loaded way down with a 55gr Ballistic silvertip from Winchester that carries about 2766fps & 934ft/lbs out to 300 yds. Also a little less crack than the 250 if noise matters. 243 is also more versatile if you want one gun that fits most situations. Hope this helps. Glen :D

#4 Red

Red

    Sniper

  • Moderator
  • 13,045 posts
  • Local time: 05:07 AM
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 August 2003 - 03:21 PM

It's a personal preferance really. The .243 will deliver more energy. but for every action there is...well you know.

I did some figureing, Useing a 10 pound rifle a .243 loaded with a 70 grain bullet traveling at 3568 fps...6 ft lbs recoil and has 1979 ft. lbs of energy at the muzzle.

10# rifle - 22-250 - 50 grain bullet @ 3834 = 4 ft lbs recoil and gives 1632 ft. lbs of energy.

These are obviously just numbers I picked out not knowing what load you would be shooting but they are typical loadings. I hope this helps you decide. I personally use a .223 and a 22-250. I like the 22-250 better and have not found it lacking. To date I would guess my longest shot on a coyote with it was around 300 yards.

#5 sloppyfoos

sloppyfoos

    Varminter

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • 2 posts
  • Local time: 02:07 AM

Posted 16 August 2003 - 05:12 PM

Thank you for the replies so far! I guess I could give more details for my wants/needs...I will not be saving the furs, and I live in Iowa so I won't be using the rifle for any other hunting except for coyotes. I guess I am more concerned with the muzzle jumping around rather than the recoil. ( is there a term for that other than recoil? ) Someone said that using a 22-250, you can still see your bullets hitting the target through the scope. Is this true? I know I will be getting a Tikka and it weighs around 6.5 pounds before adding the scope, so I think this is kind of a light rifle. I did not know if the difference between the 22-250 and 243 would be big or not concerning the muzzle jumping.......Thank you. --Tim

#6 Red

Red

    Sniper

  • Moderator
  • 13,045 posts
  • Local time: 05:07 AM
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 August 2003 - 07:11 AM

I can see the bullet strike from my heavy barreled 22-250 only part of the time when shooting from a bench. I guess that rifle weighs about 11 pounds, maybe more.
I don't recall ever seeing the actual strike from my lighter sporter model or when shooting in the field from a bi-pod under normal coyote hunting conditions, if I did it was just a glimps.
You need a very solid rest and a heavy rifle or a smaller cartridge like a .223 if you want to see the impact through your scope. My heavy Savage .223 allows me to see the impact but I'd hate to tote that thing very far.

#7 flatlander

flatlander

    Sniper

  • Moderator
  • 3,037 posts
  • Local time: 05:07 AM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Great White North

Posted 17 August 2003 - 08:20 PM

I was wondering how long it would be b4 someone asked this question. the next will be 250 vs 223 :D

I shot 243 for many years exclusively and then the 17rem for the last few years. I now mostly use the 17 for 95%. Recoil is a small part but there's also less blast and noise (still need ear plugs, though) and cheaper to reload and the extra snort isn't really needed less i'm going much past 200yrds (combined bean/wheat fields for pidgeons/crows) and i get a good wind advantage wit the 243. I'd say the 223 with a bull bbl will let you see hits if the scope power's not really high. But the 243 really has the horsepower and you can use it on pigs and deer someday. i'd say your choice would be between those 2. good luck

flatlander

#8 mokus

mokus

    Varminter

  • Member
  • 164 posts
  • Local time: 03:07 AM

Posted 19 August 2003 - 07:53 AM

I guess I should log in with my opinion too!lol I have both the 223 17 and the 6mm. I feel by experience that if there is a chance shots will be beyond 350yds then the 6mm bore has a huge advantage over the .22. I have used the 22-250, 223 17 and 6mm and see no reason not to use the bigger bore if pelts are of no concern. The 6mm, 243 will fair better in the wind and recoil is deff of no concern! I find the best bullet for my rifle for accuracy and performance is the 65 grain V-MAX. I have groups of less than 1/8 inch at 100yds and a vel of 3600 fps! There, I have loged in on the argument!hehe

#9 AZZA

AZZA

    Sniper

  • Moderator
  • 4,048 posts
  • Local time: 09:07 PM
  • Interests:The Environment, Shooting ferals whom destroy Australia's fragile ecosystem, , Bush walking and fishing.

Posted 24 August 2003 - 06:39 PM

Their an easier way to compare them, they both can be reloaded with 55 grain projectiles, which one is more versatile with the same weigh pills? :P

#10 Red

Red

    Sniper

  • Moderator
  • 13,045 posts
  • Local time: 05:07 AM
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2003 - 03:30 AM

Trouble is that a lot of the .243's will not shoot the 55 grainers accurately. No question it will shoot them faster and it has a little more umph.

#11 AZZA

AZZA

    Sniper

  • Moderator
  • 4,048 posts
  • Local time: 09:07 PM
  • Interests:The Environment, Shooting ferals whom destroy Australia's fragile ecosystem, , Bush walking and fishing.

Posted 25 August 2003 - 05:49 PM

Good point Red. Ive seen some pretty nasty wounds on foxes with 60 grian hollow points out of a mates .243 :lol:

He hit a fox in the head at 100 yard aprx and their was not much of a head to recognise after the bullet struck.