.223 and its rivals.

[Sherlock]

Sherlock,impressive shooting,at the longer ranges .

With 75 amax@ 2860 ,the drop/drift at 800y is about 212/37 inches with a 5mph breeze.Any advice on how to make accurate wind assessments out to 800-even a 1% error means .4 inch out,and even a .3moa rifle,at 100,in a near perfect world will be no better than 3 inches at 800yards.

So that's near enough 31/2 inches,assuming near perfection-which is ...errr...? unlikely!

That's a miss pretty often on crows,some on rabbits ...and not too clever on fox....

... first shot hits.....possible,but how about misses...

Look forward to the wind doping advice ( even with no wind,it's good going,not elementary to us Watsons).

gbal

 

 

Gbal... First thing was to shoot in calm conditions - so I would not shoot at live stuff with that cal - at that range when windy.

 

Second - I am shooting on to a large sandy series of massive rabbit warrens - so I shoot at a couple of 6 " steel gongs which I have put out permanently - to find out what the wind is actually doing over that distance,,, Before having pointing the rifle at living creatures.

 

Lastly I have been shooting from more or less the same position - across to the sandy bank for the last 20 yrs - and in that time I have fired the odd round or two ... .

 

 

S

[gbal]

Gbal... First thing was to shoot in calm conditions - so I would not shoot at live stuff with that cal - at that range when windy.

 

Second - I am shooting on to a large sandy series of massive rabbit warrens - so I shoot at a couple of 6 " steel gongs which I have put out permanently - to find out what the wind is actually doing over that distance,,, Before having pointing the rifle at living creatures.

 

Lastly I have been shooting from more or less the same position - across to the sandy bank for the last 20 yrs - and in that time I have fired the odd round or two ... .

 

 

Thanks S,that clarifies-you have lots of experience at that site,you actually have effective sighters first,and good 'splash' feedback if any misses. And don't shoot if there is wind.

Quite likely the vast majority of shots are well less than 800y. Fair enough.Anyone who wants to emulate now knows what the basics requirements are to have any realistic chance of some success. I enjoyed a similar opportunity,but at half the distances-a much less challenging proposition with the 224 class cartridges,of course(pre 6BR etc).

 

gbal

 

 

S

[Raifuru]

I pretty much exclusively use a 20TAC for vermin now and cant fault it. I use 50 grain begers and on paper, It does indeed beat the previous 223 and 17 Rems outright, but I am not sure my hit count has increased from my original 223. The main thing with the 223, 22-250 and 243 are that factory rounds are abundant and you will find one that will be damned close to your best reloads. That is where the 20s and 17s fail. 17s are good, but I had some nasty results with the 20 grainers, 25s were better and 30s better still, but only a custom barrel will deal with a 30 grain berger.

As I have said before, my main advantage with my original 20 TAC was that I could get some seriously high velocities that were way over what QL would see as safe, I got some details from Tod Kindlers book and found that the gun would handle his loads with no issues.

I would personally avoid anything AI as my 243 AI and frends 22-250AI will jam on cycling as a repeater.

I must admit a 270 WSM on foxes is pretty impressive but a little lively out of a 4x4 window.

[Alycidon]

I pretty much exclusively use a 20TAC for vermin now and cant fault it. I use 50 grain begers and on paper, It does indeed beat the previous 223 and 17 Rems outright, but I am not sure my hit count has increased from my original 223. The main thing with the 223, 22-250 and 243 are that factory rounds are abundant and you will find one that will be damned close to your best reloads. That is where the 20s and 17s fail. 17s are good, but I had some nasty results with the 20 grainers, 25s were better and 30s better still, but only a custom barrel will deal with a 30 grain berger.

As I have said before, my main advantage with my original 20 TAC was that I could get some seriously high velocities that were way over what QL would see as safe, I got some details from Tod Kindlers book and found that the gun would handle his loads with no issues.

I would personally avoid anything AI as my 243 AI and frends 22-250AI will jam on cycling as a repeater.

I must admit a 270 WSM on foxes is pretty impressive but a little lively out of a 4x4 window.

 

 

AIs dont feed well at all from most magazines due to the shoulder angle. I have a 17AH that hangs up when single fed !!. Ais are really for single shot actions where they are hand fed.

 

Caliber wise then its all been said 100 times before. Personally I prefer 20s for foxes, driving 39 gr SBKs at a modest velocity ( 3600-3700) or Berger 50s at 3500 then they are pretty well flat as far as almost all my shots. Its only at over 300 yards that the difference between the calibers is more noticeable.

 

A

[bradders]

If you're only getting 2650 with a 75 Amax, then you're doing it wrong

[Big Al]

If you're only getting 2650 with a 75 Amax, then you're doing it wrong

 

I plucked this figure out from a quick online search, what would be a more reasonable figure to expect from a 20" barrel?

[247sniper]

 

I plucked this figure out from a quick online search, what would be a more reasonable figure to expect from a 20" barrel?

 

 

Anywhere between 2830 - 2950 ftps seems to be the norm, although 3000 ftps has been achieved before.

 

One thing to note though that with a long range rifle set up using high BC bullets, Velocity does not have a great effect on the bullet, what i mean is chancing the last 50 ftps will not achieve much. The opposite to a fast fast shooting caliber .

[gunner]

Iv had a few , started 223 rem - still hold my longest shot with that1 . Then went 223Ai 8 twist , it has allot more clout at longer range / past 400 - plus ! But you have to be spot on on the range , with a 75 grain Amax its quite loopy ! Id sway more to a 22Br now thinking on it , a little more fps and better accuracy .

Iv now gone .20 and it is Very good , probably most importantly its soo much less lickley to ricochey than a slower .22 vld target type bullet . Plus there are other benefits , one is seeing the gorey splat show thru the scope ,

I also run a 17 hmr which i like but would prefer 17rem but my 20 practical covers that role now i suppose . Its good for maggies at @ 150 .

Not sure why but im thinking of a .20 ppc , 20 Br is a bit too much but ppc is probably one of THE best small varmint cartridges on the planet ! Cheers

[snaggletooth]

 

 

In the real world Davey, out too 350 yards the .204's are mustard, fast, flat shooting and very good in the wind. They are better then a 40 grain bullet from a .223 with a decent charge behind it, but in the field there is not much in it. A .223 Ackley Improved with a 52 Amax would be very close also with some decent smack to it.

 

IMO with out doubt if you are shooting upto fox only and vermin out to 350 - 400 yards then id pick up the .204 any day of the week, the advantages from the likes of the high BC 80 Amaxs from my .223 Ackley only come into play past 350 yards and greatly so and i do mean greatly after 500 yards. The difference out to past 600 + yards is just incredible with the (.482 BC) 80 Amax's

 

Hope this help you out fella?

 

If you stepping up from HMR the either a 223 or a .204 is a massive "STEP up" but out to 350 yards which is far enough for most people id choose the .204.

 

But I would check to see if you can get the reloading components first, that's another story but believe it is no on the up

 

 

 

Steve

 

Thanks Steve.................. my head tells me go 223, ie better choice ammo, bigger choice of rifles, but my heart says 204.

 

I'm lucky enough to have a RFD near me that shoots a 20Tac, which he swears by, and says that there's no problem getting components.

[gunner]

Ai , if u haven't read about the 20 practical on accurate shooter site then you should buddy , its called the practical for a reason . especially if you already shoot and reload 223rem , if you have a bushing die in 223rem all you need is new bushings in 20 cal . you can use you 223rem bullet seater 4the 20 prac , and to shoulder bump you can use the FL 223rem die . But will either need a new decapping rod or get the std one torned down on a lathe to .200 ish so it fits the new neck size . Iv clobbered everything out to 300 so far with mine with quite ease ! But i know itl go further . But good luck with your choice .

[Big Al]

Thanks for the input so far guys, interesting opinions.

 

As things stand I have an accurate .223 in 1:9 twist and Ive been nothing short of amazed to be honest at the levels of accuracy I can achieve out to 300yds or a touch more. Gbal has spoken in the past about 90% kill ratios, I might not be quite there but in sensible conditions Im not that far away I would guess on the likes of crows and rabbits. Looking at the data it would seem that running a 204 or 20Prac at around factory load speeds would give me quite an improvement over the current ballistics which is 55gr SBK at a leisurely 2950fps. The gun shoots 40gr vmax very well and I guess it will go a bit heavier than 55gr.

 

The thing that is really bugging my is recoil which although minimal is enough for me to lose the sight picture at times and that isn't what I want. I accept this has to happen in the calibers above small varmint rifle but I would really like a lighter rifle than I have that is very precise out to say 300 that allows me to see the strikes every time at 24x mag, does this even exist? If it does then I need to find it and then I can also go 6mmBR for deer and the longer stuff and accept the recoil as a trade off for extended range.

 

None of my friends shoot this kind of stuff so Im really struggling to try the likes of .17 Rem or 204 Ruger 20 Tac/Prac. I read so much about these calibers having no recoil but Im sure they do, its just the extent of it and how I find it personally that is the key to my decisions. If anyone reading this can offer me an afternoon on the gongs with those kind of calibers Im thinking about I would be happy to pay for the ammo and reciprocate with a nights lamping on some very good rabbit ground.

[gbal]

Al,here's the dope for 300y,5mph wind all commercial loads,so comparable and not hot:

 

223 40 @ 3800 5.5/6 inches rel recoil .8

204 32@ 4030 4.7/5.3 .6

17 25@4040 5/5.8 .45

 

the 20 prac will be in there,close to 204,but is a custom chambering job.

 

I can't see a hoots worth of difference in any field use performance - and individual same cartridge rifles can differ this much via mv differences(let alone barrel length).

 

The 17 is virtually recoil free,as per the scope jump at 24x test. The 223 is pretty good,moves a twitch .

The 17 is closest to it's limit at 300y.The 223 has far more bullet weight choices.

Remember to equalise rifle weight-or add a little,then recoil differences vanish.

The performance step up from these-if desired- is the 22BR class.Better yet,6mm.

g

[Sherlock]

The performance step up from these-if desired- is the 22BR class.Better yet,6mm.

 

 

 

HI Gbal.

 

Just wondered about that last statement " Better yet,6mm"

 

I have owned a 22.250 with a tighter twist , and shot with a 22 BR using 75 & 80 grn Amax bullets.

 

Having owned two 6mmbr's , and three 243's. I must say my experience is completely the opposite.

 

The better performance comes from the larger cased 22 cals over the 6mm's I have owned.

 

 

For example.(velocity taken from my own rifles} wind 10 mph full value - Range 600 yrds

 

• 6mBR - Bullet - 105 grn Amax - Velocity - 2760 fps - Drop - 87.7 Drift - 28.4
• 243 - Bullet - 105 grn Amax - Velocity - 3030 fps - Drop - 70.2 Drift - 24.6
• 22.250 - Bullet - 80 grn Amax - Velocity - 3250 fps - Drop - 60.8 Drift - 24.0

With the greatest of respect - I wondered why you think the 6mms are better performers ???

 

 

Kindest regards

 

S

[gbal]

Sherlock,

I did say 22BR ( inc 22/250) class steps up from the 224 clones

There aren't many serious long range varminters who put the 6mms below the 22/250.

Let's have a look why-comparing almost like with like,since you give 22/250 with 80,obviously a custom number-OK): staying with 600y,10mph wind we have:

 

22/250 80@ 3250 60.8/24 your data

 

243 85 @ 3330 50/28

 

6 rem 80@3400 57/31

 

 

243 WSSM 95@3150 63/30

240 wm 85 @ 3500 51/28

243 Laz 85@ 3620 50/28

 

These 6mm are commercial loads,not 'heated' at all.Energy is 800+ft lb.What is the 22/250 energy?

80 grain would trim these data -I can't comment on your 22/250 velocity.

The 243 (or 6rem are pretty much over the counter,no fuss at all,which is relevant to some.) 6

 

As is,there is not a lot in it,granted.....but we have hardly exploited the 6mm above-in the above commercial load cartridges,and not even touched on the 'big sixes' like 6-284.

 

You can push 224 bullets-the 224 Clark (257Roberts necked-cf 6rem,7x57 necked) will go 80 @3500,but is awful hard on barrels .

The 6-284 will be therabouts,and the 6 Improved will go 85@ 3600,as will a hot Weatherby. How about a 6-68 -though that's probably certifiable (the 6.5x68 Banshee gives 85@4000).

 

Another take on this is to check how many 6mms are used in 300m cism (6BR dominates) and 600y shooting-where not restricted-more.iI think than 224s.(good though the 223 can be -as a service cartridge in Xcourse,the 6xc etc have rather taken over.)

 

Now there are other considerations-eg rifle choice,costs (barrels may be consumable,but preferably slowly),and just plain shootabiity,maybe without custom dies etc.

The 6BR and 243 do quite well on these,and both have extended range capability (the 6PPC is the accuracy king,but not at 600y+in a breeze,perhaps.

 

I lusted mightily after a 22 -243 Middlestead once upon a studenthood,but light 6mm bullets have overtaken it. It is instructive perhaps to look at the 22/250 and 243 with 55g bullets-as a like to like comparison,again 600y,commercial-any 'improving' could be done to either:

 

22/250 55 Nosler BC.268 @3670 60/42

243 Nosler 55 BC.277 @3850 52/38

 

Again,close-would the 243 'improve' more than 22/250 -I don't know-I suspect the 6rem might do so,as it's a bigger case....

 

OK,realistically 600 is too far for any of these,in any wind more than a puff occasionally.The 6s have more powder capacity to use heavier bullets to reduce wind drift,and just better BCs,so I don't see any liklihood they will be surpassed by the 224s.

 

Interesting though. An extra hundred fps does not make much difference (so why pay the price?) Can't see any case for the 224 as 'more accurate/precision' either,and that matters a lot,we don't want to be whizzzzing just past..... :-)

 

gbal

[Sherlock]

. It is instructive perhaps to look at the 22/250 and 243 with 55g bullets-as a like to like comparison,again 600y,commercial-any 'improving' could be done to either:

 

22/250 55 Nosler BC.268 @3670 60/42

243 Nosler 55 BC.277 @3850 52/38

 

 

Hi Gbal.

Thanks for taking the time to give such a full reply.

 

Unfortunately the figures you give above - just don't stack up.. Simply because your using the bullet manufacturers BC figures which are often well overstated.

 

For example.

If you look at Noslers BC ( or should I say BS) figure for their 55 grn BT - they state 0.268.. Not in a million years

The 58 grn Vmax ( BT) states a BC of 0. 250. Brian Litz independently measured it at 0.238. The Nosler will be less than that.

 

See below

 

58 grn Vmax - Stated BC 0.250 - Litz G1 BC - 0.238 - Overestimated 5.04 (%)

 

Nosler 55 grn bullets have true BC of 0230 , That's the problem with quoting from Google -- the figures used often aren't reliable. Below is a quote from Mr Litz regarding Nosler BT bullets

 

The Nosler Ballistic Tip bullet are the most overestimated of all the designs considered in this study, had a 6.33% average overestimate.

 

To further investigate the possibility that Nosler is generating their BCs for marketing purposes rather than to best inform the shooter regarding ballistic performance.

 

 

Now compare the 22.250 shooting a 52 grain Amax at 3850 fps - the true BC of this bullet is 02.80

 

52grn Amax - Stated BC 0.247 - Litz G1 BC - 0.280 - Underestimated 3.78 (%)

Run the figures now and you will see a totally different picture. And in the field when I run my 22.250 directly against me 243 - the smaller cal was the real performer at 500 yrds.

 

Last point, you certainly can look at some of the larger 6 mm wild cats or improved calibre and, indeed they would be better performers. However I am talking about a factory rifle 22.250 with no case necking or faffing.

 

 

Regards

S

[gbal]

300y 600y 1000y drop/drift 10mph,inches

 

223 80 Sierra MK 2900 12/7 82/30 348/101

 

223AI " 2990 11/6 76/29 324/96

 

22BR " 3150 9/6 68/27 348/101

 

22/250 " 3200 9/6 65/26 274/88

 

6BR 105 Berger 2970 11/5 73/22 286/71

 

243win 115 DTAC 3120 9/4 61/18 232/57

 

 

80SMK BC .42;Berger 105 BC .535; 115 DTAC BC .585. 70F,1000' alt.

 

The above data are from Accurate Shooter site,.243 cartridge.

There is a very clear graph of the data too.

The two 6mms are clearly superior,from 200y and increasingly so with distance.This confirms the relative advantage of the 243 for commercial loads from some 41 makes,and 29 22/250 makes-in so far as comparisons there are possible.

 

"Superior" means better drop and drift,acknowledging that drop is not the more important,as gravity is a constant,distance is accurately measurable with a laser,and can be dialled in (and indeed the number of clicks is not greatly different-for 4" at 600y,eg.Windage is much more the varminters problem,as it is not really measurable accurately,so an 8" reduction (26 to 18) is worthwhile.

Accuracy is more an individual rifle issue,but there is no compelling evidence for the 6mms to be less accurate at 600y (and plenty that they are superior from competition preferences.)

 

My earlier data showed small but consistent advantages for 243,and even more for the other 6mms.

 

Sherlock,let me take up some of your points,although they either ignore most of the data,or give none,or are somewhat misguided as a defence of the 22/250-in itself a very fine varminting cartridge.

 

I note that you agree that the 'larger 6mms would be better performers",and that you are more concerned with the 'factory 22/250-no case turning or faffing".

OK-my quoting commercial loadings is very much in that spirit,as near like to like as possible.You don't give your 22/250 twist,but for 80g bullets,it must be at least 1/8,which I believe is available in the Savage rifle (though the vast majority of factory 22/250s will be slower. You must therefore allow the fast twist 243 as well,and that simply gives more improvement.

There are very few ,if any exceptions to the generalisation:better performance comes from more capacity/velocity,higher BC bullets,and improved case efficiency.The 243/6mm cartridges win over the 224s on all three-case capacity is greater,BCs are higher;efficiency is at least the equal,usually better.(indeed if we look at the 'efficient' designs,the PPC and BR,in each case it is the 6mm not 224 cartridge that excels in accuracy and range. How many long range records are set by the 22BR,or Bench Rest competitions won by the 22PPC,compared to their 6mm superiors?)

 

I accept your general point that manufacturers can be somewhat economical with all the ruth about BC.There are at least seven different mathematical models for different bullet shapes (put simply),and it is naughty/confusing if there is no consistency between bullet makers.Bryan Litz has done much to clarify here.We should also remember that BC can/does vary with velocity.It may be that Nosler BCs are 5% high....but that is precisely why I compared two Nosler BT bullets in 22 and 243-ANY BC issues will be as near as we can estimate,the same between them.So the data remain comparable,if slightly less 'good'-the decrement will be less than 5%,of course,but the fundamental remains,like is compared to like (we cant have the same bullet exactly,as calibre differs),and the 243 is a bit better.

This superiority is consistent in commercial SAAMI loadings,though not always large.It is large with the best available 243 bullets,the DTacs.No faffing either. So your BC point really does not apply-indeed the figures you supply,simply make the 22/250 bullet less impressive,though you omit to consider the 243 one.

Note the table I began with uses the same Sierra 80g for the 224s,but of course the heavier 6mm bullets-I doubt that the berger BC is much out,as you correctly accept Bryan Litz analysis.

It's unfortunate that in getting into this,you ignore all the other data given,including the regular 243,which is a bit better than 22/250 consistently-though not as dramatically as the 243 with Dtacs!

 

I note too,that you do not give any data for your 243,and simply state 'in the field,when i run my 22/250 directly against me 243-the smaller calibreis the real performer at 500y".

Well,of course it is possible to run a top 22/250 against a mediocre 243,and find the 22/250 better.But toe to toe,in comparable rifles etc,there is a small consistent superiority in favour of the 243-even more so the other 6mms-and with the best ,the 243 wins hands down,or up,or miscellaneously located!

 

Interesting though,as I said,the ball game has changed with new bullets,in both calibres,and fast twists.

But since both calibres can benefit,we are back to the fundamental bare necessities-if you want better ballistic performance,you need more velocity,better BC,maybe efficiency...and of course accuracy.

Mostly,we don't need them-and there is a small price to pay in £costs,recoil etc.

The 22/250 is a very fine "Varminter"-ever since it was so copyrighted by Gebby in 1965,more or less when the great Warren Page championed the 243. The 22/250 was understandable helped by the UK interpretation of 'good reason to posses' for varminting,but that never was a ballistic advantage.

We are fortunate to have both,and it's good to see both improving,without "faff',at that.Some like 'faff' of course,but that's the joy of choice.

I hope you continue to enjoy your 22/250.It has been interesting indeed to see what the new heavies do,just as they did for the 223,....and of course,for the 243,keeping it ,and the 6mms ,ahead..?

 

atb,and enjoy

 

g

[Sherlock]

Sherlock,let me take up some of your points,although they either ignore most of the data,or give none,or are somewhat misguided as a defence of the 22/250-in itself a very fine varminting cartridge.

 

I note that you agree that the 'larger 6mms would be better performers",and that you are more concerned with the 'factory 22/250-no case turning or faffing".

 

I note too,that you do not give any data for your 243,and simply state 'in the field,when i run my 22/250 directly against me 243-the smaller calibreis the real performer at 500y".

Well,of course it is possible to run a top 22/250 against a mediocre 243,and find the 22/250 better.But toe to toe,in comparable rifles etc,there is a small consistent superiority in favour of the 243-even more so the other 6mms-and with the best ,the 243 wins hands down,or up,or miscellaneously located!

 

 

 

 

 

Hi GB

You state I give no data - you obviously missed it in my post , So here it is again taken form owning and running the following cals.

 

• Two 243 Tikka Supervarmints ( 10 twist)
• one semi custom 243 with 8 twist Truefite barrel
• Two 6mbr's with 8 Twist custom barrels
• Semi custom 22.250 with 9 twist barrel

 

As you can see the once you marry a 22.250 , or one of the larger case 22 cal ( 220 swift or 22BR ect ) with high BC bullets - the 22.250 not only keeps up with a 6mm cal - but actually surpasses it

NOTE it has 27 inch less drop than my 6BR and 10 less than 243 - and better on drift than both the 6 mms at 600 yrds.

• 6mBR - Bullet - 105 grn Amax - Velocity - 2760 fps - Drop - 87.7 Drift - 28.4
• 243 - Bullet - 105 grn Amax - Velocity - 3030 fps - Drop - 70.2 Drift - 24.6
• 22.250 - Bullet - 80 grn Amax - Velocity - 3250 fps - Drop - 60.8 Drift - 24.0

I am not blindly defending my choice of calibre as you so often see on forums - in fact I don't have a 22.250 in my cabinet at this moment. But I am speaking from experience of using and varminting with them. May I ask I you have ever owned a 22.250 ( or similar ) and ran 75 / 80 grn Amax ? .

 

As you see from my history of rifles listed above , I am a 6mm cal fan and spent thousands of pounds on the cals. But in my experience with the 22 cal launching a high BC Amax it gave the better performance in the mid ranges ( out to 600 yrds).

 

Obviously you can choose to lob a 115 grn DTac - and I could counter that by generating statistics using a 90 grn VLD ( BC 0.551) in the 22.250... - neither of these bullet I have any experience with , or interest in TBH ,,,Furthermore it seems an exercise in pointlessness to go into a BC arms race.

 

The problem as far as varminting goes , that nearly all of the high BC bullets are designed for target use and don't expand on impact. This is a very important factor which doesn't get mentioned when quoting from the great saint Exbal .

 

Therefore are you going to shoot a bullet like a Dtac / or 107 SMK at a rabbit knowing that it is likely to pass through and wound.? NOT FOR ME. This is why most people use Amax because you get clean kills and a decent BC.

 

What I loved about my former 22.250 - was it fired a 75 gr Amax at 3360 fps - this meant I could use it as a point and squirt rifle for foxing without developing an other load. It used less powder than my 243's and had less recoil than either the 243 or 6BR shooting a similar BC bullet.

 

Good discussion

 

S

[gbal]

Sherlock,more thanks-this is interesting and complex....The one thing I'm pretty clear about is that I was right to want a Middlestead 40 years ago. It would be even better now (as are the 224s with bullets heavier than 60g,and the 243 with 105 and esp 115 bullets).

I still think there is nothing so far to change the potential advantage of considerably more powder in the 243-the serious attempts to improve the 22/250 (6xc) have been to increase capacity,though still a way short of 243. 6xc of course I claim for the 6mm club!

We will get confounded by BC- I don't think it is currently easy/possible to match 224/6mm very closely.

I note your data on 243/6BR/22-250-but the two 6mms get 105 bullets,and the 22/250 gets 80...I understand the issue-there are not any 80g varmint 6mm bullets with good BC,and if we try to use same make/design,then the only 6 Amax is the105 -so the best from that attempt is a 105 (BC.5) 243,and an 80(BC45) 22/250....there isn't much in that for drift.

We could substitute 87g Vmax (.4) for the 243...but that does not sound like a winner,if we keep to SAAMI.

 

The BC issue is a pain-not only do makers use different G designs,even Berger(BL) doesn't publish some of the BCs for it's varmint bullets.I don't trust ballistic programs-a guide for the wise,a mistake for the unwary! Sierra ay leas give three BCs for three velocity ranges (224 77g drops from .372 over 3000 to .3 under 1700;and 243 107 from .48 over 2750 to .4 under 1700) ....do ballistics programs compute this...by 500y some bullets are well down the velocity ranges! No one seems to acknowledge this.

I did argue,and still do,that we can control for 'irregularities' in BC by comparing bullets from the same maker/design hence my choice of Nosler 55 in both 22/250 and 243,which does show a small advantage for the 243...as one might expect from more capacity,better BC and equivalent design.I'd expect that small advantage to be fairly consistent,but it seems we can't really test it.....until we get 243 80g Amax,to run alongside the 80g Amax 224 !!

 

I absolutely take your point on terminal effectiveness on ,here,rabbits.I was making the general point that 6mm is superior,but the basis -I think absolutely overwhelmiing-was in target shooting.

I just don't know how non varmint bullets would perform,but I absolutely agree that humane terminal performance is quite the most important consideration. Edible would be desireable. I have not used heavy A max eiher. I do wonder if anyone can provide some field experiences on this (not fox,I think we have to consider species by species). I rather think that 500y is pushing distance too,but lets keep to that,as almost any combination will be effective to 350 at least.(pushing distance,because-as a current post shows,a 2mph wind error means a miss on magpies at just 300.Rabbit have a wider critical hit zone,of course!)

 

OK-though definitive data across the range of bullets/distances yet eludes us-maybe someone can run a program-I don't see much in it,between the best 22/250 and current 243 bullets,strictly as crow/rabbit rifles at distance. The 22/250 may well have caught up,just about....we shall see.(of course there is a bit more in the 6mm cupboard.)

I'd imagine it is such a close run thing,that individual rifles (did anyone mention barrel length?) and the relative 'faff'/improvement/hot potentials of each calibre would come into play.......?

 

One point,separate really,does anyone have experience of the performance of 243 calibre with fast twist for the heavies 107/115, but using light(er) bullets....will they stabilise with the fast twist.The 243 would indeed be a flexible number if it could.

Then the Middlestead might need rebarelling.

 

Dream on.

 

g