if you have a scope that compensates for drop there is no downside to the 250. the only downside to the 225 is its not gonna hit as hard as the 250. i say 250 all the way. yould you rather be hit with a grape or a coconut?? I pick grape so shoot the elk with the coconut
Get a JOB! I already feed the bears, I dont need to feed you too!
" Real elk guns start with the number 3 or bigger and blow two holes, one in and one out." - My Dad
Started using the 338 RUM in 07 with some success, taking elk, mulies and my Dall ram with the 225gr AB. Ranges 350-700 yds. In 08 I switched to the 250 gr AB and never looked back my Rem loves them. I've taken two bulls, a cow and two mulies at ranges 300-600 yds.
Last years bull in NM--374 yds w/250 AB in front of 91 grs RL-25. DRT.
With your twist and barrel length I think I would try the 250's. Mine shows about 200 fps difference between the bullets at the muzzle. On several occasions I have seen complete bullet failure with the 225's. Nothing remaining but small pieces of lead and jacket material. I will not shoot them again. Maybe the 250 will hold together better. When I get catastrophic bullet failure I am immediately off to something else. All the BC in the world is not worth a lost animal. That is why the Barnes TSX bullets are so attractive. They never fail and retain 95+% of there weight. All three bullets completely failed on my elk this year at 740 yards with the 225 AB with a muzzle velocity of 3264 fps. This was out of a 338 ultramag.
Predictions are difficult, especially when they involve the future