midwesthunter
Well-Known Member
For deer and antelope. I can't really see a advantage of one or the other? Is there any?
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
243 or 25-06
- Thread starter midwesthunter
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Outlaw6.0
Well-Known Member
Sure, If you go 243 you will get:
Short Action= less weight+faster bolt manipulation
WAY better bullet selection
WAY better Ballistic coefficient options
Lapua Brass
Less Recoil
With the 25-06 you will get:
Heavier bullets with a poor BC
(115 VLD will net you all of .466)
A little more poop on the receiving end (moderate range).
A higher cross sectional area
Might net more velocity
If you are limiting the game size up to Deer & 'lopes only, I have got to vote 243, flat out, hands down winner IMHO. If you intend to throw heavier critters in to the mix (elk) I would probably vote 25-06 for more bullet weight (a whopping 5grains) & diameter.
The 6mm bore size is getting a LOT more attention than the quarterbore, which means better component selection.
t
Short Action= less weight+faster bolt manipulation
WAY better bullet selection
WAY better Ballistic coefficient options
Lapua Brass
Less Recoil
With the 25-06 you will get:
Heavier bullets with a poor BC
(115 VLD will net you all of .466)A little more poop on the receiving end (moderate range).
A higher cross sectional area
Might net more velocity
If you are limiting the game size up to Deer & 'lopes only, I have got to vote 243, flat out, hands down winner IMHO. If you intend to throw heavier critters in to the mix (elk) I would probably vote 25-06 for more bullet weight (a whopping 5grains) & diameter.
The 6mm bore size is getting a LOT more attention than the quarterbore, which means better component selection.
t
6 of one 1/2 dozen of the other.
Have 4 243s and 2 25-06s and Outlaw preaty much nailed it.
If I was building a long action-long barreled gun the 25-06 might get the nod for deer/goats but the 243 has proven to be a favorite for varmints.
Have found the 243 easier to tune and all 4 243s will outgroup the 25-06 dispite more work being put into the 25-06s.
Have 4 243s and 2 25-06s and Outlaw preaty much nailed it.
If I was building a long action-long barreled gun the 25-06 might get the nod for deer/goats but the 243 has proven to be a favorite for varmints.
Have found the 243 easier to tune and all 4 243s will outgroup the 25-06 dispite more work being put into the 25-06s.
midwesthunter
Well-Known Member
Ya I have a couple of each, trying to narrow down the amount of guns I have or duplicates anyways. Getting bad when looking for a specific one, and find others you forgot you had. Guess thats a good problem though. I also tend to shoot yotes with them as well.
Sure, If you go 243 you will get:
Short Action= less weight+faster bolt manipulation
WAY better bullet selection
WAY better Ballistic coefficient options
Lapua Brass
Less Recoil
With the 25-06 you will get:
Heavier bullets with a poor BC
A little more poop on the receiving end (moderate range).
A higher cross sectional area
Might net more velocity
If you are limiting the game size up to Deer & 'lopes only, I have got to vote 243, flat out, hands down winner IMHO. If you intend to throw heavier critters in to the mix (elk) I would probably vote 25-06 for more bullet weight (a whopping 5grains) & diameter.
The 6mm bore size is getting a LOT more attention than the quarterbore, which means better component selection.
t
I own both. I'd go for the 243 due to bullet and brass selection if you are sticking with deer and antelope. IMHO the 1 in 10" twist of most 25-06 rifles is on the hairy edge of stabalizing the 117 grain or 110 grain bullets that you'd use. I've made my 25-06 a varmit rifle only because of this.
Until berger gives us a real 25 cal slug id say 243. A 6mm 115 will kill better than a 25 115-120. I have both and my 6-284 with 115 bergers makes a 115 gr 25 look like a kiddys gun.
BC and SD of 25 cal is pathetic and makes it a waste of good brass. Same thing with the 270...just no real bullets. Now that berger has the 170gr 270 maybe they will give us a 130gr 25.
BC and SD of 25 cal is pathetic and makes it a waste of good brass. Same thing with the 270...just no real bullets. Now that berger has the 170gr 270 maybe they will give us a 130gr 25.
My latest Nosler manual, version 7 ,shows for the 25-06 a velocity of 3361fps with a nosler 100 grain ballistic tip.That bullet shows to have b.c. of.393.In .243, the 100grain nosler bullet shows a velocity of 3144fps and a b.c of.384. To me those numbers dont lie. The extra 200 fps is a big deal to me. I dont use Berger bullets so I cant speak for or against what some of the other guys are saying about them. I have used 25-06 with much success on whitetail. I think it is the more versatile round of the two. Factory ammo is not as cheap or as easy to find for the 25-06 , but its not a deal breaker IMHO.
This is LRH so I assume everyone reloads or they would not ask the question here. Factory ammo is not LRH suitable. 500 yds yes but that is still short range.
Actually those numbers obviously lie. You evidently picked two different bullets for your comparism. I am thinking it wasnt intentional so here goes. You cant have a bc of a higher number with the same weight and form factor in a larger caliber. Its impossible. If the two bullets have the same shape the smaller diameter will have a higher bc.
If you compared apples to apples the 243 pastes the 06 due to bullet selection alone. If you tie any gun to 1 bullet its not real anyway. Whos gonna shoot a .384 bc in a 6mm anyway?
I am a deer hunter not a ballistic specialist . I consider 400 yards a long shot. I'm not sure it's fair to the animal to shoot at any distance further. That's just my 2cents. As for the bullet comparison I did compare a .243 partition to a .25 ballistic tip. Nosler doesn't offer a 100 grain BT in .243. The 100 gr PT in .243 does have a higher BC than the .25 100 gr PT. There is however still a 200 fps difference in 25-06 over the 243. Like I have said before , speed matters to me. I do like the .243 though. If I did more target shooting I would probably have one. I actually do have a .243 put back for my 3 yr old son so I guess I will be reloading for it in about 3 yrs.
At 400 yards the .25 100NBT is a great bullet and works well, but the OP is not being helped with that info, he is asking about longer range. Stick a 105 A-Max in the the 243 with a .500 BC and see what happens. Go to a 115 and watch it eat the .25s lunch.
tRight but you are posting on a LRH website posting about LRH. 400 is uhh how do I put this...close. When you compared the two bullets you didnt realize that the 6mm bullet if it was the same would pound the 25 even with 200 more fps. FPS does matter just not as much as bc past 400. The 25 is a fine short range gun and if anyone ever whoops up some real bullets itll be a fine LR gun. At the moment its not but that is my OPINION and I consider LR to start at 880 so take it with a grain of salt.
BKKNUP can I ask you a question? And Im not trying to be mean its an honest question.
Why are you on a website called long range hunting when you consider 400 to be past the limit of effectiveness?
Do you realize that people kill deer at 3 times that distance with absolute regularity in the wind? Im not bustin on you here I just have noticed that many of the members now seem to not have any concept of what we do on here. Its frustrating to have good advice countered by someone who has never even done what hes posting about. If you guys were here to learn I could see that but it seems as if many are just bored and wanna tell everyone its ok to shoot a grizzly at 1200yds with a 223 because they killed a deer with one out of a treestand at 15 ft.
And this isnt directed at you, you missed a bc no big deal, but there are much worse on here at times.
I dont mean anything bad by this I just want to understand the mindset of you guys so that I can figure out why guys who never shoot past 400 and dont plan on it are on here giving advice. I just dont understand I guess.
Why are you on a website called long range hunting when you consider 400 to be past the limit of effectiveness?
Do you realize that people kill deer at 3 times that distance with absolute regularity in the wind? Im not bustin on you here I just have noticed that many of the members now seem to not have any concept of what we do on here. Its frustrating to have good advice countered by someone who has never even done what hes posting about. If you guys were here to learn I could see that but it seems as if many are just bored and wanna tell everyone its ok to shoot a grizzly at 1200yds with a 223 because they killed a deer with one out of a treestand at 15 ft.
And this isnt directed at you, you missed a bc no big deal, but there are much worse on here at times.
I dont mean anything bad by this I just want to understand the mindset of you guys so that I can figure out why guys who never shoot past 400 and dont plan on it are on here giving advice. I just dont understand I guess.
