View Full Version : Springbok rifle .243 vs 22.250
Iam looking to pick up a flat shooting rifle for springbok hunting as the 30.06 is not working out well esp when I cant get the range finder to lock on.
Now the .243 is very popular but the ballistics of the 22.250 look very impressive on paper but the projectile looks abit light?
Any one out there used the 22.250 much and can give insight into ballistic performance i.e is it very suseptable to wind deviation and what it the bullt effect like???
01-03-10, 08:26 AM
I would rather go for the .243, the .22-250 is as you said very impressive on paper but in my opinion to light and wind sensitive, the .243 would have much more applications.
01-03-10, 08:34 AM
Hey Roger, I have a .308 loaded at 110gr and is very close to a .243 with the setup. Seen a .22-250 in action but think that you have a better chance for a decent shot with the .243 in adverse weather or if you strike bone.
Ps. What is your 30-06 loaded at? My brother has one loaded at 165-180gr and it is impressive with lots of energy.
Thanks for the in put gents but am hoping for some commentary form a 22.250 owner or hopefully some one who has owned both weapons and can give a end users comparrison.
Must admit Iam leaning way over towards the .243 but I wouldnt mind hearing some feed back about the 22.250 out of interest.
01-03-10, 09:11 AM
I have a .223 and .243 - if no wind, both are brilliant
If the wind is blowing, both are crap - If strong winds are bothering I use the .300WM
.22-250 launches a 55GR projectile, .243 launches 85 - 100GR - keep that in mind. .243 can be used successfully on Blesbuck as well
Both have light recoil, both very nice rifles and should serve you well
Many farmers do not allow you to hunt with the .22 centre fires though, they prefer the .243 as a minimum caliber...
Ja makes sense Christo, had a look at the ballistic tables at http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_trajectory_table.htm and it seems the difference in bullet drop and speed between the .243 85gr and the 22.250 55gr at 200yds are not far apart so combined with the obvious vesatility of the .243 it seems the wiser choice would be the .243.
Any one got .243 Sako lying around?
01-03-10, 10:48 AM
You'll be happy with it
Phone NSN guns in Silverton, they have loads of used rifles, and try VLT in Queenswood as well
Will do ..got my 30.06 from VLT and NSN is a stones throw from my house.
The 22250 is very light, soi it only works on a very accurate shooting and mostly headshots. I think the 243 is better. On windy shots I use my 7mm rem mag and think that is more versitile
01-03-10, 11:50 AM
I graduated through a .243, .223, .222, .25-06 and .22-250 with culling operations. I hated all of them. In anything stronger than 12km/h wind you are guaranteed problems, and barrels do not last when shooting that much. That is why I went with the .270 and never looked back.
Also contact Classic Arms in Witbank, they have stacks of used rifles, 012 656 2923. Limpopo Arms in Boksburg also have plenty used rifles in stock. Camdix in Krugersdorp, 011 660 2398. Craig Monk at Blunderbuss 011 867 0370.
Will check those places out thanks,
I was wondering about the longevity of the barrel at those high pressures but you have confirmed my suspision Engel!....oh ja have seen a guy shoot springbok with a .270 but it made such a mess of that little animals shoulder that there was not much left for the pot after both shoulders where reduced to a red gelitin mass that had to be discarded but perhaps he was using the wrong ammo?? I always try shoot springbok with a high neck shot a they are fairly brittle but wanna save as much meat as possible
Not really on the look out for a versatile caliber as I have that in the 30.06 ...now just want a good flat shooter but will have a look at the 7mm rem mag ballistics.
Thanks for the input.
I love this thread. It follows my train of thought when I get the itch to get another rifle.
I would love a lighter 22 hornet, 222 or 243 - Reason - well - it will be nice to have light caliber to shoot at dogs and jackals.
But then I ask why cant I shoot dogs and jackals with the 270? - its shot plenty before. The cost of loading all bullets will be almost the same.
So do I really need a 222? - NO! - Do I want one? YES!
The argument goes full circle. and you realize that you are better off with what you got, just adapt your loads for different purpose.
To answer your question, you will know which rifle you really want. Go get it! You can justify it later.
02-03-10, 07:01 AM
I load my .270 with 130gr bullets of best possible construction for Springbok and meat damage is minimal.
But I once took the wrong ammo along for the job and used what I took along, Swift Scirocco out a .270 drops the largest Springbok as if hit by lightning.
However, it shoots a hole through a Springbok that you can see the daylight on the other side.
It is guaranteed to shoot anything duiker - smaller that everything from below the head, all the way to the ends of the fillets are not even fit for dog food.
Yes, using the correct bullets for the application is critical.
I have a 22-250 which became SWAMBO's hunting rifle when I bought my 7x64. I've shot various species at up to 300m with the 22-250, and have never lost anything. One thing that you must consider is the impact velocity of the 22-250. It hits hard! very hard!
02-03-10, 07:16 AM
7x64mm Brenneke is excellent caliber, and very close in performance to the .270Win and the .280Rem.
the 22250 shoots very flat cos it runs at about 3800 to 4200fps. So that helps a lot on inaccurate distancing from the hunter and takes almost anything down on a head shot. The velocity burst about every vessel in the head and thus the success on taking game. Because hydrostatics come into play penetration is very bad due to light bullet and high speed.
Its a caliber good for varminting and small game. its to me a dont need but want. My min requirement on that will be good bullbarrel with a 22X scope with auto ranging.....
02-03-10, 07:47 AM
.... I'd rather not stray to far of the topic before something gets deleted.
Hydrostatic shock has about the same amount truth in it as a reliable Landrover. Research the topic in depth and you will also come to the point where you cannot support the concept of Hydrostatic shock. Having had the opportunity to hunt in the Klaserie for many years as guide and 1st hand hunting I've witnessed all but Rhino hunted and witnessed the capacity of a myriad of calibers.
What does lead to kills every time and allows you to walk up to a dead animal; and really dead not the kind that starts kicking when it reaches the skinning shed or tries to jump of the back of the Landcruiser, is a well constructed bullet of sufficient ballistic coefficient through an "immediate for live" organ.
What I am getting at is that the .22-250 lacks sufficient BC and therefore is only reliable for penetration with quality constructed bullets that is not destroyed by it's velocity. An extreme example of a bullet with tremendous BC and mind blowing speed is the .416Barret, and for this bullet to do it's job they are constructed in many cases from solid copper.
When culling with a light weight speed freak like the .22-250 placing that bullet right in the ear is even more important. I've seen a little 45gr bullet ricochet of the skull of a black wildebeest when the angle was wrong.
Shooting a blesbuck with a .22-250 at 386m with a .22-250 the energy was so little that the animal did not give any indication that it was hit and all believed it was a miss, it just kept walking only to after about another 100m lying down. If it was not kept in sight by one of the culling team that would have been a lost animal.
Do not misunderstand, the .22-250 has it's place in a gun collection. But in my discriminating opinionated opinion not as a hunting rifle. I have just seen them fail too many times in the hands of an average hunter.
Before spending $ try 125gr on 30.06
Great input gents much appreciated...its been aninteresting read!!!!!
Boerki...I attended a reloading coures a few years ago and decided that as I dont have the time to take it seriously the way it should be done I never got into reloading and doubt that I ever will.....My "Girls" Wife, Daughter and Landcruiser and hunting, running ect keep me busy enough.
I read a good article in the Magnum about a guy who was reloading 110gr in a 30.06 and getting very flat results with awsome velocities but ja thats also debateable whether that barrel was designed to with stand those pressures.....plus re-zeroing the scope or more than likely having to change the scope to another reticle to accomodate a totally different trijectory is to much pt for me......I aim to have 3 rifles in my safe some day :30.06, .243 and 458Lott(when I can afford to shoot some thing with it some day) but that 22.250 is still callin me like BUGS said above "ek will hom he want ek will hom he!!!!"
For now the .243
02-03-10, 08:01 PM
Hi Roger T..... I have shot litraly Thousands of Springbuck .... The 22.250 past 150m is on the lower end of hitting power, the optimum weight would be a 55gr Bullet at 3800 - 4000fps ...... at 100m you blow a hole the size of a rugby ball through the sholder and render much of the meat useless, at 150 the velocity drops back but at this range you start loosing momentum and it becomes a "woonder" The 243 with an 80gr bullett is a much better bet but still causes damage ..... but will carry you to 250m BUT BE CAREFULL ...... Also if you are one of these "KOP SKOOT" manne then be prepared to pay for many wounded animals and become verry unpopular..... the 243 and 22.250 were both designed as varminters . You have a 30.06 ... get to know it ... get a decent range finder......... and know the rifle balistics ....You will be surprised what it can do .... I now carry a 375 when hunting with clients and have got to know the balistics and use a reasonable range finder and any thing out to 300m is in serious danger...... But only when needed I try to restrict my clients to 150 max ...
With your 30.06 with a good 150 - 180 gr bullet with zero at 200m you will be +-7" lower at 300m and 1,5" high at 100M so that puts your bullet in an A5 page at any distance up-to 300m......I have a 243, 22.250, 7mm rem mag, 375H&H, 9,3x74R Double, 416 rigby .... so I guess I would know these cartridges .......Also stay away from the lighter bullets in the 30.06 it was designed around a 180gr and the length is crytical for stabilisation in that specific twist.... yst you can get a screamer... but it has no BC or sectional density and is !!@# ...
PS .... Its my Job as well
.... the 243 and 22.250 were both designed as varminters .
This says it all.
agree. We use to hunt in the kalahari where dr Voges only shot with a 243. That was gemsbuck and springbuck. They shot a barrel out and had it replaced. Later he went to a 300h&h and admitted the 243 was a boderline calibre. I still find it ok on all animals up to 50kg.
Why are the 22 Centrefire & 6mm(243) proponents so quiet? ???
Duely note Hawkeye,
Perhaps I do need to upgrade my Leopold range finder as I get really stuck when it wont lock on thus the 7' bullet drop of the 150gr 30.06 at 300m is very unforgiving ja I use the 150 grain (proam) as you mentioned and its awsome on the range out to 400m I can hit an A4 page but on the flat plains when there is no abument or rock or bushes to get a range it gets difficult thus I thought a flat shooter would help? I dont do head shots but I do got for the neck as ouma loves the "springbok Blad" in the oven so I try not to shoot it away.
I dare say I have taken animals at 300-350m but only after I have practised at those distances on the range....so I think I know my rifle but I you are right I need a new range finder wooohooo shopping time hahaha
03-03-10, 11:49 AM
Why are the 22 Centrefire & 6mm(243) proponents so quiet? ???
No reason to comment further - he has made up his mind on the .243 - either choice is a good choice
No need for me to justify using the .223 and .243, nor any need from my side to discourage their use - they have their pros and cons and Roger is aware of them
These small calibers have their place - I said it before and will say it again, a well placed bullet from a smalled caliber is better than a poorly palced bullet from a cannon...
03-03-10, 02:01 PM
You right Christo a well placed shot is the shot that counts no matter what calibre you use. I have hunted many a kudu with my fathers 6mm Musgrave and had many one shot kills with well placed vitals shots. But as mentioned before you need to know what the rifle is capable of and what the ballistics are.
03-03-10, 03:51 PM
Roger, you seem to know what you want and you know quality when you talk about a Leupold Range finder.
that little leopold I have has a major problem getting a fix at a distance over 200m when there is nothing to point it at except a few springbok, it has served me very well in the bush over distances out to 500m (not that I shoot at that dist) when there are other things to range on like trees and rocks nearby the animal....but I think I need a upgrade (my glass is also a leopold)
03-03-10, 10:42 PM
Hi Roger ... go look at the Nikon 440 it is much cheaper than the Leopold ... and is exceptional ..... Also I do not know how old your range finder is BUT !!! advances are made yearly on them so older models from Top brand are often out paced by new cheap models ..... If you want to borrow one ... send me a PM. Glad to hear you are not a "Kop Skoot" guy ...... if you reload for the 30.06 have a look at the nosler 150gr Balistic tip .... explosive but works well on neck shots ... But even neck shots are dangerous.........but FAR!!!! better than head shots .... I culled in the Kalahari for many years near Askamp ... using a Ruger mini 14. (223) most shots were this side of 150m using the BEST!!!! scopes and dead rests ....... and still we would find wounded animals the next day... often shot through the jaw.......We moved up to 22,250 ... yes it was better but the issue remained...... No matter how long you have hunted you still will make a mistake ..... A brach you did not see, the animal moves, wind drift , bad load, paralax error ... I can go on and on .... hence the love of heavier calibers ..... not only because the do a better job but also allow for a greater margin of error ..... Im not sure what scope you use BUT .... IF YOU WANT TO SHOOT PROPERLY and CONSISTANTLY !!!!! past 150m get a scope with paralax correction on the side of the turret....IT MAKES A MASIVE !!!!! difference to your shooting.... most scopes are set to 100m ...... to check this out ... take your rifle and sholder it .... aim at a point , then moove your head a little, you will see your cross wonder a bit .... this is more pronounced at longer range .... with paralax correction you focus on the target with the side turret... and you will not get reticle movement..... you will not believe the difference ...... then add a good range finder and you change everything on the 30.06......In closing you will notice without fail ... the older and more experienced a hunter gets ,,,,the larger the calibur he shoots .... cause he has been there, done that, and paid for it.
04-03-10, 06:46 AM
Roger, I have found the long distance setting on the Leupold Range Finder very handy and very irritating. Handy because then you really can range at distance, irritating because you cannot range anything at short distance on that setting. Sometimes irritating to have to flip between the two settings.
This is my second Leupold and I'll never move from the brand again. My first Rangefinder I had I bought in 1985, was a Bushnell.
Why are the 22 Centrefire & 6mm(243) proponents so quiet? ???
OK, I'll comment. For springbok I use a 6mm Musgrave. Built up the action (1901 Lee Enfield receiver) from spares ex VLT arms and other places, Musgrave fitted the barrel, did the blueing and set the head spacing (crappy, I must add - never do full length resizing when reloading to compensate) and a Mr. Brussel in Cape Town made me a new stock. Did a really nice job. Balistics not quite .243 but it works really well. I would certainly recommend it for smaller game.
I have used 165 gr as well as 180 gr 30-06 bullets on springbok with great success. Very little meat damage.
True, you do not need something to want it. I want a Ruger no.1 Tropical in 416Rigby. And a Farquarson falling block actioned rifle in one of the older calibres......dream on.....:)
Allow me to express my opinion on other calibers mentioned here as well. I am not a believer in the .22 centrefire calibers. I know a number of people who have hunted springbok successfully for many years with .223 and .222, but I believe they are really marginal. "Hunted" (voorle jag is not hunting in my opinion - it's shooting) with a guy using a 7mm Remington Magnum. Never seen such a mess made of good meat, and he had more kwesbokke than anyone else on top of it. I personally do not share the Magnum Obsession that the Americans especially seem to suffer of.
Some PH's shoot anything from grysbok to elephant with 375H&H solids with minimal meat damage. Might be overkill, but it works.
Also do not like .270 myself, yet lots of people swear by it. Personal thing. I'll stick to my "derrig nul ses".
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.