250 savage
- Thread starter 45-70guide
- Start date
250 is a neat cartridge. A bit more powder efficient than a 243, and loaded properly with a good 100gr bullet @ 2800-2900 fps it isn't far behind the 243. If I had a 250 I'd load it with the new 80gr Barnes TTSX. Should be a wicked little pill @ 3100 fps.
I'll likely stick to my 260's however
I'll likely stick to my 260's however
It seems that when they do a limited run of .250 Savage rifles they sell out pretty
quickly and seem to command very high prices at gunshows.
As for practicality the .250 works if you are a handloader but if you only use factory ammo then a .243 is a better choice because of the variety of factory ammo available for it.
quickly and seem to command very high prices at gunshows.
As for practicality the .250 works if you are a handloader but if you only use factory ammo then a .243 is a better choice because of the variety of factory ammo available for it.
A friend of mine has a .250 that he swears by and another has one for sale that I have been considering. Just how hard is it to find ammo. I don't handload but have been wondering how to get started. It's getting expensive to feed my 6.5 and you can use up to a .250 in the farm country around here. Might be a nice addition.
By the way, happy family day.
By the way, happy family day.
The 250 is one of my fav cartridges. It's very efficent, 100gns at 28-900fps make for a nice deer round & there's a good selection of varmint bullets now available. I have 99 Savs & a Ruger M-77 in 250.
.250 has a KOOL factor while the .243 is BORING
All IMHO of course
.250 has a KOOL factor while the .243 is BORING
All IMHO of course
- Location
- St. Joe's Island, Ont
I don't understand the price problems.
Around here 243 and 250 shells are priced the same as each other, no major differences.
I've got 99's in 243 and 250, haven't shot the 243 yet but the 250 is pretty damn accurate.
Around here 243 and 250 shells are priced the same as each other, no major differences.
I've got 99's in 243 and 250, haven't shot the 243 yet but the 250 is pretty damn accurate.
I have a 25-06, but would prefer to have the .250 Savage. The only reason I have the .25-06 is it is Stevens 200 and it was price that sold it. Some day I may come across a ..250 at the right price, or trade deal. Until then the .25-06 will do.
besides cool and slightly more powder efficient there is no rational logic explanation given sofar to pick a .250 over the .243.
The .250 gives frequent case separations due to the tapered shape of the case, meaning only few reloads.
This was discussed on 24hourcampfire under ask the gunwriters comparing the .257 Roberts to the .250 Savage.
Since I have been considering the .250 and the .243, I tend to lean presently more towards the .243.
Main reason for me would be very low recoil rifle sufficient for deer.
The .243 can be loaded up with good accuracy around that 3000 fps.
Can the .250 be loaded up to 2900 fps with good accuracy?
Seems it lies more aound that 2800 fps mark.
The .243 seems to be adequate for deer out to 300 yards, with good broadside shots and good bullets.
Perhaps the .257 Roberts is the one to get, since it has very low recoil and is good for deer and then some. Only chambered by Ruger presently I believe.
Anyway, I got something to think about until next summer.
Wayne van Zwolle writes about the .250 as good for deer out to as far as 200 yards with good broadside shots.
If I spend money on a rifle and scope getting around or over that 1000-1300 dollar mark, I want something with a bit better reach on deer then 200 yards.
The .250 gives frequent case separations due to the tapered shape of the case, meaning only few reloads.
This was discussed on 24hourcampfire under ask the gunwriters comparing the .257 Roberts to the .250 Savage.
Since I have been considering the .250 and the .243, I tend to lean presently more towards the .243.
Main reason for me would be very low recoil rifle sufficient for deer.
The .243 can be loaded up with good accuracy around that 3000 fps.
Can the .250 be loaded up to 2900 fps with good accuracy?
Seems it lies more aound that 2800 fps mark.
The .243 seems to be adequate for deer out to 300 yards, with good broadside shots and good bullets.
Perhaps the .257 Roberts is the one to get, since it has very low recoil and is good for deer and then some. Only chambered by Ruger presently I believe.
Anyway, I got something to think about until next summer.
Wayne van Zwolle writes about the .250 as good for deer out to as far as 200 yards with good broadside shots.
If I spend money on a rifle and scope getting around or over that 1000-1300 dollar mark, I want something with a bit better reach on deer then 200 yards.
Ruger chambered a bunch of M77 full stock rifles in 250 savage. Sweet looking little rifle IMHO.
Last I looked there were still a few available here in Canada. Here's a pic I 'stole' from another thread. I really like this round; almost no recoil or muzzle blast. Less noisy than a .243 and larger caliber bullets.
Last I looked there were still a few available here in Canada. Here's a pic I 'stole' from another thread.
I really like this round; almost no recoil or muzzle blast. Less noisy than a .243 and larger caliber bullets.
I too, can't see why anyone would choose a 250 over a 243. However, no one has ever explained to me why one calibre is exciting, ###y, or whatever, while a similar calibre is boring!
Originally, the 250 was called a 250-3000. The designation being the bullet was supposed to be travelling at 3000 fps. We later found out,(speaking for myself) that it was only the 87 grain bullet that was supposed to be getting 3000 fps.
On the other hand, I had accurate loads in my 243 with a 100 grain bullet going in the 3100 fps range.
Ballistically, a .257" diameter 100 grain bullet bullet going about (even) 2900 fps, is quite inferior to a .244" diameter bullet going about 3150 fps.
Originally, the 250 was called a 250-3000. The designation being the bullet was supposed to be travelling at 3000 fps. We later found out,(speaking for myself) that it was only the 87 grain bullet that was supposed to be getting 3000 fps.
On the other hand, I had accurate loads in my 243 with a 100 grain bullet going in the 3100 fps range.
Ballistically, a .257" diameter 100 grain bullet bullet going about (even) 2900 fps, is quite inferior to a .244" diameter bullet going about 3150 fps.
I like the 250 savage round and would love to find one in a 700 classic.I do have an older Browning with Sako action redone to 250 AI.It is a fun round 75g v max over 3300fps.The load info for it shows a 100g bullet at over 3200.
(have a second one in the works)
Gord.
(have a second one in the works)
Gord.
Last edited:
Same reason I shoot an old (110yrs) Winnie 38-55. There are way better cartridges not doubt but few reek of the history and class of some of these old cals. Got a Henry Martini made 2 years before Custer did his Little Bighorn thing. My 308 and 30-06 just dont have the creds. Still fun to shoot but its not the same at all. Way closer to Cowboy action really and I can see the fun aspect quite clearly.
Well 12% greater bullet diameter for one.I have a Rem 700 Classic that will penetrate an AB WT broadside rib shot at 300 yards.Also shot a lrg Mulie buck that was over 300lbs.I'm shooting 41gr Win 760/Win brass/Fed mag primers/100gr Sierras.Don't use this load in any lever action as it will be an overload.I get no preasure signs and 3 shot groups one hole at 100 yards...............If they made ammo and guns for the .250 more available at the time there would be no .243 Harold ******the .250 has doing the same job since 1920.What they needed was a 1-10 twist to start with like Newton wanted!
###y is in the eyes of the beholder.
Some people thought the Pontiac ##### was ###y
And a 25-06 will outdo a 243, & a 257 Weatherby will outdo...and so on.
That's not the point.
The average 243 shoots 100s at 3000fps while the average 250 shoots them at 2900, a game animal will never tell the difference. You numbers were from an add in the 19teens, powders have come a long way in the last 90yrs, mostly to the benifit of smaller capacity cases.
Point is the 250 as other have said, hits pretty much just as hard as the 243 with less recoil, less noise & less muzzle blast. Anybody with 250 experience will tell you that
From Horn book both with 100gn SP, 243 at 3000fps, 250 at 2900.
Engery for 243 at 300yds 1168, 250 1042 hardly such a huge difference to a game animal. You are right thou if all you want is a deer cartradge with long range capability then perhaps you should consider neither of these. A 270 would better suit your needs & hit much harder.
