So whats wrong with the .243 (pope gun) again??
Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:20 pm
Going hunting on a smaller property near Roma in the next few weeks where I don't think they'll appreciate my usual 4500+ftlb hunting/varmint rifles. So I had to dig out and dust off the old 243 and work up some current loads. Seeing as the usual critter needing culling on this place will be reasonably small I worked up some loads using the nosler 55gn BT and 75gn hornady hp.
Its been years since I've actually shot this rifle because I really do enjoy making paddock pizza of anything up to 45 + kgs, hence my love of larger calibres using explosive pills. After a full day at the range with my loading gear trying endless combinations of components I came up with 2 varmint loads for the next trip. Now the rifle involved is a very old timber stocked CMC howa wearing a bushnell 4-12 scope which cost less than 750 bux new including scope. The first load worked up was the 75gn hornady doing a very consistent 3500 and a bit fps. After much testing the final load consistently shot 3 shots under .5 moa and 5 shots around .6 moa. Now the other load with the 55gn BT that took even longer to come up with also shoots 3 shots under .5 moa and 5 under .66 moa. Now my question is why do people try to avoid and freely criticize a calibre like this when it drives a 55gn BT at over 4000fps easily with this kind of accuracy. What is the advantage of going to a wildcat calibre like the 6x250 or any other variant when a std calibre can achieve this. Not that this is any thing special but at these speeds and accuracy from a cheap outfit I think it rivals the likes of the 204 ruger type outfits costing s**t loads more. Running it through the ballistics program it has a 2 inch point blank range of 315 yds. Not too shabby but a ways short of my 300rum at 4100fps with the 125 BT. I also have a ruger laminate job in 220 swift which is severely taxed driving a 55gnr at 3900 fps so the 243 s**ts on this as well. So why is the pope gun so despised on this forum when to my eyes it seems bloody capable and exceeds so many other so called varmint cals with ease?
The final load actually averaged closer to 4050 fps. This was the last shot before a cease fire while working up the load.
Its been years since I've actually shot this rifle because I really do enjoy making paddock pizza of anything up to 45 + kgs, hence my love of larger calibres using explosive pills. After a full day at the range with my loading gear trying endless combinations of components I came up with 2 varmint loads for the next trip. Now the rifle involved is a very old timber stocked CMC howa wearing a bushnell 4-12 scope which cost less than 750 bux new including scope. The first load worked up was the 75gn hornady doing a very consistent 3500 and a bit fps. After much testing the final load consistently shot 3 shots under .5 moa and 5 shots around .6 moa. Now the other load with the 55gn BT that took even longer to come up with also shoots 3 shots under .5 moa and 5 under .66 moa. Now my question is why do people try to avoid and freely criticize a calibre like this when it drives a 55gn BT at over 4000fps easily with this kind of accuracy. What is the advantage of going to a wildcat calibre like the 6x250 or any other variant when a std calibre can achieve this. Not that this is any thing special but at these speeds and accuracy from a cheap outfit I think it rivals the likes of the 204 ruger type outfits costing s**t loads more. Running it through the ballistics program it has a 2 inch point blank range of 315 yds. Not too shabby but a ways short of my 300rum at 4100fps with the 125 BT. I also have a ruger laminate job in 220 swift which is severely taxed driving a 55gnr at 3900 fps so the 243 s**ts on this as well. So why is the pope gun so despised on this forum when to my eyes it seems bloody capable and exceeds so many other so called varmint cals with ease?
The final load actually averaged closer to 4050 fps. This was the last shot before a cease fire while working up the load.