Compare and contrast the .22 WMR, .22 Swift, the 22-250, the .243 and the .223
- Thread starter Don
- Start date
- Replies 35
- Views 1,592
OP
Just wondering which would be a good "all around" cartridge. There was a .243 in my Dad's collection that I'm wondering if I should have kept.
The .220 Swift and .22-250 are both great calibers but are mainly known as speed demons and primarily loaded with lighter bullets.
The .223Rem and .243Win can both be loaded with lighter varmint bullets and heavier LR style bullets. Of the calibers listed the .223Rem and .243Win I feel would be the top two for "all around cartridge".
OP
Because I've heard that it a very flat shooting cartridge and at one time was THE varmint cartridge.
MacEntyre
Shoot on Sight!
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Member
Benefactor
Life Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
I just believe that the .243 is not in the same class as the rest. You can easily load a 105 grain bullet in the .243 which would put it into the medium game class (deer). 22-250, 22 Swift, 223, (even the old .222) are all excellent varmint cartridges but I would not consider them deer cartridges. What about the .22 Hornet since the .22 WMR was listed?
I have had a .22-250 and I shot many a ground hog with it out to 300-400 yards. The same with the .22 Hornet but at closer ranges. And I knocked down a lot of deer with the .243, although personally I believe is is at the bottom of the deer/pronghorn cartridge lineup. In .240 caliber I would prefer the .240 Wby (LA) or just move up to the .25's (.257, 25-06) for deer and pronghorn.
Kind of interesting. When you think about it the .243 has a large following but in a way it is kind of a bastard round. I mean it can be used as a varmint round but there are far better cartridges out there like the .22-250 or the .223. And in a pinch it can be used as a deer round, but again there are better cartridges out there for deer too. So in reality it's not that great for either one.
But if anyone has an old Ruger 77 VT in .243 with the beaver tail forearm, 26 inch barrel and laminated stock I'll buy it from you.
Oh, at one time the .222 was THE varmint cartridge too.
Last edited:
Used in a pinch for deer ? I have killed many with 55gr BST... never once felt remotely under gunned. The .243 is MUCH more versitile than any of those other varmit rounds....I just believe that the .243 is not in the same class as the rest. You can easily load a 105 grain bullet in the .243 which would put it into the medium game class (deer). 22-250, 22 Swift, 223, (even the old .222) are all excellent varmint cartridges but I would not consider them deer cartridges. What about the .22 Hornet since the .22 WMR was listed?
I have had a .22-250 and I shot many a ground hog with it out to 300-400 yards. The same with the .22 Hornet but at closer ranges. And I knocked down a lot of deer with the .243, although personally I believe is is at the bottom of the deer/pronghorn cartridge lineup. In .240 caliber I would prefer the .240 Wby (LA) or just move up to the .25's (.257, 25-06) for deer and pronghorn.
Kind of interesting. When you think about it the .243 has a large following but in a way it is kind of a bastard round. I mean it can be used as a varmint round but there are far better cartridges out there like the .22-250 or the .223. And in a pinch it can be used as a deer round, but again there are better cartridges out there for deer too. So in reality it's not that great for either one.
But if anyone has an old Ruger 77 VT in .243 with the beaver tail forearm, 26 inch barrel and laminated stock I'll buy it from you.
Oh, at one time the .222 was THE varmint cartridge too.
I've killed many, many deer with the .243. But if I had a hankering to go out and purchase a caliber to strictly deer hunt with I would not pick a .243. And if I was going to go with a strictly varmint round I would not go with the .243 either. I always wanted to go out west for prairie dogs. Is the .243 a common caliber out there for shooting "at" them?
Compare and contrast the .22 WMR, .22 Hornet, .22 Swift, the 22-250, and the .223
There, fixed it for you.
Compare and contrast the .22 WMR, .22 Hornet, .22 Swift, the 22-250, and the .223
There, fixed it for you.
When I go to south GA for Coyotes I used to carry a 22-250 and a 243 in case the wind picked up. Then I got the bright idea of a .223 bolt gun by itself. My 22-250 is on it's 3rd barrel so I have intimate experience with it and will never give it up for anything else. When I had to switch to the .243 my range was reduced by 50% and the hits weren't as destructive but they still go down.
I haven't been able to produce the groups with the .223 that I want but I'm still working down that path. Assuming I can achieve the accuracy desirable it will most likely become my go to coyote gun.
I think the .243 is a beginners deer cartridge with much less recoil than a larger caliber and a great beginners gun. The weight of most .243's is the same as a gun in .308 so recoil is the only dividing factor. I personally think a .308 is the ideal deer gun but is also suitable for almost anything that walks North America, short of the Great Bears.
With all of that said, I'm a devout Rem 700 fan and all of my rifles are of that pattern because I understand them and can make them shoot. The 22-250 and the .223 sport bull barrels and the .243 is a normal tapered barrel.
I have no experience with the .22 Swift but did get into the .219 Zipper briefly back in the 70's but soon gave it up for the 22-250.
I haven't been able to produce the groups with the .223 that I want but I'm still working down that path. Assuming I can achieve the accuracy desirable it will most likely become my go to coyote gun.
I think the .243 is a beginners deer cartridge with much less recoil than a larger caliber and a great beginners gun. The weight of most .243's is the same as a gun in .308 so recoil is the only dividing factor. I personally think a .308 is the ideal deer gun but is also suitable for almost anything that walks North America, short of the Great Bears.
With all of that said, I'm a devout Rem 700 fan and all of my rifles are of that pattern because I understand them and can make them shoot. The 22-250 and the .223 sport bull barrels and the .243 is a normal tapered barrel.
I have no experience with the .22 Swift but did get into the .219 Zipper briefly back in the 70's but soon gave it up for the 22-250.
OP
I think they use the .243 a lot in Ohio to shoot at groundhogs.
I think I was thinking of this cartridge rather than the .22 Swift. One of my uncles had a rifle in (I think) .22 Hornet.
Let's throw the .22 Remington Jet onto the pot. I've got a barrel for an H&R Handy Rifle in that one.
Last edited:
OP
I can't speak to the other calibers, but I love my .243. I've got a Remington 788 that I rebuilt after it was underwater in a flood -- plastic stock, Timney trigger, Nikon scope. I found out it likes 100gr boat tails; with those, it's a tack driver! If I do my part, 3 rnds at 100yds is 1 ragged hole. That is why I like it so much: I accidentally discovered how accurate it is, then started reloading for it.
6mm Creed
I love my Tikka in .243 and bought it specifically to smoke yotes and whitetails.
58 grain for yotes and 75 grain for deer. Puts both bullets under a dime and does a great job. I also have a Remington 700 in 300 win but man that thing is nowhere near as fun to shoot. It stays in the safe most of the time.
I do use a .223 for hunting yotes at night but just because the pic rail is more conducive for my thermal. Either way they all are a lot of fun!!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
58 grain for yotes and 75 grain for deer. Puts both bullets under a dime and does a great job. I also have a Remington 700 in 300 win but man that thing is nowhere near as fun to shoot. It stays in the safe most of the time.
I do use a .223 for hunting yotes at night but just because the pic rail is more conducive for my thermal. Either way they all are a lot of fun!!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cocked & Locked
Fight until you prevail or bleed out
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
.243...I've had a couple. In the early 1970's I hunted groundhogs with a Model 70 Winchester with a 24" heavy barrel and 3-9x Weaver scope. Hand loaded 75 grain Sierra hollow points worked great.
Only .243 I have now is this Remington Seven (Leupold VX-lll 2.5-8x). Accurate enough @ 100 yards lightweight rifle with 100 grain Winchester Power points. I'd take this over .220 Swift, 222, 223, 224, 22-250, etc., etc.
Only .243 I have now is this Remington Seven (Leupold VX-lll 2.5-8x). Accurate enough @ 100 yards lightweight rifle with 100 grain Winchester Power points. I'd take this over .220 Swift, 222, 223, 224, 22-250, etc., etc.
I'd take it over a .243Win any day and twice on Sunday! Interesting backstory on it too:
http://www.gunsandammo.com/ammo/rifle-ammo/the-accidental-6mm-creedmoor/
Now I want one too.
I was seriously looking at a .240 Bee last summer at a local gunshop. It was discounted to a very decent price. The next time I went by there it was gone. Ammo was around $40 a box but most likely I would have been loading for it in no time.
.243 on steroids.
.243 on steroids.
My brother has a Browning Micro Medallion in 243 Win and has a load for it that pushes a 55 grain bullet right at 4,000 f/s. It is incredibly accurate. We have used it several times in Colorado for prairie dogs with great success. Lots of red mist. He loads it with 100 grain bullets for deer. I have shot quite a few deer with a 243 using 100 grain bullets.
I have used a 22/250 and a 223 for deer without any problems. I loaded the deer rounds with Barnes bullets and was very careful about shot placement.
I have used a 22/250 and a 223 for deer without any problems. I loaded the deer rounds with Barnes bullets and was very careful about shot placement.
I have never understood the idea that .223 is ok for people but not deer.
We can find tons of data on the performance of .223 hunting 2 legged criders but 4 legged we got to watch shot placement and all that.
Just a thought
We can find tons of data on the performance of .223 hunting 2 legged criders but 4 legged we got to watch shot placement and all that.
Just a thought
Slosolo2
Here to be happy
Could be that some states prohibit deer hunting with .22 calibers so less use for the data and a much smaller data pool. Plenty of hot war since Vietnam to assess the effect of .223 (5.56) on people though.
I took a woodchuck with my 788 in .22-250 at about 50 yards. The load was a factory 40 grain Federal Blitz. It left the forequarters and hindquarters connected by a length of spine. No ribs, guts or skin. Nothing. Upper and lower thoracic cavities were completely gone.
Lost during one of three moves was a target with a 100 yard group that can be completely obscured by a dime.
I'm done looking for the perfect varmint rifle.
Lost during one of three moves was a target with a 100 yard group that can be completely obscured by a dime.
I'm done looking for the perfect varmint rifle.
Last edited:
RedneckFur
Smith & Wesson is a religion of peace.
My father regularly hunted deer with a Ruger Mini 14. It always did the job for him. I think a .223 is fine for deer. IMHO, you should be watching your shot placement when hunting regardless of the round you're hunting with, whether it be a .223 or 375 H&H.
RedneckFur
Smith & Wesson is a religion of peace.
I've never owned a 243, because I have no need for one, but I do like all that its capable of. I'd have no issues using one as a deer rifle or varmint gun. I'm not a huge fan of the 22-250 because its barrel burning tendencies. With how I shoot, I'd be replacing barrels on it every 2 years. For a hunting rifle that fires a dozen shots a year, it will last a very long time though.
22 magnum is a favorite of mine. Its versatile and fun to shoot. It can work for deer in a pinch, just know your game laws. I shoot it a lot less than I used to. 22 magnum used to be a cheap round to shoot, but recent changes in ammo prices put it on par with .223. Because of that, my AR has become my 'go to' rifle to shoot when I go to the range.
22 magnum is a favorite of mine. Its versatile and fun to shoot. It can work for deer in a pinch, just know your game laws. I shoot it a lot less than I used to. 22 magnum used to be a cheap round to shoot, but recent changes in ammo prices put it on par with .223. Because of that, my AR has become my 'go to' rifle to shoot when I go to the range.
Neck shots seem to work best. I know this is a controversial topic on shot placement on deer.
That said, I'm looking at 6.5 Grendel AR15 for hunting, if I was to build out bolt action, I'd go 6.5 Creed or 6 Creed.
spittinfire
Well-Known Member
I've never shot a person and I hope I never have to but I don't like 223 for either people or deer. Yes, it will kill them, I won't argue that but if you were to ask me to pick a caliber to face either it wouldn't be .22. I would honestly ask for a .30 caliber weapon for either deer or man.
I'll agree to the barrel issues with the 22-250 but you can't argue with it's intended purpose on varmints. I've had mine sine the late 80's and it's on it's 3rd barrel but I'll keep having it re-barreled instead of buying a new one. I seem to get about 2500 rounds before it goes away, and then a new barrel is only 350.00 and 3 weeks away...
Back in the 1960's when Uncle Sam was taking a bit of my time, we were told that the newfangled 22 caliber round shot out of that Mattel plastic rifle was designed to neutralize the enemy and not necessarily to kill him. We were also told that a bullet shot out of the new rifle would take off an arm if it passed within a foot of the target. Right! We were also told that the new bullet tumbled because there were spiral grooves in the barrel of the new rifle while the grooves in the M14 were straight. Right!
You could certainly carry more rounds of 5.56 than of 7.65 and you could control the new rifle when fired full auto more easily than you could an M14 fired full auto. (If you have never fired an M14 at full auto, you have missed an interesting experience.)
Since FMJ bullets are generally not allowed for deer hunting, the main problem I see with using a 223 on deer is getting a good bullet that will hold together without blowing up on a shoulder or rib. There are some very good bullets out there.
I'm from the old Ruark school of "Use Enough Gun". All of the aforementioned calibers "will" work on deer and I assume people. The only problem I see is that when you shoot people do you worry about them running off or do you just want to put them out of action? I used a .243 for many years shooting deer at night for herd health checks and it did well. We only took neck shots and ranges were limited to those specific shots. We rarely ever had one run away. Clean, ethical kills. Now, suppose you were a sniper shooting at troglodytes in the hills of Afghanistan. You hit one at some off the wall distance and you see him scurrying off behind a rock.
So, now you have a wounded troglodyte. The ethical thing to do is head up there, track him down, dispatch him, gut him, drag him off the mountain, and have him for dinner. But that ain't gonna happen. It ain't deer hunting. And that is the big difference. You shoot a deer in the wrong spot (or in the right spot with a poor bullet/rifle combo) and it takes off. Now you have a wounded deer to track and find, generally in the dark, in the briers, and sometimes even in the water. Had it been a troglodyte in combat, no big deal. Your job is to fight and kill the enemy, not shoot, retrieve, and eat them. My friends have always given me hell for using calibers and ammo that some would consider overpowered for deer. Maybe so, but I haven't lost an animal in a very, very long time. I pick my shots and I want a quick kill. One of my favorite bullets are Nosler BT's in a 30-06 or a 300 Bee. My range is limited to what I consider having enough energy in the load to blow the biggest hole I can going in and coming out. I rarely ever get two shoulders off a deer. But I always get my deer. In our little private club, we get a lot of guests who bring a lot of questionable firearms. We now have a little qualifier set up permanently. A 6 inch steel plate at 200 yards (2 moa). You have to hit it twice in a row to use that weapon for hunting with us. That culls out a lot of them. Scopes aren't set up properly, guns can't do it, or they just can't shoot worth a damn. But it beats having them go out and cripple up some poor critter that the rest of us have to spend time tracking. So, if you can hit that plate you are good to go. But show up with what we consider a short range cartridge (or a .22 caliber) and we will politely invite you to hunt a stand with no more than 100 yards of visibility. In other words if you get a shot the deer will be in your lap.
As a side note, I've noticed that quite a few AR style rifles (including .223/5.56) have a difficult time qualifying at our 2 MOA plate at 200 yards. Is that the norm?
So, now you have a wounded troglodyte. The ethical thing to do is head up there, track him down, dispatch him, gut him, drag him off the mountain, and have him for dinner. But that ain't gonna happen. It ain't deer hunting. And that is the big difference. You shoot a deer in the wrong spot (or in the right spot with a poor bullet/rifle combo) and it takes off. Now you have a wounded deer to track and find, generally in the dark, in the briers, and sometimes even in the water. Had it been a troglodyte in combat, no big deal. Your job is to fight and kill the enemy, not shoot, retrieve, and eat them. My friends have always given me hell for using calibers and ammo that some would consider overpowered for deer. Maybe so, but I haven't lost an animal in a very, very long time. I pick my shots and I want a quick kill. One of my favorite bullets are Nosler BT's in a 30-06 or a 300 Bee. My range is limited to what I consider having enough energy in the load to blow the biggest hole I can going in and coming out. I rarely ever get two shoulders off a deer. But I always get my deer. In our little private club, we get a lot of guests who bring a lot of questionable firearms. We now have a little qualifier set up permanently. A 6 inch steel plate at 200 yards (2 moa). You have to hit it twice in a row to use that weapon for hunting with us. That culls out a lot of them. Scopes aren't set up properly, guns can't do it, or they just can't shoot worth a damn. But it beats having them go out and cripple up some poor critter that the rest of us have to spend time tracking. So, if you can hit that plate you are good to go. But show up with what we consider a short range cartridge (or a .22 caliber) and we will politely invite you to hunt a stand with no more than 100 yards of visibility. In other words if you get a shot the deer will be in your lap.
As a side note, I've noticed that quite a few AR style rifles (including .223/5.56) have a difficult time qualifying at our 2 MOA plate at 200 yards. Is that the norm?
Last edited:
I'm from the old Ruark school of "Use Enough Gun". All of the aforementioned calibers "will" work on deer and I assume people. The only problem I see is that when you shoot people do you worry about them running off or do you just want to put them out of action? I used a .243 for many years shooting deer at night for herd health checks and it did well. We only took neck shots and ranges were limited to those specific shots. We rarely ever had one run away. Clean, ethical kills. Now, suppose you were a sniper shooting at troglodytes in the hills of Afghanistan. You hit one at some off the wall distance and you see him scurrying off behind a rock.
So, now you have a wounded troglodyte. The ethical thing to do is head up there, track him down, dispatch him, gut him, drag him off the mountain, and have him for dinner. But that ain't gonna happen. It ain't deer hunting. And that is the big difference. You shoot a deer in the wrong spot (or in the right spot with a poor bullet/rifle combo) and it takes off. Now you have a wounded deer to track and find, generally in the dark, in the briers, and sometimes even in the water. Had it been a troglodyte in combat, no big deal. Your job is to fight and kill the enemy, not shoot, retrieve, and eat them. My friends have always given me hell for using calibers and ammo that some would consider overpowered for deer. Maybe so, but I haven't lost an animal in a very, very long time. I pick my shots and I want a quick kill. One of my favorite bullets are Nosler BT's in a 30-06 or a 300 Bee. My range is limited to what I consider having enough energy in the load to blow the biggest hole I can going in and coming out. I rarely ever get two shoulders off a deer. But I always get my deer. In our little private club, we get a lot of guests who bring a lot of questionable firearms. We now have a little qualifier set up permanently. A 6 inch steel plate at 200 yards (2 moa). You have to hit it twice in a row to use that weapon for hunting with us. That culls out a lot of them. Scopes aren't set up properly, guns can't do it, or they just can't shoot worth a damn. But it beats having them go out and cripple up some poor critter that the rest of us have to spend time tracking. So, if you can hit that plate you are good to go. But show up with what we consider a short range cartridge (or a .22 caliber) and we will politely invite you to hunt a stand with no more than 100 yards of visibility. In other words if you get a shot the deer will be in your lap.
As a side note, I've noticed that quite a few AR style rifles (including .223/5.56) have a difficult time qualifying at our 2 MOA plate at 200 yards. Is that the norm?
FWIW when I was helping a friend who runs a guide service I saw more wounded and lost deer from clients shooting larger caliber rifles. The recoil/muzzle blast caused a lot of flinching---I loaned my .243 to several folks who struggled to hit a pie plate at 100 yds with larger caliber rifles. IMHO it all comes down to what an individual is comfortable shooting. In regards to your question about ARs being inaccurate I would attribute that to the shooter.