243 or 6.5x55

6.5x55 has a lot more potential, performance wise, and would be my choice, but for the specific uses outlined by the OP, 243 works as well. So for his purposes, flip a coin . . .
 
It really makes me laugh when I here people say the 6.5 is not much improvement over the 243. The 6.5 packs way more punch then the 243, the facts are a 6.5x55 or 260rem with a 140 grain bullet has more power (KE) at 300 yards and beyond then a 308 with a 150 grain bullet. It also has around the same or a little better trajectory then a 300wm (when both are load with optimum BC bullets).
Because you reload have a look at the 260 rem it shares the pretty much the same ballistics as the 6.5x55 and will do everything the 6.5 will but in a short action. Have a look at the Tikka or Sako in 260 and like the 6.5 you can load it from around 75 to 160 grain bullets and choice of bullets ain't really that small.
http://www.midwayusa.com/browse/Bro...9&categoryString=9315***652***19785***9016***
 
Last edited:
"It really makes me laugh when I here people say the 6.5 is not much improvement over the 243"
I don't believe anyone said that or says that. It is "more gun" and no one disputes that and it is a fantastic round - the question is whether or not the .243 is enough gun for the specific application. This same logic says we should all start at .375 H&H and move up from there as anything less is not an "improvement." I think it makes sense to pick the right "tool" for the job and use enough gun. Depending on what you are doing, the .243 is a fantastic cartridge.
 
I would pick the 6.5 x 55 just because I don't have one. It would fill a huge hole in my rifle lineup. Right now, my .243 performs best in the 75-100 gr range, my .270 WSM does best in the 130-150 gr range, my 7 mm mags do great at the 140-165 gr range, my .308 is good for the 150-180 range, and my .325 WSM is perfect for the 185-220 gr range. See the flaw in the lineup? I truly need a cartridge whose sweet spot is the 100-130 gr bullet range. Sure I can and do have loads for the .270 WSM down there, but it's not ideal. So, I obviously NEED a 6.5 mm rifle.
 
I DO agree with Fullboar. I don't care for the .243 at all, except for varminting. Use enough gun, but don't obliterate the animal. Most people eat the game they shoot, I would hope. Bloodshot meat is yucky. For hunting game animals especially antelope, the 6.5x55 is about perfect. It cleanly kills without tearing up a bunch of meat. It has a wonderful trajectory. And it works well with other game. Gun snobs who simply can't resist giving a laundry list of their calibers, can't begin to appreciate a hunter who can use 1 gun for several applications. But that says something about the hunter.
 
jmortimer said:
"It really makes me laugh when I here people say the 6.5 is not much improvement over the 243"
I don't believe anyone said that or says that.
Click to expand...

Have a look at the 3rd post from the top of page 1.

Picher said:
Seems to me that if you're already loading for the .243, the change to 6.5 isn't much of an improvement in performance. You may want to try the 7mm-08 or .270 Win.
Click to expand...

One thing I have noticed is anyone who isn't a proponent of the 6.5mm dont own or have never owned one but I dont hold that against anyone I was also ignorant to the performance of the 6.5mm until I tried it and now I wont go back.
 
Last edited:
If I had to pick "only one of the two and that would be my only rifle in life" I would choose the 6.5x55. Only because you have a more versatile selection of bullets even if I only load with 139grain.
Also own a .243 that I load with 100grain tips.
All game hit with the 6.5x55 (swede Carl Gustav fully sporterized) drop on the spot or no more than 10 paces away and all deer hit with .243 same results!!!

stu295 your 6.5 looks is great!!
_______
roberto
 
"...if it is available in 6.5..." No current Weather Warriors come in 6.5 x 55. The T3 does though.
As much as I love my .243, the 6.5 will give you an elk/moose rifle as well. Does mean you'll have a long action, if you care about that sort of thing. However, not being able to find ammo in small places might be an issue too.
 
Thanks for everyones input, I think I will get a 260 instead as it is available in the rifle I really like and is basically the same as the 6.5 If I feel the need for the 243 I can steal back from my kids.
 
Yes, try a .260 or 6.5x55. I have and use a .243, but not much anymore. I have and use a .260 and 6.5x55 and usually take one of those out for deer. I am not one to promote heavier bullets. I still use the 22-250 and .22 Hi-Power, but there is something about the 6.5 that is agreeable. If you want to play at reloading and the range the 6.5's are a lot of fun. I became bored with the .243 rather quickly.
 
absolutely the 6.5 X 55.
No contest.

Plus, I've heard for years the same old "you can buy it at a corner filling station" argument... How many of you actually go hunting without enough ammo? Or lose it? Or shoot it all up and need to go buy more? (that's a scary thought :eek:)
Actually, I went hunting two years in a row, taking only the 4 rounds I had left loaded for my sporterized swede, knowing that if I took a shot at a deer, that one was all I needed. (I do a LOT more "hunting" than "killing") I've taken 4 or 5 Texas whitetails with mine, ranging from a 100lb doe to an almost 200lb mature buck at about 140yds. All were one-shot kills, and only one managed to travel more than a couple of steps. The doe jumped sideways at the shot and died on the other side of the barbed wire fence about 10yds away.

The 6.5 is capable of shooting a 160 gr bullet that has an astronomical sectional density.. .can you say, PENETRATION? Actually, the 140gr bullet has a higher SD than most other "conventional" cartridges. It's easily driven to over 2600fps and kills deer better than you would believe.

IMHO, the .243 is MUCH better at varminting, or perhaps smaller deer, if kept to 100yds or so. Bullet weight is just too light for most deer hunting.
 
I'm toying around with the idea of getting a 6.5mm gun as well but can't really decide and need it like another hole in my butt. My problem is they all seem pretty similar to the 7mm-08 in the SA with the nod going to the 6.5-284 Norma overall. Thing is I already have 3 7mm Mag's. I think if it were me I'd opt for the Creedmore or Grendel because lets face it, they just sound cool.

Then again, leafing through the Barnes Manual I came across the .338 Scovill and that caught my eye especially just getting an '06 rebarrelled.
 
It also has around the same or a little better trajectory then a 300wm (when both are load with optimum BC bullets).
Click to expand...
How is this possible? I looked around and couldn't find anything to back this up. The best 6.5x55 loads don't even compare to the .25-06 or .270 win let alone a .300 win mag in any aspect of trajectory, mpbr, velocity, energy. It has an impressive bc but I don't think this cartridge is comparable to the .300 win mag when talking hunting rifles. Am I missing something here? :confused: Someone fill me in.
 
"Am I missing something here?"
No - at 300 yards the .300 Win Mag is down around 6" with 800 ft lbs more energy and the 6.5 is down about 7" with 800 ft lbs less energy. Two different classes of gun. Everything anyone said about the 6.5 x 55 vs. the .243 could be said about the 6.5 x 55 vs. the .300 Win Mag. The .300 Win Mag is "more gun" - not even close.
 
Gun snobs who simply can't resist giving a laundry list of their calibers, can't begin to appreciate a hunter who can use 1 gun for several applications. But that says something about the hunter.
Click to expand...

Dang, that sounds a lot like gun envy. I collect and use many different guns and calibers througout the season, more of if it suits me kind of thing. You could use a bazooka (well maybe not a bazooka) but a 416 Rigby and if you don't place the shot well, its all for nothing. People that say a .243 is for varmits or paper or yotes etc and that the bullets aren't design for this or that or deer don't know much about the little twenty four and three, its a very adequate whitetail catridge when you put the bullet where you are supposed to.
 
You can buy 243 cartridges in any corner gas station....try that with the 6.5 x 55.
Click to expand...

You did read the OP's OP? The part where he says he handloads? Ammo availablity is a non-issue.

IMHO, the .243 is MUCH better at varminting, or perhaps smaller deer, if kept to 100yds or so. Bullet weight is just too light for most deer hunting.
Click to expand...

Horsefeathers.

A 100 gr .243 Hornady BTSP launched at 3,000 f/sec will still have over 1,000 lbs of energy at 400 yards. If you can't kill ANY deer in North America with that at under 400 yards, then it was because you did not place the bullet where it needed to go, not because the bullet was not heavy enough. They are not armored vehichles, they are animals, made of flesh and bone. So long as the bullet is tough enough to penetrate adequately, and is soft enough to expand reliably, a .243 WIN is capable of taking deer to 400 yards, if the shooter is up to the task.

The .243 Winchester was introduced to compete with the .244 Remington, and was produced with a 1 in 10 twist barrel to stabilize 100 grain bullets, something the .244 with it's 1 in 14" twist did not do well. The .224 failed to sell, and was re-introduced as the 6mm Remington, this time around with a faster twist (1 in 9, IIRC).....

If you want a .243 rifle for varmits, find one of those old .244 Remmy's: They were made for blowing up prairie dogs.

One of the biggest deer I ever killed was taken with a .243 WIN (Remmy 788) at over 250 yards ..... the deer hit the ground so hard his far side leg broke, untouched by the bullet which passed through his chest a couple inches behind it. A .243 is plenty of rifle for deer.

As for the OP's question: I'd go with the Swede, if I could get it in a 96 Swedish Mauser. I think it would be fun to experiment with slow powders in that long barrel. ...... .260 Rem otherwise: Cases are cheaper.
 
IMHO, the .243 is MUCH better at varminting, or perhaps smaller deer, if kept to 100yds or so. Bullet weight is just too light for most deer hunting.
Click to expand...

Maybe you meant .223 instead of .243 ......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top