.250 Savage

[Salt]

Anyone read HANDLOADER MAGAZINE?

I read that the .250 Savage has less kick than the .243 yet has more terminal performance on deer. Can anyone give more details? What is the average bullet weight for the .250 Savage?

I was going to buy the Savage 99 chambered in .300 Savage, but I think I may go .250 Savage instead.

[Badger Arms]

I've always thought that the US Military should have adopted this cartridge in its 250-3000 incarnation. This had an 87gr bullet travelling a published 3000fps. This in a short cartridge with minimal recoil. A boat-tailed bullet and a semi-auto rifle of smaller stature than the Garand would seem, in retrospect, to solve all of the problems we suffered from having too large a rifle and caliber.

Enough about the rant, I am aware of only one load currently available. That's the 100gr load at about 2800fps. The 250 in some loadings has an advantage over the .243 but that's mostly on paper. You MIGHT be able to squeeze extra performance out of the 250 at some ranges in some realms, but it's likely not to matter much in the field. Deer don't read ballistics tables.

I'd buy the .243 for several reasons. First, there are more factory loads available for this round. Second, there are more bullets and reloading data available for the reloader. Finally, you can use this rifle as a varmint rifle AND a deer rifle. If you want a rifle to give you a BIT more than the .243, look toward the 7-08, 260 Remington, and perhaps the 6.5 Sweede. By jumping to these 6.5 and 7mm rounds you gain a larger selection of loads and more performance to boot.

To get back to your post, if I were to have a choice between the .250 and .300 Savage, jump on the .250. My opinion. If you do buy the 300, I've got a set of dies I can sell ya! :)

[Mike Irwin]

I've got a .243, and have only dabbled with the .250, but what I've seen leads me to believe that the .250 is the far superior cartridge.

It gives so much and asks for so little in return. Exceptionally accurate, very efficient.

As Badger notes, there's more available for the .243, but I would never let that stop me from buying a .250 in any incarnation.

[Mannlicher]

The .250/3000 really comes into it's own, when used in a good bolt gun. The Model 99 Savage was a good platform for the little .25 caliber, but the full potential cannot be realized there. My current rifle in .250 Savage is a Ruger International full length stocked carbine. The little carbine has been re worked, and rechambered in .250/3000 Ackley Improved.

100 yard groups under an inch, and velocities of over 3200 fps with the 100 grain Sierra. Accurate, hard hitting, and low recoil. The best of all worlds.

[ACP230]

I have shot deer with a 16 gauge shotgun, a .30-06, and a .250-3000 (.250 Savage). Many of the deer I shot with the .250 did not move from the spot where they were shot. The .250 is very accurate from my Ruger lightweight, and is my favorite deer rifle. My son likes it too. He keeps trying to get it away from me. No luck yet, however.

[Art Eatman]

For all that I've killed about 20 deer with a .243, I still think of it as marginal on deer and superlative on varmints. It seems to me that the .257 or the .250-3000 are inherently better on deer with the 100- or 117-grain bullets. I tend toward regarding them as somewhat limited on range, however.

This is sorta seat-of-the-pants, of course, from some shooting, some reading, some BSing...(Or maybe a lot of all that. :) )

Hey, sometimes you guys get me to wonderin', "Why do I think what I think?" In cases like this, I tend to judge a cartridge by whether or not I'd take a shot at Bambi when he's running. I guess that's why I'm more of an '06 guy than a .243 guy.

If Bambi is inside of 200 yards and standing or just walking along, I don't think it really matters much what you use--if you can shoot accurately.

:), Art

[griz]

The 250 Savage in an old Ruger ultralite is one of my favorite guns. Since you read Handloader I'm assuming you reload. The 250 is much more versatile with handloads because of the capability to use heavier bullets and the availability of more game bullets. The 6 MM’s lean slightly toward varmint weights.

That aside, unless you are a reloader, I think You would be better off with a 243. More choices of loads and the availability of premium bullets in factory rounds when you by 243 stuff off the shelf.

[Spectre]

I'm eagerly waiting to receive a custom 6mm Remington. Being based on the 7x57mm, it has a little more punch than the .243. I was initially going to have the rifle chambered in .250 Savage, but factory .250 ammo is a little on the weak side of what I wanted (and I don't know when I'll have time or space to reload). Call sensop in on the discussion, or just do a search for his name and .250 . You should get a pretty decent yield of info.

High angel hell: death and destruction from above!

[Lone Star]

Back in the 1920's, Dr. Roy Chapman Andrews used a .250 (Model 20; I've seen photos) to kill big Asian sheep and elk. If you can shoot it, it can kill, I guess. (He also used 6.5mm amd 9mm Mannlicher-Schoenauers.)

Lone Star