« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: 223 versus 243  (Read 1076 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rex6666

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2332
  • Gender: Male
223 versus 243
« on: May 17, 2007, 10:34:41 AM »
is their some reason that i am unaware of or is it my imagination that the 223 is more popular
than the 243?
when i look at Hornady ballistics the 243 out shoots the223, at least on paper, comparing the 75gr in both and the 55gr 223 to the 58gr 243
75 gr is the heaviest in 223, and the 100gr 243 still is better out to 400yds
i know their is more ammo that hornady but that is all i shoot not being a reloader
Logged
Rex
GOD GUNS and GUTS MADE AMERICA GREAT

Texas is good for men and dogs, but it is hell on women and horses.

Offline DalesCarpentry

  • Trade Count: (32)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6111
  • Gender: Male
  • I would rather be shooting!!
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2007, 10:39:24 AM »
I think there are a couple reasons the 223 is more popular. For one reason you can buy ammo for it cheaper and another is if you reload it uses less powder which means you can reload more per pound of powder.
Logged
The quality of a mans life is in direct proportion to his commitment to excellence.

A bad day at the range is better than a good day at work!!

Offline Tack Driver

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2007, 10:45:16 AM »
Little less POP, little less recoil (not like there is any with either), but yes, a good bit less money. Bulk .223 can be found ANYWHERE.

I'm a big .243 fan though. Light recoil, stupid flat, and crazy fast with varmint weight bullets, but can still be loaded up with enough pop to drop deer hard. Nuff said.
Logged

Offline rex6666

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2332
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2007, 10:50:36 AM »
that is why i like the 243 ammo light for varmints and heavy enough for deer.
how good is the bulk ammo for the223, as good as hornady or just plinking.
i like to practice with what i am going to use.
Logged
Rex
GOD GUNS and GUTS MADE AMERICA GREAT

Texas is good for men and dogs, but it is hell on women and horses.

Offline quickdtoo

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (149)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43301
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2007, 10:51:12 AM »
Although the two can be interchangeable for certain purposes, they're really in two different classes. The 243 is based on the 308 Winchester case which is considerably bigger than the 223 and holds roughly twice the powder volume. That right there tells you that there's gonna be a lot more recoil and noise, and it will cost more to shoot the 243, whether you reload or not. The 223 is considered by most as inadequate for deer, isn't legal in a lot of states, some even consider the 243 as a poor choice, although I think that to be a statement made by more shooters that have never used one or those that made poor shot placement.

Just depends on your requirements and what your intended use is.

Tim

Logged
"Always do right, this will gratify some and astonish the rest" -  Mark Twain

Offline Inrut24/7

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 338
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2007, 03:51:51 PM »
Another forum site i frequent, www.huntingpa.com, there is a fella who shoots a 243 on groundhogs for out to 1000 yards and ocasionally he will post vidios of his long shots, I was thinking about getting a 204, but lately i have been thinking about trying a .243,or a 6mm
Logged

Offline bluebayou

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2007, 04:01:17 PM »
I was going to mention the 1000 yard point, but you beat me to it.  There are some that shoot 105 gr VLD bullets in aftermarket, fast-twist barrels.  I think that would be awesome, very little recoil in such a heavy rifle too.  I have a 223 bolt gun and it is my favorite as I can see the hits through the scope because of light recoil.  I WILL get a 243 HB for the Handi one day.....just not this year. 
Logged

Offline wcf3030

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 280
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #7 on: May 17, 2007, 04:27:07 PM »
Cheaper to shoot and works for what I want, which is a medium range varmint/target rifle.
Easy on the shoulder and damn accurate out of that Ultra.
Logged
"Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it."

Offline trotterlg

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (36)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3978
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #8 on: May 17, 2007, 04:54:16 PM »
.223 and .243 aren't even in the same universe.  You can kill anything with the .243 you can with the .223 but you will have a lot more fun shooting the .223 unless you really need what the .243 can do for you.  A .243 can have a very nasty sharp recoil, kind of harsh for what you would expect from a round of this size.  Unless you will want to shoot deer or pigs or elk then the .223 will give you a lot more pleasure and be a lot cheaper.  Those 1000 yard .243 shots were selected from about a hundred tries.  Larry
Logged
A gun is just like a parachute, if you ever really need one, nothing else will do.

Offline Mac11700

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (34)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6875
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #9 on: May 17, 2007, 07:01:54 PM »


I personally don't own a 223...and really never had a need for one...even though I have shot several AR rifles in that caliber..The 243 bull barreled Handi I owned was a terrific shooter...and works great with the 55 grain Silver Ballistic tips for mitchell  and also with the 95 grain Silver Ballistic tips for myself...The chamber was cut correctly and my brass didn't stretch hardly at all with max loads...1000 yard hits with fast twist barrels ( 1x8 or 1x7 ) are common place with those using the cartridge..but they are using some highly tuned rifles and that comes at a high price tag...You can read more about it here...http://www.6mmbr.com/243Win.html..I've always found the 243 very  easy on the shoulder and usually pretty accurate when fed properly...It's very easy to load for..and you have a wide range of great components to choose from with it...Personally...I would get both and enjoy them..and have a matched pair...My preference would be for the 24" bull barrels in both...

Mac
Logged
You can cry me a river... but...build me a bridge and then get over it...

Offline Coffee_Boy

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2007, 10:10:13 PM »
Many states will not allow big game hunters to use the 55g .223.  So that should tell you something.

Here in New Mexico, you can hunt deer and pronghorn with the .223.  They also allow the use of the .243 on elk and oryx (including 58g, I assume).  I don't think any of these are good laws (those bullets are too small, if you ask me).

But here in New Mexico, there are also no limits on magazine capacity.  Go figure.  I guess the firing squad method is popular among the political class.   :-[
Logged

Offline Coffee_Boy

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #11 on: May 18, 2007, 04:31:29 AM »
Hey, CB, what the heck is an oryx? (you might ask)  Well, funny story:

Back in the 60's (I think), the people at NM Game and Fish came up with this idea to promote tourism (Governor's contest, maybe?).  They decided to make NM a destination for hunters by offering exotic species.  Three, in fact, the african oryx, the persian ibex, and the barbary sheep.

One problem, though, Federal law.  YOU CANNOT IMPORT A FOREIGN SPECIES INTO THIS COUNTRY AND RELEASE IT INTO THE WILD.  Obviously !!!  But our heroes were not deterred by something as silly as a Federal law.  They imported these foreign species, tagged them, kept them confined, and then released THEIR OFFSPRING into the wild.  Take that, Big Brother!

Hunting the oryx is tough, though.  You have to pull your pickup truck up next to where they are standing, and then step the lawful distance away from your vehicle, before you discharge your rifle.  (Actually, it is kind of tough after that, because you do have to back your truck over to the kill and lift the beast into the bed with a crane).
Logged

Offline rex6666

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2332
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #12 on: May 18, 2007, 05:04:32 AM »
Maybe some one should call the feds. to look at Texas, we have lots of exotics that were
   relased behind 3 wire bob wire fences.
The Audad was release in paladuro canyon maybe 30 years ago no fences.
Logged
Rex
GOD GUNS and GUTS MADE AMERICA GREAT

Texas is good for men and dogs, but it is hell on women and horses.

Offline Fred M

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2362
    • Fred The Reloader and Wildcatter
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #13 on: May 18, 2007, 05:41:41 AM »
243?
Too small for big stuff and too big for small stuff.

223 one of the best varmint calibers with a range and accuracy at which 99%
or the majority of varmints are taken.
Logged
Fred M.
From Alberta Canada.

Offline stimpylu32

  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (67)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6062
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #14 on: May 18, 2007, 06:05:05 AM »
Part of the mind set of the 223 is the fact that if its good enough for the army its good enough to do anything , also many were under the thinking that you could mix & match the 223 and the 5.56mm and all would be fine , before the war bulk 5.56 was everywere and dirt cheap .

I happen to like the 223 as a mid range varmint round out to as far as 500 yards , it fits well between the 22 mag and the 243 , with about the the recoil of a air rifle . Granted the 243 does have its place , that being to fill the role of long range varmint gun / deer rifle but to try to put them in the same class just don't work .

JMHO

stimpy
Logged
Deceased June 17, 2015


:D If i can,t stop it with 6 it can,t be stopped

Offline dw06

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1074
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #15 on: May 18, 2007, 09:14:33 AM »
+1 what Fred said.I'm not a big 243 fan,had one and got rid of it after two deer seasons.Did shoot allot of groundhogs with it and it did fine,but for all of my needs a 223 does as well cheaper and lees fuss and noise.JMO.
Logged
If you find yourself in a hole,the first thing to do is stop digging-Will Rogers

Offline rex6666

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2332
  • Gender: Male
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #16 on: May 18, 2007, 11:24:21 AM »
lots of deer killed with one shot with 243 every year and know people that kill elk with them (little lite for me)
seems to me the 243 will do anything the223 will and more, maybe a little louder, may cost a little more, but what the heck we only go around once if you put the shot in the right place the 243 is some better
Logged
Rex
GOD GUNS and GUTS MADE AMERICA GREAT

Texas is good for men and dogs, but it is hell on women and horses.

Offline McLernon

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1217
Re: 223 versus 243
« Reply #17 on: May 18, 2007, 01:45:26 PM »
'Double -lung' a deer and it's dead no matter what you use. But I would never use a 223 on deer. A 243 does nicely.

Mc
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »