Thread: .243 load development part deux

Originally Posted by Dama dama

I assumed he meant 100 95gr NBT...

I'm glad SOMEONE is paying attention in here!

Just read through all this. What a journey. Is there something inherent about the 243 that makes it a fussy caliber when it comes to bullet selection? I've had a few 243s and they all seemed to like what they liked and not a lot else. 85gr Barnes went well in all of them, 90BT went well in two of them but not another one, and 90gr speers went well in all of them also. None of them liked anything made by Sierra at all. The only bullet they all seemed to like that was over 95gr was whatever it is the federal blue box 100gr is. All 10" twist (BSA, Kimber, Forbes)
If I were to make a comparison every 270 I have had has seemed to be able to make pretty much any of the available projectiles work to an acceptable standard where as the 243 always seemed to have an on/off switch, when it was on, it was on, and where it was off it was off.

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

Just read through all this. What a journey. Is there something inherent about the 243 that makes it a fussy caliber when it comes to bullet selection? I've had a few 243s and they all seemed to like what they liked and not a lot else. 85gr Barnes went well in all of them, 90BT went well in two of them but not another one, and 90gr speers went well in all of them also. None of them liked anything made by Sierra at all. The only bullet they all seemed to like that was over 95gr was whatever it is the federal blue box 100gr is. All 10" twist (BSA, Kimber, Forbes)
If I were to make a comparison every 270 I have had has seemed to be able to make pretty much any of the available projectiles work to an acceptable standard where as the 243 always seemed to have an on/off switch, when it was on, it was on, and where it was off it was off.

Speaking from my own, limited experience......they're fussier than a vegan at a BBQ!

Originally Posted by Zedrex

Speaking from my own, limited experience......they're fussier than a vegan at a BBQ!

Best you read Scribe's wonderful book. Check out his working tool and the pill he used for his income. His mate Jim Warren used the same calibre. Some times the discussion clouds the reality.

Who? What? Maybe less mystery and more direct comment would be helpful? My experience is that MY rifle is a fussy feeder, that's not discussion, it's reality.....

Well it's no surprise the Ballistic tips shoot well. They were a pet project for one of Noslers head bullet designers who was a 243 fan. Think that's why they are 95 and 90gr. Realised that not all 243s like hundies and they have a tip making them longer so have to make them lighter

My Sako will shoot 90 grain BT's into an inch or less depending on how I hold my mouth when I shoot; meanwhile it wont shoot a 90 grain ELDX into less than three inches. It will shoot 100 grain Prohunters into one hole, but not a Speer. It will shoot the 85 grain HPBT all into the same place, but will spit the Hornady 87 grain all over the place.

It's all been fun and very interesting but it confirms for me that if a rifle wont shoot it can cost a fortune in time and money to get it to behave. My approach now would be to drop a rifle like this off at sea and having learnt a lesson start again with something reputable (and likely more spendy).

This approach of mine has likely contributed to the rising sea levels but at least I have very accurate guns.

But the 2 best groups are boat tails how's that possible i thought it wouldnt shoot boattails? Isn't that half the reason this thread was 20 plus pages long?

Originally Posted by Stocky

But the 2 best groups are boat tails how's that possible i thought it wouldnt shoot boattails? Isn't that half the reason this thread was 20 plus pages long?

Yep.

Never met a .243 a usefull hunting load could not be found for . Unless the rifle in question was mechanically deficient or the human element incompetent.

Originally Posted by Zedrex

So I should have shot each projectile in one 10 RND group rather than breaking to allow for barrel cooling etc?
Having just plotted the NBT as 1 ten RND group I can see that moves the MOA out to 1.2

I'm satisfied with the 95gr NBT over anything else and a whole different league compared to the SST/Win DS and I think it's good enough to go hunting with.
At the end of the session I re-zero'd my scope 4 clicks left and 6 clicks down but had no "relaible" ammo to check that with but I've a bof of NBT projectiles to load and will check re-zero then.

At the moment I feel I've got a load that me and rifle can shoot with reasonably reliable/predictable results, next is to get the new scope mounted and then see what I can do to tighten up my grouping further, which MAY include further tuning this load.

What are you seeing?

You have 10 data points for each load. You may as well use them most effectively, as a complete larger sample rather than 2 small samples - what's the mean radius on the 95 NBT, 90 NBT, and 90 ELDX loads when you measure it over a 10 rd sample? I'm guessing somewhere around about 0.5MOA for each


Those 3 all look very similar in reality for what you should expect, to me. and all perfectly adequate for hunting at conventional ranges. ~2moa cone of fire from each.

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

Just read through all this. What a journey. Is there something inherent about the 243 that makes it a fussy caliber when it comes to bullet selection? I've had a few 243s and they all seemed to like what they liked and not a lot else. 85gr Barnes went well in all of them, 90BT went well in two of them but not another one, and 90gr speers went well in all of them also. None of them liked anything made by Sierra at all. The only bullet they all seemed to like that was over 95gr was whatever it is the federal blue box 100gr is. All 10" twist (BSA, Kimber, Forbes)
If I were to make a comparison every 270 I have had has seemed to be able to make pretty much any of the available projectiles work to an acceptable standard where as the 243 always seemed to have an on/off switch, when it was on, it was on, and where it was off it was off.

.243 has many of the chamber design elements that are found in more modern & inherently precise cartridge designs, e.g. throat angle & tolerances. There's no inherent reason a .243 should be fussy in a quality rifle, it should be if anything better than some other older cartridges.

Originally Posted by Stocky

But the 2 best groups are boat tails how's that possible i thought it wouldnt shoot boattails? Isn't that half the reason this thread was 20 plus pages long?

To be fair, it looks like it shoots nothing really well. I think the lesson here is steer clear of Franchi if you want really good precision (based on 1 rifle and unknown other variables)

Originally Posted by gimp

You have 10 data points for each load. You may as well use them most effectively, as a complete larger sample rather than 2 small samples - what's the mean radius on the 95 NBT, 90 NBT, and 90 ELDX loads when you measure it over a 10 rd sample? I'm guessing somewhere around about 0.5MOA for each


Those 3 all look very similar in reality for what you should expect, to me. and all perfectly adequate for hunting at conventional ranges. ~2moa cone of fire from each.




.243 has many of the chamber design elements that are found in more modern & inherently precise cartridge designs, e.g. throat angle & tolerances. There's no inherent reason a .243 should be fussy in a quality rifle, it should be if anything better than some other older cartridges.





To be fair, it looks like it shoots nothing really well. I think the lesson here is steer clear of Franchi if you want really good precision (based on 1 rifle and unknown other variables)

I don't think your last comment is fair on Franchi, even with your little disclaimer in brackets.
How often do we hear of a cheap deal on a rifle because it's a lemon, and the new owner has it shooting well?
Id like to see someone with a proven track record have a go at getting this thing to shoot before knocking the brand.

Originally Posted by Tahr

It's all been fun and very interesting but it confirms for me that if a rifle wont shoot it can cost a fortune in time and money to get it to behave. My approach now would be to drop a rifle like this off at sea and having learnt a lesson start again with something reputable (and likely more spendy).

This approach of mine has likely contributed to the rising sea levels but at least I have very accurate guns.

I seem to have 2 categories of rifles: projects, to keep me entertained at the range playing around with loads, and second hand ones known to be accurate shooters with at least one good handload. With time some of the first have moved into the second category...

Originally Posted by Stocky

But the 2 best groups are boat tails how's that possible i thought it wouldnt shoot boattails? Isn't that half the reason this thread was 20 plus pages long?

I said, waaay back that it had got the worst grouping from the one boatail I'd tried and that my assumption from that was that boatails were not suitable in this rifle. I'm happy to stand corrected on that. As for the reason this threads so long....because it's full of opinions, some helpful, others not so much....

Sent from my CPH2639 using Tapatalk