Reloading for 243 - an update

[Sim G]

I've just had a look in the half a dozen loading manuals on my shelf. I don't have a Nosler. But non of them recommend IMR4350 with 70 grain bullets. I fact, the powder has little recommendation in .243 Win, full stop.

There is however, plenty of data for Hodgdons H4350....

That said, I'd say your powder choice is inappropriate. The lack of listing indicates that research by bullet companies have shown that it is unsuitable.

And as for 0.2gn increments, that's a route of diminishing returns. Even the best scales have a variation of 0.1gn, so for every charge weight measured there is potential for a 0.2gn variation anyway. 0.1 above, 0.1 below....

And because you are shooting deer with it, apart from the obvious moral obligation to an effective kill, you have a legal obligation. An acquaintance bought an RPA Woodland Stalker in .243 with a 16" barrel. Would shoot any load very well, but a favourite load was outstanding. And killed well. But, he was technically illegal slaying those deer as the short barrel didn't quite make the velocity for a legal load. The effectiveness would have mattered not in court.

You need a chrono when developing loads for quarry.

You need a rethink on the whole process matey.

[mick miller]

Okay, you need to look here: http://www.nosler.com/nosler-load-data/243-winchester/

Load data, from Nosler, for IMR 4350

This is my foxing load, I don't use ballistic tip on deer as that would be a bit mad.

and here: http://accurateshooter.net/Downloads/sierra243win.pdf

Load data from Sierra for the 100gn soft point BT's I'm using for deer using IMR 4350, 40.1gn should give around 2,800fps or around 1740 ftlb.

But, if you have a better suggestion for powder for 243 I'm happy to listen matey.

[mick miller]

In testing today the low end of IMR4350 at 43gns to 44gns gave the best groups. When the weather improves I'll put everything over the crony and see what it's doing, now that I have one kindly loaned to me.

[mick miller]

Also on that Nosler page is load data for the 55gn ballistic tip load I want to develop using the N150. Right near the top. But there's nothing in any bullet weight using N150 in my Hornady manual, should I conclude that this powder is unsuitable for 243 also?

[Sim G]

I used to shoot an awful lot of .243... I was using it 20 years ago as a target cartridge long before it became "vogue".

N140 or RL-15. Heavier bullets, H414. The powder of choice for .243 right across the bullet range? H380.

[mick miller]

Okay, for the 100gn Sierra gives data for H414 but not N140 or RL-15 and H380 only gives a short range between starting load and max. This is why I opted for the IMR 4350, it gave a wide range between starting and max for me to tweak between (if not enough energy for fallow it'll just become a Muntjac and CWD round).

Nosler gives data for H414 in 70gn only, RL15 in 55gn only but H380 across the board (as it does for IMR4350).

As I'm trying to use known data, from the bullet manufacturers themselves, can you see why I arrived at the decision I did? I didn't pull it from thin air and have tried to use data I can trust. All that said, it seems as if my barrel really doesn't like anything arriving out the end of it too quickly, all the loads thus far have performed best at the low end to middle with charge weights.

It's quite confusing when you start out, as information from many sources seems to conflict each other. I'm glad you didn't call me matey again though

[Sim G]

The most accurate loaded ammo, in my experience, is often not at the top end of the data.

What's wrong with "matey"?

[mick miller]

Ooh, I'm glad you said that, as on another forum one of the target shooting bods said the opposite, that they always found the most accurate loads were at the top of the scale. I've found the exact opposite. Maybe it depends on the barrel, powder combo, I don't know but it does prove that every individual finds different results that work for them.

As for matey, well, please don't be offended by this, but in the context and manner it was read it came across a little, well, condescending. I'm sure that wasn't your intention. Maybe I'm too sensitive

[Mr_Logic]

Somewhat puzzled on what has been posted here. .243 is not a cartridge well suited to N140, or RL15 in my experience. I've shot it with H414 throughout, and it worked nicely for me. With a 55gr Nosler I got > 4000fps and a group about a 5p piece. Same sort of performance with the 70gr. I did use it for the 100gr bullets as well but I then stuck with the 95gr SST. These days I use a 95 NBT and N160, simply because it was what I could get.

I also use N160 with the 105 Amax (8-twist barrel) and it does 1K without too much strife, too. I would expect IMR 4350 to work, the 4350 powder usually does. IMR and H4350 are right next to each other on a burn rate chart, and Nosler has published data for it. No problem with using it. Wouldn't be my first choice but it's not dangerous to do so.

I really don't like the 223/308 powders for 243 as the loads are so light.

I've had combos that work with a heavy charge, right at the top end, and I've had others that worked well on a pretty mild charge. That's the thing with reloading, it's trial and error. what some think can't possibly work, works for others. The proof is what happens on target - does the deer fall over? Is it a V-bull consistently? Depending on what you're trying to achieve, if you answer 'yes' to the appropriate question than crack on!

[mick miller]

Thanks for that. Out of interest, why do you say that IMR 4350 wouldn't be your first choice?

Is it:

a). Because it's an American powder and therefore supplies may be intermittent.
b). Unsuited to the calibre.
c). Poor performance (perhaps temperature sensitive)
d). Something entirely different, like personal choice.

I'm interested to know so that I can start to scratch candidates off the list for future load development.