I suppose they are not comparable in a sense because one shoots a high speed bullet and the other is a slow, larger, bullet. But do you feel that both are about equally adequate? (.243 w/ 100 gr and 30-30 w/ 170 gr)
I ask this because i have hunted with a 30-30 for a few years and took a buck about 75 yards with it about 2 years ago (only buck i've ever shot). So i know the performance of the 30-30.
Im looking either to get a single shot or bolt action for .243 but even though i realize that many many many hunters take deer every year with it, i cant shake the idea that it is just a tad bit under powered for that "trophy buck" that some guys have been seeing around my area.
The reason i want a .243 is that it is light recoiling and theoretically has better punch than the 30-30 out to 200, maybe 300 yards
So, in overall short hand, do you think the .243 has more punch at 100 yards than a 30-30 (.243 w/ 100 gr and 30-30 w/ 170 gr, using standard core-lokt remington ammo).
-thanks guys,
--Grizz-Lee
I ask this because i have hunted with a 30-30 for a few years and took a buck about 75 yards with it about 2 years ago (only buck i've ever shot). So i know the performance of the 30-30.
Im looking either to get a single shot or bolt action for .243 but even though i realize that many many many hunters take deer every year with it, i cant shake the idea that it is just a tad bit under powered for that "trophy buck" that some guys have been seeing around my area.
The reason i want a .243 is that it is light recoiling and theoretically has better punch than the 30-30 out to 200, maybe 300 yards
So, in overall short hand, do you think the .243 has more punch at 100 yards than a 30-30 (.243 w/ 100 gr and 30-30 w/ 170 gr, using standard core-lokt remington ammo).
-thanks guys,
--Grizz-Lee