223 vs 243 vs 270

Bolt action rifles, lever action, pump action, self loading rifles and other miscellaneous longarms.

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by Gwion » 13 Nov 2016, 7:18 am

Browning wrote:We do roo and pig culling all the time and neither the farmer or us has any inclination to clean up "carcasses".....
I guess it all depends on the owner but everywhere we go, as long as they ain't left on a track, no problems...


Just because it's done does not make it good practice.
User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by duncan61 » 13 Nov 2016, 9:04 pm

I am fortunate where I shoot as there is a small area that I call Mirkwood cos its dark and overgrown and wet all year,Good for ducks but any unwanted carcasses go in their off the property,Its actually Crown land but not accessible from any side but the two adjoining farms.And guess where the pigs are showing up
.22 winchester .22hornet .222 .243 7mm rem mag cbc 12g
User avatar
duncan61
Officer Cadet
Officer Cadet
 
Posts: 1905
Western Australia

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by bigfellascott » 13 Nov 2016, 9:20 pm

petemacsydney wrote:Thanks Norton. Been talking to a few mates who are shooters and looking around the threads. i'm actually thinking maybe i should go for 2 rifles. maybe start with a 223 for small game and then when I've got more experience step up to a 271 or 308 for larger stuff. i saw a few posts on various websites saying that if i use a 243 on bunnies that there may not be much left of the bunny and i'll be carrying it out in a plastic bag..
do you guys share the view that a 243 will shred a bunny to pieces? i guess it also depends on rounds?


The rabbits will be fine with a 243 if you shoot them in the head, it will probably bruise the front legs but no great loss as theres SFA meat there anyway, I normally only bother taking the back legs and maybe the backstraps out of them anyway. You could get away with just the 243 I reckon for everything you've mentioned if you really only wanted the one cal as it has a good range of projectile weights from 55gn up to near 100gn if memory serves me correctly :thumbsup:
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by bigfellascott » 13 Nov 2016, 9:23 pm

petemacsydney wrote:thx mate. I don't think i'll be doing a lot of eating. Maybe the occasional bunny on toast or a fox curry, but i also wasn't sure of the etiquette on leaving a pile of mush behind in the bush or indeed on someone's property (who has allowed me to help with their pest problem). i presumed most hunters would tow out kills - i cant imagine a farmer would be pleased with dead mush attracting potentially other pests?


Pete just ask them what they want done with the carcasses mate, some are happy to let them lay, others have a kill pile they want them dumped in, just ask and they will let you know where you stand regarding that. :thumbsup:
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by bigfellascott » 13 Nov 2016, 9:29 pm

Gwion wrote:
AusC wrote:
petemacsydney wrote:I also wasn't sure of the etiquette on leaving a pile of mush behind in the bush or indeed on someone's property (who has allowed me to help with their pest problem). i presumed most hunters would tow out kills - i cant imagine a farmer would be pleased with dead mush attracting potentially other pests?


Meh, in will just break down over time or more likely be eaten by something else within a night.

I wouldn't worry about attracting more pests. Killing one is going to be more of a loss to their numbers than feeding another.


This is an old thread but this statement is very ill informed.
Leaving rotting flesh in grazing land can lead to issues for the grazier. Most obviously is the attraction of carcasses to scavenging predators like cats, dogs and foxes. A regular free feed for cats will encourage them to breed near by and increase the chances of a toxo issue within breed stock. Free feeds for dogs make them stronger, bolder and more territorial; more likely to successfully kill live stock. Same with foxes, they will more successfully raise young with free feeds.

The other less known issues involve the pathogens that can develop in ground that has rotting flesh left behind. These pathogens can linger long after the carcass has rotted and affect livestock.


I'd say written by someone who doesn't come off the land :D all the farms I visit have dead stock on them at one time or another, none get buried or anything special done to them, they are just left there to rot, same with pests, they lay where they fall 99% of the time or get dragged to kill piles where they rot. :thumbsup:

A wannabe farmer from the city well they'd probably hold a funeral service for the pet chook or lamb I guess. :D
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by duncan61 » 13 Nov 2016, 10:07 pm

If the paddock gets mowed for baling old bones go flying and cause problems so it pays to move any carcasses
.22 winchester .22hornet .222 .243 7mm rem mag cbc 12g
User avatar
duncan61
Officer Cadet
Officer Cadet
 
Posts: 1905
Western Australia

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by bigfellascott » 13 Nov 2016, 10:37 pm

duncan61 wrote:If the paddock gets mowed for baling old bones go flying and cause problems so it pays to move any carcasses


Yep common sense really isn't it. :D
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by duncan61 » 13 Nov 2016, 11:05 pm

Ive never shot a 270 but I have shot the 30/06.The ballistics are nearly at 7mm rem so Its got some go
.22 winchester .22hornet .222 .243 7mm rem mag cbc 12g
User avatar
duncan61
Officer Cadet
Officer Cadet
 
Posts: 1905
Western Australia

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by Gwion » 14 Nov 2016, 9:09 am

bigfellascott wrote:
Gwion wrote:
AusC wrote:
petemacsydney wrote:I also wasn't sure of the etiquette on leaving a pile of mush behind in the bush or indeed on someone's property (who has allowed me to help with their pest problem). i presumed most hunters would tow out kills - i cant imagine a farmer would be pleased with dead mush attracting potentially other pests?


Meh, in will just break down over time or more likely be eaten by something else within a night.

I wouldn't worry about attracting more pests. Killing one is going to be more of a loss to their numbers than feeding another.


This is an old thread but this statement is very ill informed.
Leaving rotting flesh in grazing land can lead to issues for the grazier. Most obviously is the attraction of carcasses to scavenging predators like cats, dogs and foxes. A regular free feed for cats will encourage them to breed near by and increase the chances of a toxo issue within breed stock. Free feeds for dogs make them stronger, bolder and more territorial; more likely to successfully kill live stock. Same with foxes, they will more successfully raise young with free feeds.

The other less known issues involve the pathogens that can develop in ground that has rotting flesh left behind. These pathogens can linger long after the carcass has rotted and affect livestock.


I'd say written by someone who doesn't come off the land :D all the farms I visit have dead stock on them at one time or another, none get buried or anything special done to them, they are just left there to rot, same with pests, they lay where they fall 99% of the time or get dragged to kill piles where they rot. :thumbsup:

A wannabe farmer from the city well they'd probably hold a funeral service for the pet chook or lamb I guess. :D


Every farmer I know has a designated area where they put dead animals. Usually either a pit or a pile, where they will periodically burn the remains. The dead are not left to rot in the paddock.

Personally, I have a gully with Devils in it, so they get a free feed every now and then.

Leaving dead to rot is poor practice.
User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by bigfellascott » 14 Nov 2016, 2:10 pm

Gwion wrote:
bigfellascott wrote:
Gwion wrote:
AusC wrote:
petemacsydney wrote:I also wasn't sure of the etiquette on leaving a pile of mush behind in the bush or indeed on someone's property (who has allowed me to help with their pest problem). i presumed most hunters would tow out kills - i cant imagine a farmer would be pleased with dead mush attracting potentially other pests?


Meh, in will just break down over time or more likely be eaten by something else within a night.

I wouldn't worry about attracting more pests. Killing one is going to be more of a loss to their numbers than feeding another.


This is an old thread but this statement is very ill informed.
Leaving rotting flesh in grazing land can lead to issues for the grazier. Most obviously is the attraction of carcasses to scavenging predators like cats, dogs and foxes. A regular free feed for cats will encourage them to breed near by and increase the chances of a toxo issue within breed stock. Free feeds for dogs make them stronger, bolder and more territorial; more likely to successfully kill live stock. Same with foxes, they will more successfully raise young with free feeds.

The other less known issues involve the pathogens that can develop in ground that has rotting flesh left behind. These pathogens can linger long after the carcass has rotted and affect livestock.


I'd say written by someone who doesn't come off the land :D all the farms I visit have dead stock on them at one time or another, none get buried or anything special done to them, they are just left there to rot, same with pests, they lay where they fall 99% of the time or get dragged to kill piles where they rot. :thumbsup:

A wannabe farmer from the city well they'd probably hold a funeral service for the pet chook or lamb I guess. :D


Every farmer I know has a designated area where they put dead animals. Usually either a pit or a pile, where they will periodically burn the remains. The dead are not left to rot in the paddock.

Personally, I have a gully with Devils in it, so they get a free feed every now and then.

Leaving dead to rot is poor practice.


Each to their own, around here they don't tend to worry about where things die much and I'll be buggered if I want to try and carry out 100kg pigs from down the steep gullies either, same with bloody dogs or foxes ain't interested in dragging them for miles either, they get shot and stay where they drop :drinks:
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by in2anity » 14 Nov 2016, 9:29 pm

Speaking as someone who grew up on a largish (3000acre) working property near Dunedoo, most dead stuff out in the paddocks stays where it falls. If its in a inconvenient position like close to a dam or somewhere where you would smell it regularly, then we used to drag it away to an out-of-the-way gully. Same goes for large cattle stations (which I've also worked on) - you only move em if they may compromise the water. I've never known any real farmer to do anything different to this - and when it comes to cropping and pasture (which you may bail) it doesn't really matter if there's a few bones mixed in, nobody ever even thought about that from memory. You don't run stock on crops or bailing pasture though so no dead sheep or cattle. I suppose you wouldn't wanna drop a deer a week before wind rowing / bailing, that's a very specific scenario though... I don't know any hobby farmers personally, so I can't comment on their perhaps extreme attitudes...
At what point does lack of maintenance become patina?
User avatar
in2anity
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 3048
New South Wales

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by bigfellascott » 15 Nov 2016, 7:47 am

in2anity wrote:Speaking as someone who grew up on a largish (3000acre) working property near Dunedoo, most dead stuff out in the paddocks stays where it falls. If its in a inconvenient position like close to a dam or somewhere where you would smell it regularly, then we used to drag it away to an out-of-the-way gully. Same goes for large cattle stations (which I've also worked on) - you only move em if they may compromise the water. I've never known any real farmer to do anything different to this - and when it comes to cropping and pasture (which you may bail) it doesn't really matter if there's a few bones mixed in, nobody ever even thought about that from memory. You don't run stock on crops or bailing pasture though so no dead sheep or cattle. I suppose you wouldn't wanna drop a deer a week before wind rowing / bailing, that's a very specific scenario though... I don't know any hobby farmers personally, so I can't comment on their perhaps extreme attitudes...


:clap: you get it - all the farms I've ever been on operate the same way, pretty much common sense I reckon, if it's in ya way move it, if not leave it where it lays.

All I can say to anyone who hunts on diff properties, ask the owner what the rules are so to speak, they will soon tell you how they want it to work and more than likely will tell you if they want carcasses disposed of in any particular way anyway but always good to clarify the rules before you start.

Lots of farmers don't like foxes hanging of fences, some are fine with it so I just clarify how they want things to work before I get started, same with spotlighting too, I find out if they are ok or not with it any restrictions etc, same goes for paddocks that have crops in them or are about too, I ask if I can or can't drive on them etc, some are fine some say no, ya just got to ask questions to avoid problems and you should be fine. :drinks:
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by Rocker » 17 Nov 2016, 11:00 am

bigfellascott wrote: :clap: you get it - all the farms I've ever been on operate the same way, pretty much common sense I reckon, if it's in ya way move it, if not leave it where it lays.


Aren't you required to leave it in some instances too?

Not a farmer here, don't know the in's and out's, but thought with Roo cull for example you could shoot them but then were not allowed to do anything with them.

Couldn't take the meat or whatever and turn them into something useful.

I thought?
Sako A7 30-06
Marlin 1895 Guide Gun 45-70
User avatar
Rocker
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 266
South Australia

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by duncan61 » 10 Dec 2016, 4:51 pm

Where I hunt and shoot I get 40 damage tags for the roos and can sell them to a licensed processor,The only problem now is both processers are chockas with roos so I am skinning and selling the skins to the tanner directly.If a bit of meat falls in my freezer oooopppppps
.22 winchester .22hornet .222 .243 7mm rem mag cbc 12g
User avatar
duncan61
Officer Cadet
Officer Cadet
 
Posts: 1905
Western Australia

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by sandgroperbill » 10 Dec 2016, 11:29 pm

They need to change it so that meat can be removed from properties. Wastage is pointless
sandgroperbill
Warrant Officer C2
Warrant Officer C2
 
Posts: 1083
Western Australia

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by alan j » 11 Dec 2016, 5:59 pm

If you were only shooting roo within 250m would you guys still use a 243 or go for a 223. I have owned a 243 for about 4 years, with the intention of shooting deer and roo. Deer is not going to happen. Is the difference in recoil, noise, running cost, etc worth going back to a 223 if only shooting roo ? Ive never shot a 223 thanks .
alan j
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 37
Queensland

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by duncan61 » 11 Dec 2016, 6:21 pm

All the roos I head shoot at night are less than 100 metres more like 60 metres.The greys down here in the south are harder to get close too but we mainly ambush in the mornings and late afternoons.I have shot a big boy standing behind me by rolling over and lifting the rifle on my knee.Range about 7 foot.One roo that my mate and I still talk about was just about leaning on my bullbar but that was up in the gascoiyne and you can get a lot closer.This big boy was behind a large bush and I stopped and it hopped out and stood still.I have been with other pros that drop em out a way but then spend an hour trying to find them.get closer I say and do one at a time
.22 winchester .22hornet .222 .243 7mm rem mag cbc 12g
User avatar
duncan61
Officer Cadet
Officer Cadet
 
Posts: 1905
Western Australia

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by Sam45 » 11 Dec 2016, 8:16 pm

alan j wrote:If you were only shooting roo within 250m would you guys still use a 243 or go for a 223. I have owned a 243 for about 4 years, with the intention of shooting deer and roo. Deer is not going to happen. Is the difference in recoil, noise, running cost, etc worth going back to a 223 if only shooting roo ? Ive never shot a 223 thanks .


Mate a .223 will drop a Roo @ 300 no worries at all. The .243 will go a bit further as you know. Personally I use the .223 cheap and reliable, plenty of ammo. Prefer not to shoot em that far out, but it certainly is capable of doing it. Sadly there is not one rifle that will cover everything. I also have a .270 and only use it for deer. It really depends what you will be hunting most of the time. I would hate to be putting a couple of hundred rounds through the .270. The .223 is an all day/night shooter. Zero recoil, accurate and cheap. Better to buy a heap of em and use accordingly. You know the old saying... Never enough gun :thumbsup:
Sam45
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 294
Queensland

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by halberg » 12 Dec 2016, 9:26 am

sandgroperbill wrote:They need to change it so that meat can be removed from properties. Wastage is pointless


Yep, idiotic.
Savage Mark II FVT .22LR
Tikka T3 Lite Stainless 25-06 Remington
Sako L691 6.5x55 SE
User avatar
halberg
Private
Private
 
Posts: 66
Queensland

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by flutch » 04 Feb 2020, 3:01 pm

petemacsydney wrote: Maybe the occasional bunny on toast or a fox curry


Old thread I know, but wtf! People actually do this? Foxes would have to be one of the worst smelling animals and I couldn't even begin to imagine eating one, yuck
Guns:
Rossi S/S 410
Lanber U/O 12 gauge
Adler B220PG 12 gauge
Ruger 22lr
Remington 270 win
Howa 223
Weatherby 300 Winmag

Bows:
G5 Quest Drive
G5 Prime Defy
flutch
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 447
Western Australia

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by Blr243 » 04 Feb 2020, 3:32 pm

With toast avocado and baileys Irish cream
Blr243
Brigadier
Brigadier
 
Posts: 4479
Queensland

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by bladeracer » 04 Feb 2020, 3:36 pm

flutch wrote:[quote="petemacsydney" Maybe the occasional bunny on toast or a fox curry[/quote

Old thread I know, but wtf! People actually do this? Foxes would have to be one of the worst smelling animals and I couldn't even begin to imagine eating one, yuck


If you're hungry enough maybe :-)
There are some kids in Tassie (I think) that do a survivalist type of Youtube channel, they shot a fox and cooked it up. I'll see I can find it.

https://youtu.be/Wc9ezczJvcI
Practice Strict Gun Control - Precision Counts!
User avatar
bladeracer
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
 
Posts: 12655
Victoria

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by flutch » 04 Feb 2020, 3:51 pm

Fark yeah nah, I'll be right
Guns:
Rossi S/S 410
Lanber U/O 12 gauge
Adler B220PG 12 gauge
Ruger 22lr
Remington 270 win
Howa 223
Weatherby 300 Winmag

Bows:
G5 Quest Drive
G5 Prime Defy
flutch
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 447
Western Australia

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by Bill » 04 Feb 2020, 4:06 pm

6.5 Grendel will do the job on all 3, ammo's getting cheap and more available, not alot of recoil and target work is where the Grendel shines at moderate ranges :thumbsup:
When a guy is digging his own grave, you don’t fight him for the shovel.

Success leaves clues, Fools follow failure !

20 Hornet, 218 Bee, 222 Rem, 256 WM, 6mm ARC, 6.5 Grendel, 6.5x55 Scan, 270 Win, 357 Mag, 358 Win, 9.3x62, 500 A Square
User avatar
Bill
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1253
New South Wales

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by JimTom » 04 Feb 2020, 5:34 pm

Bill wrote:6.5 Grendel will do the job on all 3, ammo's getting cheap and more available, not alot of recoil and target work is where the Grendel shines at moderate ranges :thumbsup:


I am a fan of the Grendel too mate however I am not certain it will do the job of a .223 or .270 if that is what your post is getting at. Great cartridge though.
User avatar
JimTom
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2130
Queensland

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by flutch » 04 Feb 2020, 5:41 pm

I reckon own as many guns as you can justify, get both or all three
Guns:
Rossi S/S 410
Lanber U/O 12 gauge
Adler B220PG 12 gauge
Ruger 22lr
Remington 270 win
Howa 223
Weatherby 300 Winmag

Bows:
G5 Quest Drive
G5 Prime Defy
flutch
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 447
Western Australia

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by JimTom » 04 Feb 2020, 5:43 pm

flutch wrote:I reckon own as many guns as you can justify, get both or all three



Well said that man.
User avatar
JimTom
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2130
Queensland

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by bladeracer » 04 Feb 2020, 5:47 pm

flutch wrote:I reckon own as many guns as you can justify, get both or all three


I got the paperwork for licence renewal today, which includes a handy list of my firearms, very handy :-)
Practice Strict Gun Control - Precision Counts!
User avatar
bladeracer
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
 
Posts: 12655
Victoria

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by Bill » 04 Feb 2020, 6:46 pm

jimtom 90gr TNTs at 3000fps is pretty much matches OSA 223 55gr which chronograph at 3050fps.

Yeah certainly not in the same class as a 270 which can run a 150gr at 3000fps but a 0.264 hole aint much diff from a 0.277 hole.

A Grendel uses a 40% less powder than a 270 Win so alot less recoil and ofcourse a short action so a lighter handier package and lots of slippery high BC 6.5 pills for moderate range work.
When a guy is digging his own grave, you don’t fight him for the shovel.

Success leaves clues, Fools follow failure !

20 Hornet, 218 Bee, 222 Rem, 256 WM, 6mm ARC, 6.5 Grendel, 6.5x55 Scan, 270 Win, 357 Mag, 358 Win, 9.3x62, 500 A Square
User avatar
Bill
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1253
New South Wales

Re: 223 vs 243 vs 270

Post by JimTom » 04 Feb 2020, 7:26 pm

Fair enough.
User avatar
JimTom
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2130
Queensland

Next

Back to top
 
Return to Centerfire rifles