Are there bigger, meaner, louder .25-cal rounds? Of course. Does bigger always mean better? Of course not.
There's ALWAYS bigger and badder of anything....but there's a saying "it's not how big it is, but how you use it"
All this ..."ONLY 2800 fps....blah blah blah" meanwhile my former miniscule 6BR using a mere 28.5gr of powder under a 105gr dropped my furthest deer....right at 400 yds.
How much is ....ENOUGH? It's not how fast or KO, or Ft. lbs. - it's Shot placement with a good bullet thru vitals.
Like Scott says headstamps don't matter and I can't recall any animal I ever killed having a Chrony clocking incoming rounds to decide if they drop after impact.
LOTS of nice rounds, all have a niche, a 250 is like a 6BR but there is nothing to worry about feeding. Is it 'better' than a 243 or another round?
Does it NEED to be any 'better?' should be the question.
I'd bet 80-90% of deer are killed under 200 yds a Deuce or 223 w/right bullet in the right spot will handle those chores.
Nope, a 250 won't impress w/ballistics nor Chrony worshippers, but game won't argue when properly hit
250s should be more abundantly used IMHO as they do a great job at a minimum of blast and recoil - both which are counterproductive to the most important part of the killing equation - shot placement.
If one's 'ego' requires magnum on your bbl and headstamp, feel free - as they all work....when the pilot does his/her job.
JB is correct, as Rocky, a Bob as the 25 Souper offer the same and then some, but the 250 is not 'impotent' - lest anyone think so stand behind said target
