For any realistic use I'd have for my 338 I wouldn't need a 250. But back when I used to play with it, the rifle made it clear to me a 250 was what it liked.
My Ruger m77's were the same way. I even tried the 180's back in the day and the 250's always seemed to edge out everything in the accuracy dept. However, I always suspected it was because of the particular type/brand of bullet (Sierra gameking). My first 2 Rugers loved a stiff charge of IMR 4350 which ran the 250's at 2,700 fps and my last Ruger liked a somewhat anemic load (67gr. IMR 4350) that ran 2,600 fps. My Alaskan doesn't seem to be as particular as the Rugers and has seemed to shoot just about everything I've tried in it pretty accurately. The Rugers were very decisive when the accuracy node was achieved. 1/2 a grain in either direction would make accuracy suffer big time. Here's the last Ruger m77's load:
Originally Posted by raybass
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style.
Originally Posted by Pharmseller
You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole.
![[Linked Image]](http://s1180.photobucket.com/user/chiefbsa/media/002-8.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s1180.photobucket.com/user/chiefbsa/media/003-11.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s1180.photobucket.com/user/chiefbsa/media/Image023-1.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s1180.photobucket.com/user/chiefbsa/media/003-12.jpg.html)
