Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 243 vs 6.5 swede recoil comparision

Could someone shoot me a recoil calculation between a typical 140 grain swede load and a typical 100 grain 243 in the same weight rifle? I'm debating about the ammo availability and recoil reduction for my typical northern MN deer hunting to see which way I should go. I've seen several charts that are all over the place and don't have any hand load data.

Thanks for the input.
H
PS - which would you pick for a winter fat northern MN whitetail?

8 pounds, 50 gr powder, 140 gr at 2700 in 6.5x55 says 14.9 ft lbs

same rifle in 243, 100 gr, 2900 fps, 45 gr powder: 10.0 ft lbs

I like the 6.5 bullets, and would go 6.5x55, a little cooler too. Besides you're in New Scandinavia and it seems more appropriate.

You wont feel the difference, go with the 6.5

Wild6.5freakAlaska ��2002-2011

I know I can't feel it, but I can't speak for the OP. He ought cozy-up to a Swede shooter at the range, & launch a few for himself. Just sayin'.

FC

for what it's worth, here's a source for some recoil information

http://www.chuckhawks.com/recoil_table.htm

This is interesting. I bet my 35 rem, 7mm08, and 300 savage are similar to the swede. Could you add figures for a 300 savage 150 grain, 7mm08 in 140 grain, and 35 rem in 200 grain?

I hunt with both and neither offer any real different in recoil reduction over the other...

I've hunted St Louis County for 10 years or so.. and you don't need anything more than 100 to 125 yds capable...

if I was hunting up there again, I'd carry a Swede with a charge of 30 grains of RL 7 and a 160 grain RN.. or if I couldn't get that, then a 140 grain SP Hornady...

kicks a lot less than any factory 243 load...

flat shooting and lethal...

I wouldn't call a 160 out of a Swede "flat shooting". Nor would I consider the 140 flat shooting for that matter.

As far as kick goes, how can anyone claim their swede kicks less than a 243? The swede has heavier bullets, and more powder capacity. It is a larger round. A better debate would be 260 vs 6.5x55.

Apart from how well a chamber is cut and stock design, it's all physics. (for that matter it's ALL physics.) If you launch a 100 gr at 3000 fps from two rifles both weighing 7.5 lbs the recoil will be the same whether the headstamp says 243, 257 or 6.5. The 6.5 is an excellent cartridge and I'd favor that with a 129 gr. Hornady.

I am no fan of recoil either. All things equal of course the Swede will kick more. You are still talking more powder and a 40% bullet weight increase so...even so, not that many other rounds will kick noticably less than one.

I have rifles comparable to both: a 6mm and a 260 Rem. The 6mm kicks less but is wood and a little heavier. I think it is rare to find a 6.5 and a 243 in the equal rifle weights so I think it might be slightly moot. While I love my 6mm and find it perfect for Texas deer, for a big fat northern buck I would feel better squeezing off a 6.5/140 at one of those monsters. Your odds of a complete pass through are just improved.

Take a look at a CZ 550 (available in 6.5x55). We got my Dad one in 6.5x55 and he has not touched his sledehammering 7mag since. Compared to some new light weights rifles (Tikka or Browning) it is on the heavy side but it weighs what a standard rifle always weighed up until recently so its not like dragging around a varmint rig. I would not even call it heavy -just not lightweight. Comes with a great recoil pad (on top of the heavy coat you will be wearing in the field) and its own good rings all of which make it a great bet for recoil sensitive. Fantastic set trigger for targets and zeroing scopes too. Thing is a blast to shoot -and will freak you out first time! It is an honest pussy cat even compared to my similar 260Rem Browning -which isn't bad, but more than any 243 I ever shot. Think you would enjoy shooting either rifle and in other circumstances might point you to a 243 - this just isn't one of them. Let us know what you decide.

What kenjs1 says about the CZ is spot-on based on my experience of the rifle. Very well made, beautiful wood, accurate and recoil is nada. It's not a monster to carry, just not a featherweight.

Actually I bought a ruger 77 mk II 6.5 swede from the fire classifieds (impulse buy) and it shoots factory ammo less than a inch.

Over the years of buying, helping buddies out in a pinch, and inheriting rifles; I have a pretty mixed collection. 3006, 308, 7mm08, 300 savage, 6.5 swede, 35 rem (bolt action), and 45-70 and I feel the need to purge some because I'm not a handloader and the ammo can be expensive or hard to find. So I am thinking of keeping the mildest recoil rifle in case the wife decides to hunt deer, but it seems like the 35/708/300 sav/6.5 swede all recoil about the same and maybe its a reason to get a 243 (this is madness I say!).

The idea of the swede with a near 243 kick with the penetration of that hefty 140 grain bullet was the reason for the the impulse buy. Plus reading about it from all you rifle loonies out here made me sucumb to peer pressure.

So what would you purge and why? Only need one rifle, well two so I have a backup...

The 243 cannot shoot heavies, I think 105's is about max. They make 6.5 bullets all the way down to 85's. A 243 is no slouch on deer. Only after the internet was invented did deer require short mags to kill.

I love both rounds so hard to choose. If you think you will hunt bigger stuff than deer, the 6.5 makes sense. If you think you might want a second varmint gun, go with a 243 since it can shoot 55's.

I have the a few 223's and inherited a nice little 22 hornet so I am good in that area for my occasional woods coyote hunt.

That darn 6.5 is just a nice gun when you really drill down into balistics. Never understood why it suffers other than its not an american 30 cal.

the 6.5x55 produces a lil more recoil but those 2 rounds are bar none 2 of my favorite rounds to shoot deer with or targets man they just get-R-done and do it up right,top notch in my book...

I don't own a 243 but do several 6.5 Swedes. For years that was all I used from small game to moose and the round worked good for them all. I agree with the poster who said there was no need for magnum rounds for deer.

Randy

My ex hunted with a 6mm Rem till I had a 6.5x55 put together for her. After that she never fired the 6mm Rem again.

Man I just wrote a brilliant dissertation eliminating all one at a time Agatha Christie style, starting with the 3006 and 45-70 then all 30-cals due to recoil and fixing on a 243 and a 6.5 -the entire time thinking you need meds for daring to part with a 300 Savage.

I am rethinking this...well except the rehab... because you are not hand loading. So new idea here: 308 and 243. Why??? There are good reduced recoil factory loads for a 308 availble. Buy some for the range and for introducing the wife to larger bores (or dare I say it- for yourself). Factory choice ammo for a 6.5 is 140 or more 140 - pretty much negating the wonderful felixibility you hear from us about 6.5's. Add a 243, let her pick it out (or think she picked it out )- some good stout bullets and the wife has a rifle to claim as hers that she wlll like to shoot. You have your backup and everything covered from mice to moose.

I shoot a Sako .243 and FW 6.5. I love the old Sako, but if I could only keep one it would be the 6.5x55. The recoil on either is minimal. The little 6.5 bullet is accurate and gets the job done. Ken

humdinger,

It just so happens that I have an extra Ruger M77MkII in 6.5 Swede that I would part with. I bought it new and it still looks like new. Been shot maybe 100 times. Shoots real good too. Send me a PM if you're interested.