I don't think he said that 24's and 25's wouldn't kill deer and elk, nor that 223 cal's would not kill deer.Rather he seemed to imply that for both jobs there were better options.

After my 2000 season experience using the .243 Winchester I don't feel terribly confident in this caliber for big game either

Taken from the article

Oh, it's on now!

No mako i'm not looking to go down that road.I appreciate a man putting in that kind of time and sharing with everyone.By no means am i a ballistian. In my limited experience with the 243 it seems to a very adequate cartridge for deer,at least for me.

The ire won't be directed towards you for simply pointing out what the study says (well, it shouldn't anyway).

I have zero hesitation in using a .244, and while I don't prefer the .22's - I've seen the results, and it's dead critters. Many times, LARGE ones.

What I see as valuable in newsprint testing is to determine for yourself if the bullet performs as the manufacturer describes. There will always be those claiming the exception rather than pointing out the rule, but, if you test enough bullets from a variety of calibers at varying velocities you do get an idea if the bullet is performing in accordance with its design and marketing. And, of course, the medium has to be consistent. The best cup and core bullet is likely to disintegrate if the newsprint is too dry, but even then, if the medium is consistent, you can determine which penetrated more before shattering. I've drawn my own conclusions, of course, from my own testing but I'm hesitate to mention them due to the flammability of the electronic media.

I read about a test where they painted the front of Keith style bullets prior to shooting test medium. It seems the paint on the shoulders was undisturbed and it was concluded that the shoulders never made contact. I think it was Ross Seyfried who wrote about it but I don't remember if he was involved in the testing.

This is true, the wound channel is determined by the size of the me-plat on the bullet. I have shot enough game with these bullets to have observed this in the field as well as in test media

Posted link for 'informative value'

Re: the author's statement, sort of 'premature' to base his assessment of the 243 on a few kills w/random bullets. Have to know more info to conclude anything on those WW powerpoints. Suffice to say, I have had GREAT results using 95BTs and 85 TSX, as well as others. The 100 PT may not make the widest wound channel, but it will give 2 holes, my first deer kill was using it, but I wanted something more, and think I have found it.

Alot of good info in the article/review. I can say, just like in medicine, the OUTCOMES Data (what happens in field) may be far more important than stats/pics of bullets.

Use what works for YOU. Often certain bullets have 'trends,' and I find myself going w/those that are most favorable - in their actual shooting/hunting - those results showing up from many sources.

Most often, a bullets reputation over a LONG time will be seen by it's results. IF the cost of ALL bullets were equal, I'd fathom the majority of hunters would choose a premium of one kind or another.

An LBT WFN does does have some "whop."