While your generating NUMBERS run us some with the 105 A-max and some 115 D-Tacs. Your last comparisons is like comparing being clubbed in the head with a baseball bat versus a claw hammer because I would not slum either for longrange.
Eddybo, I am sure you are smart enough to know that the formula I used is to compare apples to apples and
does not take bullet type into consideration. As for Point Blank Range, again I kept it for the loads quoted for the TKO example.
I compared the calibers in question on an equal field. Plain and simple. Anything past that feel free to run numbers to prove the point you want to make. Like I said in my opinion the type bullet used is more the question needed to be asked opposed to what of the two calibers to choose.
Read the BOLD type above, bullets are way more important than headstamps. Your analysis has no relation to real life if you do not consider bullets it is nothing more than mental masturbation.
I will not disagree and I also said that should have been the question not what caliber. Thus my argument that we don't need numbers to prove anything here. Only thing numbers will show you is bullet drop or wind drift and retained energy. We also don't need to take the rifle out to 1000 yards to prove anything. The OP asked for a deer/lope rifle. He did not ask for a specialized long range rig. This pizzing match with me started with Boxer spouting off about showing numbers when I gave a personal statement I had no experience with either the .243 or 25-06 but I would choose a .260 if I were to have only one rifle for said game. My opinion, and had the OP asked why or any other person in a civilized manner I would be glad to say why. You keep sticking up for that Baffoon from THE MILFORD when he has contributed nothing to this topic at all. My post of numbers means nothing and I stated that! Same if I had used Hatcher's formula. They are mathematical formulas and only use fixed numbers to derive another number. All they do is say a whole lot of nothing just like Boxer does only without swearing and talking down to everyone.
You sure read a lot into things and are seemingly pretty sensitive, maybe the internet is not for you. I have taken up for no one, nor have I seen anyone needing defended. I just happen to agree that the 243 is the best choice when you consider bullets available. Go run yourself some numbers with the 115 DTAC and the 105 A-max and the 105 108 line of bergers.
There is not enough difference between the two at short range unless you consider a short action rifle to be an advantage. At long range the 243 has the advantage, but it is based solely on bullet availability. If there were some good .257 wind buckers out there I would be on the other fence. If your going to compare such things compare them at a point where those things make a difference, at the muzzle or at the 100 yard line, the small differences are negligible, and no one can say either is not just as capable of killing stuff.
