Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors 250 won't kill deer, unpopular due to bad reputation????

Not to piss in the corn flakes here but most of us have a lot more opportunities to "pass" on risky shots than our fathers and grandfathers did, especially here in the NE.

Nobody passed on risky shots and I suspect that is still the case for some. When you and your kids are hungry, that is easy to say and hard to do when that might be the only legal (or illegal) deer you see all year. The only risk you take by not shooting is not getting your piece of meat. 100% of the shots you don't take...result in no game.

Which begs the question, what will the 250 do that the 300 can't do better? A consideration back in the day when most people could only afford to own one rifle.

There are a lot of variables to consider.

Price wise, I believe that one of the reasons that Winchester 94 carbines in 30-30 are so common across the U.S. is that they were always significantly less expensive than a comparable Savage 1899/99. Before the advent of telescopic sights, the "advantages" of side ejection that Marlin and Savage could claim were more theoretical than practical. Or so it seems to me.

Also, prior to the post-WW2 economic boom, few people had sufficient income that allow them to travel far from home to hunt. I grew up in rural New Hampshire and often went hunting by walking out the back door or walking out the back door, going to the garage, and getting the Honda CT-90 into action.

Jeff

Randy
The 250 will Shoot or Travel Flatter than a 300, and I Think a Bit More Distance.Just My 2 Cents.

But Heck I can Do Just as well with a 22,. And Many Have Killed Some Large Game With a 22

Sorry to disagree Steve, but that is baloney.

The 30 cal will shoot just as far, drift less and deliver more energy down range than the 25 cal. The very reason that most militaries in the world use the 30 cal as a long range sniper rifle.

Not saying the 250 isn't capable of taking game, just saying the 300 is better at it than the 250 is.

I shot an antelope last fall at 300 yards with my 300 in a 30+ mile an hour crosswind. Knowing that my 150 gr bullet dropped 10" at 300 yards I held 6" over the root of his tail and delivered the 30 cal ball behind the front shoulder.

I could have easily shot a box of 250 shells trying to hit that antelope under those conditions.

In his book, "Shots at Whitetails," published in 1940, Lawrence R. Koller had great praise for the Savage 250-3000. But he too stressed the importance of a well placed shot.

Just face it you guys, the 250 don't work!

If it is/was marginal there are a lot of those Eskimo's that have being doing it wrong for a long time.

Just sayin.

Eskimos used to kill game with spears, but they traded them in for guns...cause they are more versatile and work better.

The 300 is more versitile and works better than the 250.

Cracks me up that when somebody points out that something is better than what they got or like...they get all defensive and pizzed.

The 250 does work...the 300 just works better.

Just sayin.

yes he did and it's a great book. and if you read more Koller books he mentions handloading 117gr. bullets to use in his M1920 Savage.

Just for fun I put a couple of typical combinations through Hornady's online ballistics calculator. I compared an .257" 87 grain flat base at 3000 fps vs. a .308" 150 grain flat base at 2600 fps, both of which are quite common combinations for the respective cartridges.

I set them as zeroed at 200 yards, and put in a 30 mph crosswind. Guess what? At 300 yards the 87 grain bullet drops 2.4" less, and has 1.1" less wind drift.

So your last statement may be a bit hyperbolic.

If you follow Larry Koller, this may interest you. According to Paul Koller, Larry's Son, Larry had at least four 1920 and 20/26 rifles; a 1920 that he used with the Lyman #54 peep sight, a 1920 that he modified to allow for a Lyman Alaskan to be mounted via a Weaver "N" mount (this is the one I have), a 1920 that had been rebarreled to 228-250 (Paul thought that Risley did the work some time after he'd made a 228-250 for Harvey Donaldson, 'chuck hunters talk), and a 20/26 in 300 that he used with the Lyman #54. Paul told me that Larry had a 40 or 45 SuperSporter that he'd rebarrel in 219 Zipper during WW2 and that it was his favorite 'chuck rifle unless he got a Remington 722 in 222 Magnum.

Jeff

Ah... the old online balistics calculator.

Can't argue with that. Hyperbolic or not, can't think of too many experienced rifleman that would opt for a 25 instead of a 30 in a 30 mph crosswind.

Maybe based on your ground breaking info the US Army which doesn't know much about this and hasn't done much thinking on it, will consider giving up the 7.62 Nato which was developed from the 300 Savage and consider the 250 Savage as it's new long range sniper rifle.

Not likely. Guessing they looked into it and decided that the 30 cal was the best choice.

You want to hunt with a 250 instead of a 300 in heavy wind...I am not going to try and stop you.

What were we talking about anyways?

Hang in there guys, just a few more weeks until spring.

Rod

Actually in a heavy wind I'll opt for a 243 with a sleek bullet and smoke both of them.

I don't know how much 99guy gets out and shoots, but I've put about about 800 rounds downrange in the last month.

There is no real argument of which cartridge is "better", there are many and they are all different. Pro's and con's of each depending upon what we are doing.
Some are faster, flatter, more power, etc. The point is we pick one for our purpose, dial it in and give it a go. Squirrels, grouse, deer, elk, elephants it doesn't matter.

What is really interesting about 99's and the 250 in particular is that when introduced it was the first 3000 fps ever. And that could do a lot of things a Winchester and a lot of others never could.

Personally I get a charge out of knowing what I have, what it can do and use it as such. And if that means not taking a shot in a small window of opportunity for whatever reason, so be it. The year is 2014 not 1914, meat is not an issue. If it is for you, sell your rifle(s) and buy beef, it's cheaper that way.

So true. Guess we need to take a deep breath. Thanks for the reminder.

And guess what..a 250Sav 87gr at 3000fps has 1115fp energy at 200yds and 882fp at 300. A 300Sav 150gr starting at 2600 has 1502fp of energy at 200yds and 1215fp at 300.Killed deer with both.If I had one to pick for Whitetail's..300 hand's down.

Shoot a deer in the chest with an expanding bullet moving fast enough to open up, which the 87 started at 3000 is easily doing at 300, and foot pounds won't really tell the tale.

Besides, my post was addressing the hyperbole about the great difficulty of making a hit with the 250, when in fact the hit is easier to make with it.

I actually love the 300 and happily use it, but not for BS bluster reasons. My 300 is a Remington 700 Classic, and it happily digests long seated 168 grain VLD Bergers which puts it a bit outside of typical 300 Savage loads.

I'll take the expanding bullet and the foot pounds.