I base my opinions on how well the .243 works on personal experience as well. Granted I've not shot the .257 Roberts, so my opinion there is based on the numbers (not as fast, not as much energy, not as flat). I'm not arguing that it's not a great deer cartridge.

As far as citing Chuck Hawks tables on recoil, I'm not aware of anyone else who has done the type of research he has. He shows the .243 at 8 ft lbs of recoil using a 7.5 lb rifle, and the .257 at 10.8 ft lbs using an 8 lb rifle. I don't know whether a 25% increase in recoil at these levels is significant. As far as .257 bullets vs. .243 bullets... There's not that huge of a selection of Robs at most sporting goods stores. Premium bullets you'll almost have to reload, and I'll admit the Rob may get the nod for reloaders. I was at Academy last night, and all they had Remington Express 117 gr. Core Lokts. I really doubt that on deer a 117 gr. Core Lokt is going to perform any better than a faster 100 gr. Core Lokt. So far I've had one instance where I didn't get complete penetration with my .243 on a dozen deer (it had gone through both shoulders and lodged just under the skin). I've also had one failure to completely penetrate with my '06 out of only four deer. I really find it hard to believe that folks think .243 bullets have such poor construction that they're no good for deer.

Same here!.......I have shot deer with .243 100gr Sierra "Game Kings" and they are on the ground before the dust settles........

Well, I won't take anything away from the .243 or the .257, they are both fine cartridges and both are very effective calibers. I occasionally will hunt with my .243and my .257. I like both equally; however, I am quite sure that not all animals will be impressed with any caliber. I also know that the animal being shot will not be able to distinguish the difference between the .243 and the .257. I have a wide variety of rifles in variuos calibers. I know that there has been numerous test performed on ballistic gellatin targets to prove which is the most efficient caliber. All the mathmatical equations still doesn't impress the animal being hunted. It is our duty as hunters to pick a caliber and a rifle that we can shoot efficiently and limit ourselves to only taking shots at animals that we can kill efficiently. I understand that wounding an animal does happen, but if we as hunters know our effective limitationsof our weapons and practice self control the wounding of animals can be minimized. It is ultimately the hunters choice and the exercise of his/her ethics and values.These forums are only opinions and we all have different opinions and the right to voice those opinions. That is what makes our nation great. So, make your own choice and base your decision on what you believe to be the truth. Hunt ethically!!!!

Fighting for Liberty and Dieing for Freedom!!!!

Slow Burn: Well said. My .243 is plenty of gun for hunting in the Texas Hill Country, where deer rarely exceed 160 lbs. Everyone needs to make their selection based on what will effectively dispatch the game they are hunting under their particular circumstances, and should know the limitations of whatever round they pick and choose bullet construction and shot selection accordingly.

I suspect that if I went hunting for some of those 400 lb. behemoths that they grow in the cornfields of the Midwest, I might consider upgrading a little, but, the "upgrade" would not be to a Roberts...

the difference between a .222 and a .223 is a thousandth of an inch

Actually, I think they both use bullets that measure .224.

I was just trying to be funny dickhead

The first time I ever saw these figures in print was in the "KILLING POWER chapter of P.O. Ackley's Vol. I, HANDBOOK FOR SHOOTERS AND RELOADERS. However, that chapter was pretty much contributed to the book by Paul Rosenberg, who was a pretty well-known big-game hunter of the firsthalf of the 20th Century. I don't know if Rosenberg invented the figures, but if he did, he didn't describe HOW he came up with them. However, in that same chapter is a description of the superiority of the .220 Swift (with certain bullets) over the .30/'06 and the 8X57mm for killing wild burros! Very interesting!!

(BTW, a 260-grain, .570" round ball travelling 1200 FPS has only 830 foot-pounds of energy. Yet I believe it would certainly kill a deer!)

Now I wouldn't go that far. The 460 would probably leave a 10" exit wound with guts all over the forest floor. The hydrostatic shock from 8000ft/lbs delivered from a500gr expanding bulletat 2600-2700 would be enough to make that deer a little woozy. I'd buy your comparison if it were made with a 30-06. The 460 Wby is just too far of a jump.

As was I. Hence, the . No reason to call me a ****head.