Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

AnswersASK YOUR QUESTION

Answers

Q:
are the fusions better than the corlok for the 243

Question by glen. Uploaded on November 10, 2009

Answers (6)

Top Rated
All Answers
from Christian Emter wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

You never know until you try both. I kindof do like the corlok better because it has a better effect.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shawey90 wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

try them both and see what your reaction is

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from huntnow wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

deadliest mushroom in the woods for me.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Big O wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

Step-dad said YES !
I'm using them this year in a .300 Win Mag, so I'll get back to you on this.
Season open Sat. !

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from mihunter wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

anything is better than corelok's...i love remington rifles and shotguns but not a fan of their ammo. Its pretty sad when a remington shotgun wont feed remington shot shells, but i shot the coreloks for two years out of my 7mm-08, and got real inconsistant burns, and couldnt get a group under 2.5 inches at 100, then i switched to winchester and hornady(when i can afford it) and now i am shooting under 1 inch groups, no fliers, and consistant burns. every deer i shot with the winchesters has dropped or not gone more than 30 yards (no spine shots either). I shot two deer with corloks, one went 120 yards on a double lung shot and the other went about 100 yards with a heart shot.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 870 wingmaster 101 wrote 2 years 12 weeks ago

No way!

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post an Answer

from Big O wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

Step-dad said YES !
I'm using them this year in a .300 Win Mag, so I'll get back to you on this.
Season open Sat. !

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Christian Emter wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

You never know until you try both. I kindof do like the corlok better because it has a better effect.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shawey90 wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

try them both and see what your reaction is

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from huntnow wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

deadliest mushroom in the woods for me.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from mihunter wrote 2 years 13 weeks ago

anything is better than corelok's...i love remington rifles and shotguns but not a fan of their ammo. Its pretty sad when a remington shotgun wont feed remington shot shells, but i shot the coreloks for two years out of my 7mm-08, and got real inconsistant burns, and couldnt get a group under 2.5 inches at 100, then i switched to winchester and hornady(when i can afford it) and now i am shooting under 1 inch groups, no fliers, and consistant burns. every deer i shot with the winchesters has dropped or not gone more than 30 yards (no spine shots either). I shot two deer with corloks, one went 120 yards on a double lung shot and the other went about 100 yards with a heart shot.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 870 wingmaster 101 wrote 2 years 12 weeks ago

No way!

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post an Answer