.243 what a waste. [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : .243 what a waste.


marvin
12-10-2003, 06:34
i know that this carliber is real popular. but it gets on my nerves people use it on deer and elk where i think it's only good for groundhogs. yea it'll kill about anything but so will a 22 lr. as a deer gun it works best on boardside lung shots. don't hit the shoulder or you'll be chasing for a long time. lest face it it's a gun for the expert who can thread the needle with the prefect shot no margin for error for around the edges.

and no you don't need a magnum either. a .308 class gun will give you all the power you need as still be easy on the shooter to boot.

ithaca_deerslayer
12-10-2003, 07:18
I'll bite.

The .243 has a flatter trajectory, good for varmits at unknown distances. Power enough for deer, granted not as much margin of error as the .308 (which itself doesn't have a much margin of error as the .300 win mag, so what's the point).

.243 does have less recoil than .308 and that might be important to some.

.22L has enormously less recoil, of course, but its range on varmits is not anything near the .243.

Conclusion?
Pick the .308 if you want. Some others will pick the .243. Others yet will pick the .22LR. And some will pick the .300 win mag. For myself, I like the .30-06 as the all-purpose venison round.

trapfan
12-10-2003, 07:47
Any of my family and friends who have shot whitetails with the .243 Win swear by the round. I have personally seen what a 100gr round does to a whitetail through the ribs,shoulders, and neck and in short it is devastating. I was so impressed with this round I just bought a new Tikka T3 Lite in this cal. A .308 Win is a great round too but with EITHER round shot placement is paramount! JMTCW....Trapfan

mpol777
12-10-2003, 10:37
I personally know of 46 deer who have met their maker so far this year, all shot by the "feeble" .243 Winchester.

WalterGA
12-10-2003, 10:38
I suppose the purpose of this thread is to demonstrate that ignorance about firearms and general illiteracy make for a blissful existence! Hardehardeharharhar!

That 275# buck that a young cousin of mine dropped with is .243 a couple of years ago probably didn't realize that he wasn't being shot with a .308!

mudfootball
12-10-2003, 11:33
not that its worth even that..but! Yes it is highly effective, fits closely to the thread a few days ago on the 6mm. I too shoot a 308 mainly becuase, well i like short actions (i know 243 is as well,) but in rifle season in PA there isnt many places where you can sit on a field edge and observe a deer for 10 mins till he gets broadside. When that big boy comes barrel-assin through the woods and stop quarting toward me or facing straight at me i want to know its going all the way home.
No 270 cal people here? Perhaps a split of the difference depending on what load you shoot?
kt

paynter2
12-10-2003, 15:07
I've spent hours, even days chasing deer shot with a 30-06. ONe big buck had a front leg shot clean off. You could look in the hole and see the lungs. He was hit about 10AM one day and killed at noon the next - 30-06.

Do you have a specific point or are you just blowing your bazzoo?

marvin
12-10-2003, 18:47
agian i know that it kills.600 pound elk have taken lung shots and died. but don't you think that just because it kills that there isn't better tools for the job?

you're in the dense woods and you have a 40 yard shot at a BIG buck.
he's standing behind a tree and the only shot is shoulder shot angled toward you. this is the shot my buddy had he taken it with his .243 the deer left blood in the snow and dragged the leg we finally lost the trail at dark.

had he had my 30-30 it would have been done. he use to brag that his .243 could be found under the skin on broad side shots. where it "dumped" all it's energy in the deer.this just isn't good enough for me on broad side shots i want 2 holes on angle shots i want 2 holes. i don't want to pass on a great buck because he won't turn just the right way.

hell i've killed most of my deer with a .50 muzzeloader with 400 gr bullets

TScottW99
12-10-2003, 21:10
I've never hunted elk so can't comment on that, but....

The only problem with the .243 and whitetail deer is poor bullet selection. If you use the right bullet and hit where you aim you have a dead deer. It's a great little deer round, but use the right bullet. This can be said with any rifle.

PlasticGuy
12-10-2003, 23:27
Originally posted by TScottW99
...The only problem with the .243 and whitetail deer is poor bullet selection. If you use the right bullet and hit where you aim you have a dead deer. It's a great little deer round, but use the right bullet. This can be said with any rifle.
You read my mind. If you pick a good bullet and put it where it should go, you'll do fine with a .243 rifle. If not, it won't matter what you're shooting with. I stand by my statement in a previous thread that 95% of hunters would be better served by a rifle with less power, simple because less recoil will let them shoot respectably.

wannacmyglock
12-11-2003, 00:12
i use a sks with 30 round clip, sometimes I have to put in a second clip to finish the buck off, but most of the time, its down by about the 18th shot.

Alchemy
12-11-2003, 02:09
Wanna....Was your post on using a SKS with a 30 rnd clip on deer
meant to be a joke. You said that they usually go down by the 18th
shot but sometimes you have to put in another clip?

I don't know about Florida's big game regulations but in Ore we
are limited to a magazine with a capacity of 5 rnds.

Not only do I find your post unsporting but down right disgusting.
I think that you had better find a cartridge that is better
suited for deer.

On second thought I wouldn't even put you in the same category as
a hunter....It's people like you that give honest hunters a bad name.

And on third thought I donn't even think that you are qualified to
own a weapon!

marvin
12-11-2003, 05:48
The only problem with the .243 and whitetail deer is poor bullet selection. If you use the right bullet and hit where you aim you have a dead deer. It's a great little deer round, but use the right bullet. This can be said with any rifle. [/B][/QUOTE]

the i believe was a remmington 100 gr core-lokt of the late 80's. i know that this is a fragil bullet but it's what we had at the time.

if you can wait for the just right shot the 243 will do. i just want better penatration.

paynter2
12-11-2003, 06:20
The only problem with the .243 and whitetail deer is poor bullet selection

I'll agree with you on that Marvin. We used to shoot 85gr hollow points in our 6mm Rems. But, we were hunting open country.

I shot one buck at over 400 yards with one of those bullets. Thru-and-thru with no expansion. There was snow on the ground so we found him. He went about 100 yards a bedded. Hit in both lungs, he bled out quickly. I don't use those bullets anymore.

I do shoot 100gr Remington pointed soft points now. If I remember correctly, they used to make a 120gr bullet for the 6mm too. I think that has been discontinued.

Your point of bullet selection is well taken - especially in the smaller calibers.

Glockerel
12-11-2003, 08:35
Originally posted by marvin


you're in the dense woods and you have a 40 yard shot at a BIG buck.
he's standing behind a tree and the only shot is shoulder shot angled toward you. this is the shot my buddy had he taken it with his .243 the deer left blood in the snow and dragged the leg we finally lost the trail at dark.



I guess that's one of those times when you just don't take the shot, .243 or not.
That's why it's called hunting and not shooting.You don't always get to shoot something.

MDT
12-11-2003, 08:56
Sorry Marvin,
No flame intended, but I agree w/ Glockerel. Some shots you just don't take regardless of the caliber. It's hard to pass up something like a big buck, but... you must be an ethical hunter above all.

BTW, .243 is an outstanding round for whitetail/ antelope, etc.

Sorry dude, just my .02 worth.


MDT

noway
12-11-2003, 09:08
{I don't know about Florida's big game regulations but in Ore we
are limited to a magazine with a capacity of 5 rnds.}

You are correct that FL has 5 round limitation on hunting.

18 rds into a deer is not hunting IMHO

RonC
12-11-2003, 09:19
Seems to me this battle has already been fought and the 30 cal lost, in the military.

If you are hitting them and they aren't going down, why blame the gun? Killing by hittin' em in the ***** ain't what the sport is all about.

wannacmyglock
12-11-2003, 09:25
lol, 18 rounds, 2 30 shot clips, and you had to question if I was joking, of course I was. Sometimes I use my full auto ak for squirrel huntin...............yes I'm kidding bout that too.


Originally posted by Alchemy 53
Wanna....Was your post on using a SKS with a 30 rnd clip on deer
meant to be a joke. You said that they usually go down by the 18th
shot but sometimes you have to put in another clip?

I don't know about Florida's big game regulations but in Ore we
are limited to a magazine with a capacity of 5 rnds.

Not only do I find your post unsporting but down right disgusting.
I think that you had better find a cartridge that is better
suited for deer.

On second thought I wouldn't even put you in the same category as
a hunter....It's people like you that give honest hunters a bad name.

And on third thought I donn't even think that you are qualified to
own a weapon!

GLOCK-DOOD
12-11-2003, 09:35
Originally posted by wannacmyglock
i use a sks with 30 round clip, sometimes I have to put in a second clip to finish the buck off, but most of the time, its down by about the 18th shot.
******************************************
dood ...you and me have gotta get together and hunt sometime...i use an M14 and carry several 30 round mags with me...i like to see how many holes i can punch thru them before they hit the ground...

sarge
12-11-2003, 11:08
Originally posted by GLOCK-DOOD
******************************************
dood ...you and me have gotta get together and hunt sometime...i use an M14 and carry several 30 round mags with me...i like to see how many holes i can punch thru them before they hit the ground...

This is getting off of the subject at hand, but several years ago, I had an "friend" ask if he could deer hunt on my property. I said yes. He shows up that morning, and has a Remington 7400 30/06 with a 10 round mag in it, several more 10 round mags in his vest, a Desert Eagle 44 mag pistol in a shoulder holster, and several more mags for it also. He was carrying close to 100 rounds of ammo. I had my 25/06 with 1 in the chamber and 4 in the mag. He must have taken offense to my laughing and making fun of him, as he never asked to come back again. Probably knew I would say no, anyway.

Now, back on subject. I wasn't even going to comment on this subject, but decided to jump in. I have a friend that I do enjoy hunting with, and the only rifle he has used for 25+ years is an old beat up Savage .243. He shoots nothing but Remington 100 grain Cor-Lokt factory loads, and brings home 2 to 3 deer every year. He shoots where and when he is supposed to, and puts meat in the freezer. So many nowadays thing that deer are starting to wear armor plating. I see more and more 300 mags, super blaster mags, etc than eever before. Heck, some of these deer are not much larger than a big dog. It doesn't take that much to put one down, just proper shot placement. A poor hit with a 300 mag is still a wounded animal.

Dan
12-11-2003, 12:36
My cousin hunts in PA with 243 and get a deer or two every year. In fact if I remember right he only has a 243 and 3030.

I just called him, he told me a lot of PA hunters are using 243. Said he uses Sierra #1540 Pro hunter 100gr. bullet in his handloads and they do the job.

Berto
12-11-2003, 13:02
I used to hunt deer,antelope and elk with a Mossberg 800B in .243win.Worked fine for the deer and elk and served as a backup to an '06 for Elk.I used Fed Prem 100gr BTSP's for the lighter animals and 105gr Nosler Partitions when brought on elk hunts.
It was a very good combination for deer and antelope. :)

marvin
12-11-2003, 14:24
Originally posted by MDT
Sorry Marvin,
No flame intended, but I agree w/ Glockerel. Some shots you just don't take regardless of the caliber. It's hard to pass up something like a big buck, but... you must be an ethical hunter above all.

BTW, .243 is an outstanding round for whitetail/ antelope, etc.

Sorry dude, just my .02 worth.


MDT

40 yard shoulder shots shouldn't have to be past on though. i can't remeber how many shots thru the shoulders i've taken over the years. with everything from 12 gauges to .45 cal muzzelloaders and 30-30's.

if i put myself in the right spot to get within 75 yards of a deer i've done the hunting part. and don't want to pass on shots because i didn't bring enough gun.

sharpshooter
12-11-2003, 17:00
Use that meatball between your ears and figure it out. You don't always get a picture perfect broadside shot, so you have 3 options:

1. Don't shoot
2. Shoot the head/neck/spine
3. Take a bad shot.

It's like choose-your-own adventure.

MDT
12-11-2003, 19:13
I wasn't talking about the .243 not being enough gun, it is plenty for your description. I was talking about taking a ill-advised, low percentage shot through dense woods. I don't care what caliber you are using... some shots you pass on.

MDT

marvin
12-12-2003, 05:57
Originally posted by sharpshooter
Use that meatball between your ears and figure it out. You don't always get a picture perfect broadside shot, so you have 3 options:

1. Don't shoot
2. Shoot the head/neck/spine
3. Take a bad shot.

It's like choose-your-own adventure.

maybe i don't get it, since when is a shoulder shot bad? only when you don't have enough gun or all the time?

ithaca_deerslayer
12-12-2003, 06:29
Originally posted by marvin
maybe i don't get it, since when is a shoulder shot bad? only when you don't have enough gun or all the time?

You say that if you get within 75 yards you've done your part, and that a perfect broadside doesn't always present itself, and as implied above that a shoulder shot is good.

Maybe. Depends on hunter. Depends on what you are trying to do.

I hunt handgun (.44mag).
I hunt bow (65lb compound).
I hunt shotgun (12ga).
I hunt rifle (.30-06).
My perspective may be different.

If I get a deer within TWENTY YARDS the work is NOT done. With a bow, for example, shoulder shots are very bad. Got to try and work the deer broadside, shoot through the ribs into the heart/lung area. With a handgun, the shoulder is possible at close range, but why settle for it, still work the deer to the broadside.

With the shotgun and the rifle, the shoulder will work. But there goes the shoulder meat. Might as well wait for the broadside.

My 2 cents. :)

PlasticGuy
12-12-2003, 08:52
Originally posted by sharpshooter
Use that meatball between your ears and figure it out. You don't always get a picture perfect broadside shot...
Ditto that. For me, the joy of hunting is an even split between being outdoors, being in good company, and the challenge of the hunt. If I get to shoot something, it's a bonus. And I won't shoot it if I think I could wound the animal -- that takes all the fun out of it and just makes me feel guilty. I hunted with a handgun this year, and went to a 20 guage for all of my bird hunting. I'm having to work a bit harder and pass up a few shots, but I'm killing almost as much game and having more fun. Just a thought...

marvin
12-12-2003, 15:20
the fact that you don't always get a broadside shot and if you still want to take a deer don't use a .243


not talking about bows or handguns. if the thrill of taken a deer with a bow is your thing more power to you. but you can get just as close with a rifle and not have to pass on shots.

a little lost meat is a easy trade for a fast clean kill.

ECVMatt
12-14-2003, 23:50
I have taken so many deer and pigs with my 6mm Rem and have never lost an animal. Most have dropped in their tracks. I shoot a Sierra 100 grn over H4831sc. My good hunting budy who is a ranch forman and shoots everyday uses a .243. He has the chance to shoot pigs daily and deer in season. He swears by the caliber and has multiple .243's. This post plus all of the super mag columns in the shooting magazines has rekindled my interest in hunting with my open sighted .30/30's. I wanted to start hunting animals again, not focusing on how far away I could shoot them from. I really do not like this new trend in hunting as I have only seen a hand full of people who can relaible make the long shots.

Matt

CanyonMan
12-15-2003, 09:03
EVCMATT,

"Exactly"!

What in the world did folks do before all the super mags, and gagets, and all the stuff that makes muzzle loading 'today', 'not really a 'true' muzzle loading affair,' anymore. I tell you what they did, they got meat. I'm not wanting to debate calibers here... not at all.

I am only saying, that we have to understand, that if a man can get close enough to take a deer, elk, hog, etc, with a bow.... he can get close enough to shoot one with a handgun, and surely a rifle. Even a 243/6mm.

I have found that the joy in hunting 'for me' now, in my 52 year old age, is with a lever action in .45 LC, and in 45-70 marlin, (and actually, i must admit, the 45/70 is loaded "way down"), i just like the gun! All open sights, (this may change soon because of the 'ole eye sight), may have to go to a scope. Hunting with a recurve bow... been using one for almost all my life. simple, light, effective nothing in my way but a stick and a string.

Now, before i get linched here, i "am not" getting 'primitive on you guys," or getting on a bandwagon, or going off the deep end. etc. :)

I respect 'most' of the hunting habits and 'ethics' of those on GT, 'not all' of them, but 'most all'. I think we 'all' got alot to learn, and 'no one' knows everything. I have guided hunts for around 30 some years, seen a whole lot of stuff. most of it made me nervous or sick, or mad. then, there would be those glorious times all was cool, and the guy was really a man that knew what he was doing, and 'how he wanted to do it.'

As far as that '243' is concerned, it is the same thing... know what you want, and 'how to use it'. Cowboying on a ranch, i remember one day, the ranch owner took a huge 12 point with a 6mm rem. dropped that sucker in his tracks! Then i hit a buck in the heart with a 7mag, and he ran about 80 yards, then dropped?? Go figure!? I have taken deer with the 6mm caliber, and made some really long "craw shots," on turkey with that gun. I have a friend back home, that gets his buck every year with a 243, out of the same tree stand. As far as "loosing them" with such a light caliber, there have been reams of folks loose deer when shot with a 30/06, 7mm mag, 270, and you name it. why? bad shot placement! Am i advocating the 243/6mm over other calibers? Nope! Just saying They work!

I know of a guy in Wyoming, that owns a cast bullet company, his son hunts Elk with a 243(once in a while), and a cast bullet, the dad uses a 357 mag handgun, with cast bullet. (once in a while)... this is not the 'normal weapon' for them, but it does the job. They get close!

This conversation could go on forever, in fact, it has been going on for decades... let's not forget, in the 40's 50's, deer camps, especially up north, were filled with huge bucks, taken by hunters that knew how to get close, dressed not in camo, but in black and white, or green and white, checkerd wool shirts, no deer sent, and using .35 rem, and 30-30's. So, is a 243 a good deer gun? Heck yes!
but so is a 30/06 270, 7mag, and a host of others as well, but they are 'no better than the man behind them.'

We need to have a good round... but what we really need, is to be "good hunters,". In all the years of "my deer hunting", i have never had to shoot over 75 yards or so, and remember, most all of this is in oklahoma pandhandle, where most shots would be 100-300+ yards, on the plains, or down through the canyons. Many take antelope, with a handgun, at less than 100 yards. Elk, (in N.M.), at less than 100 yards. No,i do not suggest this 243/6mm, as the choice for elk, but i would never discount the 243/6mm round for deer size game with 'proper loads and bullet placement...' I just look at the man behind the gun. Most have "to much gun," they cannot hit a bull in the butt with a fence post, but you fit that man with a caliber he can handle, and teach him to practice, and if need be, teach him 'ethics,' and place him in the woods, he will get his game.

Yes, we have all kinds of angles and different shot pictures, but, there again, 'wait for a good shot, then take it'. Why take a lousy shot just because you have a 'canon magnum Billy Bob 90 caliber'?

One more thing, someone here said something about shooting through brush or cover...sorry Hoss, this is not a good practice... there are no "brush guns!" We need to 'see clearly' 'the hair' we want to hit, before we pull the trigger.. not depend on some bullet, "no matter how big or powerful," to break through twigs and limbs and bushes, and still "hit the mark."

I agree, that we should use good sense when deciding the caliber for the game intended. Yes, there are 'better choices for deer', IMHO, than the 243/6mm..... Yet, I say that almost double-mindedly, because that caliber 'does work!'

I really don't have any real place to jump off of this 'short novel' i wrote here, :) didn''t really mean to get long winded, but perhaps somewhere in here there is something worth while, i hope. Let's just go out there with the weapon of choice, (of course using common sense), and making sure it is 'proper' for the 'intened game', and do our part to get a 'good close shot', and make the 'placement proper', and have a good clean kill, and as we have all been saying.. "its not the kill" it's the hunt, and just being out there!

FWIW !


Good Hunting!


CanyonMan

surfinusa
12-16-2003, 09:16
The 243 is a great deer cartridge. I don't use it but alot of others do with great sucess. Probably the only two cartidges that have taken more deer are the 30-30 and 30-06, although the 308 is probably right up there.

You really have to laugh at the trend toward larger heavier caliber and magnum guns that many believe they need. Maybe out west the shots are long enough to justify the 7mm mag but most people with a 270 win claim it will do most anything the magnum will.

I think that the 308 is a great all around gun if you can only have one. But the 7.62x 39 isn't bad for deer or hogs at the same range you would use a 30-30 and the SKS is a great gun you don't mind getting banged around or taking in bad weather.

But back to the original topic, I think that there are probably thousands of deer and varmint that think the 243 is a great cartridge.

mudfootball
12-16-2003, 21:45
243 is good 308 is better,? okay then that settles it
kt
im just kidding

scuzzy
01-09-2004, 00:40
speaking from exp. a REM.7600 .243 with 3*10 scope .95gr hornady SST ammo will take out a 8 point buck @ 165yrds neck shot dropped in its tracks also a great cal. for the young hunters the less the recoil the less likely to flinch so less tracking.

marvin
01-09-2004, 05:49
Originally posted by scuzzy
speaking from exp. a REM.7600 .243 with 3*10 scope .95gr hornady SST ammo will take out a 8 point buck @ 165yrds neck shot dropped in its tracks also a great cal. for the young hunters the less the recoil the less likely to flinch so less tracking.


this what i'm talking about. good shot in the neck good kill. i've known guys that shot deer in the neck with a .223 but that doesn't make it a great deer gun.

and if you take a new shooter thats not as good as a seasoned shooter and give him a .243 he's got to be right on no room for error and he wonders why his deer ran away. on an other board i just read about a guy how hit a deer at angling shot back rib toward shoulder the bullet came up short of the shoulder and it took him a while to find it. he lost all the meat and skin. the same shot with a 308 or 7-08 and the right bullet would have broke the shoulder maybe allow him to recover the deer.

RonC
01-09-2004, 09:03
Marvin, you may be right, but on the other hand...

Son shot 5 deer this season with 243 Win. Dropped 3, one ran about 100 yards and died, and one, while knocked down, got up and ran away. All shot with Speer 85 gr. BT hand loads. Son doesn't want to give up the gun (does not like heavy recoil) so we are changing to 100 gr loads.

However before the 243, he lost an animal hit with 270 Win. Before that, I think he recovered all he hit with 30-06.

marvin
01-09-2004, 15:55
thats one of the reasons that a lot of folks like the 243. is in the right spots the fast moving bullets that expand real fast can have a real dramatic affect on deer. but around the edges it lacks.


the .243 isn't a gun for a newbie but a gun for the expert!

Dogbite
01-09-2004, 22:45
Deer--yes with heavy bullets--no problem--varmints with light bullets--sounds great.Would i go elk hunting with a 243?? No way--there is a big big difference in a 100 pound southern deer and an elk.

Halfcocked
01-19-2004, 03:55
I'm sorry, but a .243 is more than adequate for white-tail. Hell, I took my first several deer with a .223 when I was a kid. Not one of them ran more than 15 yards. At the leases I've hunted over the years, I've seen many, many deer taken by a .243. Several young hunters I know have cut their teeth on that round. I've also seen many wounded or non-recovered deer with a 7mm, 30-06, and .270. The round is not the issue, it's the shooter. And, although I love the sport of hunting and want to see it grow, if you can't shoot well enough to make a clean kill, don't take a gun into the woods. There is no "margin of error."

bigleadballz04
01-19-2004, 11:33
The 243Winchester is one of the best deer rounds ever.;)

hodgdonhead
01-21-2004, 16:40
Nice reply canyon.

I too favor the .45/70 (perhaps one of the oldest and still widely used cartridges) in a 1895G. I have taken many pigs with that rifel at ranges up to 100 yards. I also favor my sako in 7MM Rem Mag.

marvin
01-22-2004, 14:36
Originally posted by Halfcocked
And, although I love the sport of hunting and want to see it grow, if you can't shoot well enough to make a clean kill, don't take a gun into the woods. There is no "margin of error."

because there is no room for error a new shooter should use enough gun to get the job done. to tell new guys not to hunt is bad for everyone as we need to grow. and lets face it sooner or later we'll all place a shot somewhere around the edges and we'll wish for a deeper driven bullet to break shoulders or make an exit so we can trail better.

Halfcocked
01-22-2004, 15:28
Originally posted by marvin
because there is no room for error a new shooter should use enough gun to get the job done. to tell new guys not to hunt is bad for everyone as we need to grow. and lets face it sooner or later we'll all place a shot somewhere around the edges and we'll wish for a deeper driven bullet to break shoulders or make an exit so we can trail better.

So hand him a caliber he can't handle? I disagree entirely. You act as if making a clean shot is so difficult. However, with a little practice and patience in the field, even the beginner can make clean, efficient shots. A bigger caliber should not cause someone to take a shot they would not otherwise take with a smaller caliber.

It's hunting methods like that which give hunting a bad name. I would rather not have those people as hunters at all than to have them as a hunter that reinforces negative stereotypes.

True hunting is not about the end result, but the process of interacting with the wild. It is what seperates us from butchers. The hunt is the important aspect and if a hunter doesn't think he has a clean shot, he shouldn't compensate with a bigger caliber. Instead, be confident that you had the proper judgement not to take a poor shot and consider yourself lucky that you are in the woods experiencing nature directly. There is always the next hunt.

marvin
01-23-2004, 06:20
i can't imaging someone who couldn't handle a .308 or 7-08 even a 30-30.
with these you could hit the shoulder and still get a clean kill. you don't need a mag. or the recoil but with same practice you should be able to handle more than a .243.

why take the small end when there is plenty of room in the middle. whynot use a .223 it's even easier to shoot.

paynter2
01-23-2004, 07:37
I can't imaging someone who couldn't handle a .308 or 7-08 even a 30-30.

A .243 (100gr)packs more energy than a 30-30 (170gr)...

Marvin - Have you ever shot a deer with a .243? What on earth are you basing your opinions on? Deer are thin skinned grass eaters - not some dangerous game. A 100gr 24cal bullet will smash the hell out of any bone in a deer's body. I've seen it done many, many times. Up to and including 240lb (dressed weight) bucks.

I started hunting with a .32 special. I could hear the bullet hit the deer and it would drop. When I was 16 I got a 30-06. I shot a lot of bucks with that rifle. But, the bullet would go through the deer and raise particular hell with some innocent tree on the other side - what percent of that energy was absorbed by that tree? Typically, the deer would run before dropping. So, I went to a 6mm Rem - 'Thwop' - again, I could hear the bullet hit and the deer would drop. My conclusion, when the bullet remains in the animal, 100% of the available energy is absorbed - that's what counts. How much energy your caliber is packing isn't the issue, it's how much energy is delivered to the animal.

I once shot 3 bucks without reloading my 6mm Rem. One of them was over 400yds away. The first one dropped instantly. The second was the long shot. As I tried to re-aquire him, I saw a third one. So, I dropped him instantly too. As it turned out, the long range shot was successful - thru and thru (between ribs). The bullet didn't expand. But, I caught his lungs and he only went about 50 yards, layed down and died. A bigger calibre whould have only punched a wider hold.

I've shot deer with my 32 special, 30-40 Kraig, 7X57 (great calibre), .270, .280, .308, 30-06, .243, and 6mm Rem. All were very capable of killing a deer. One of the biggest bucks I've ever seen taken was killed by a friend when we were in high school - he killed it with his grandfather's 32-20! He dropped that thing dead in its tracks. Hell, a good hand gun packs more wallop than that old Winchester. But, it still had enough to knock that big fella over. We were hunting in N. Wi - thick as hell. The buck was a hugh 10pt. He won a couple of local buck boards with it. I don't remember what it weighed, but it was well over 200#.

My point isn't that larger calibres are not good deer medicine, but that (provided you're not shooting 300+ yds) the .243 is all that's ever necessary.

Save your stories about tracking animals wounded by .243's. I've spent many hours tracking deer shot with larger calibres too. What does that prove? Only that deer can be very tough animals when they are fighting for their lives.

marvin
01-23-2004, 16:03
how much energy a round makes has very little or nothing to do with it's killing power. the 30-30 kills game better than it's numbers say it should.

a bullet that would stay in a deer on a broadside shot won't give enough penatration on an angling shot. and don't tell you need to wait for the perfect set up,thats what this thread is about i could try to get with in 10 yards and shot them in the eye with a .22 lr. but i'd rather get a good angle and not worry if i have enough bullet to get there.

if you think that energy is all you need. would you hunt brown bear with a 22-250? it has more energy than a 45-70 with a factory 400 gr bullet. i beleive that holes all the way through cause the most bleeding bringing on death fastest. the bigger the hole the more blood.

by the way the 7x57 is a great round.

i never said that the .243 wasn't capable of taking deer, just that there are better tools for the job in most cases.

paynter2
01-24-2004, 06:29
Marvin: You may be right about the 22-250 and the 45-70. I didn't look it up. But, a grizzly is not a deer. The bone mass of a big bear is much greater than that of a deer. So, I don't think it's a fair comparison...

As far as energy goes, it is important or there would be no need to use anything but a .22LR. AS far as penetration goes, different bullet types will give deeper or lesser penetration. I used to shoot deer with 85gr HPBT in my 6mm. In fact, the story I told before about shooting 3 deer without reloading involved the 85gr bullets. It was open shooting and those bullets were really wicked. I believe a soft-point may have delivered better results on the long shot. The last of the three was a head-on shot. Dropped it in its tracks.

I've shot numerous bucks head-on with my 6mm. The farthest I remember one running is about 15 yards.

I guess we disagree on the toughness of deer. I've never seen them as 'hard to kill'. Hard to get a good shot at? Yes. But, any high powered rifle in .24cal and up should do the job. I have no experience with .22 center-fires on deer.

marvin
01-24-2004, 10:33
no not hard to kill. i'd just like to see .25 with heavy bullets 264's even better. if everyone had the right shot all the time anything from a .223 on up would work. it's those hard angles on big deer that need more.

OMEGA5
01-24-2004, 10:48
A .243 is a necked down .308 just like the .270 is a necked down 30.06. Don't get me wrong, I perfer a 308 or 30.06 but the 243 is a good little gun and with practice and proper shot placement, and excellent deer rifle. It got a bad rap among "macho" types years ago when Jack O'Conner's wife took one to Africa... Suddenly it was a "woman's" gun and no self respecting macho man would be caught dead with one. A friend of mine has a Remington 7400 is .243 and has killed numerous deer with it. The .243 isn't my preferred caliber but it's still a darn good gun. IMHO;)