I just got my daughter a little Ruger compact in .243. For hunting I plan on her using some regular loads with 100gr Partitions but for her getting used to shooting it (shes only 11 years old) I thought I would load up some reduced loads. My question is how low can I go? My Nosler manual has 36gr listed as the smallest charge with 80gr bullets, that load is 70% of capacity. Would something like 25gr still reliably get the bullet out of the barrel and not have to big of presure variations due to the low % of case capacity?

243 is fine the way it is. My 13 year old daughter shot a hog when she was 6 with a 100 grain full load 243.

For something lighter, try a 223 Remington with the 62 grain Winchester load for deer. She shot a white tail doe with this when she was 9.

I beleive Hodgon's site has some H-4895 really reduced load data.

Aaron

trailboss

Take a look at IMR 4759.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
trailboss

+1

+1 more for trailboss.

My youngest son is 10 and he shoots a 243 handi rifle. He will shoot all the 243 trailboss loads I bring to the range.

Last trip he also shot all the full power loads as well. Then he shot all the 500 S&W trailboss loads too. Before we left he shot the 500 with a full power 610 grain load once with my assistance and once on his own (he asked to shoot the one on his own).

quote:

Originally posted by reelman1:
...My Nosler manual has 36gr listed as the smallest charge with 80gr bullets, that load is 70% of capacity. Would something like 25gr still reliably get the bullet out of the barrel and not have to big of presure variations due to the low % of case capacity?

It might, but depending on the specific Powder, you could have a Secondary Explosion Effect.

The Speer Manual and Lyman Manual both list "Factory Tested" Reduced Loads. So do most of the Powder Manufacturers on their Web Sites.

Just stick with a Reduced Load that has been Factory Tested and you will be fine. Best of luck to you and your daughter.

http://www.hodgdon.com/PDF/Youth%20Loads.pdf

under Data:
http://www.hodgdon.com/rifle.html

Hodgdon shows Trail Boss loads too.

I tried Trail Boss and it did produce light loads, but the accuracy was aweful. Could have been that particular combo. I then tried SR 4759 with a lot more success.

I had been looking for years for a reduced load for my 35 Whelen. It's a rifle that has proven expecially annoying about accuracy. Finally I tried Hodgdon's suggestion re H4895, and got some accurate loads approximating the 35 Rem - 2200 fps with the Speer 220gr bullets. I'm happy with that, and get one inch groups.

Trail Boss may be fine in some rifles, but those are what I call squib loads - good for nothing except targets and maybe rabbits. The only reason I can see for using Trail Boss is for a sub-sonic load.

SR 4759 at least produces barely enough vel that it can be used for hunting. Finding a load for the 243 with that powder may not be easy.

That's why I recommend H4895. That way you can use the same powder for 75% practice loads, and 100% loads for hunting. Another advantage of using H4895 for practice loads and for hunting loads is there is a good chance that sighting in again when switching ammo can be avoided by memorizing the clicks of scope adjustments to compensate. There is a good chance that it will be merely elevation adj by a few inches. If you use Trail Boss, it's anyone's guess - the POI could be completely off the paper target, comparing the squib load to the full hunting load.

Hot Core is right about the hang-fire loads. You can't use just any powder, and reduce the charge below the book starting load without risking delayed ignition, so use published loads. Also as he said, secondary explosion effect is something to avoid too. The point is that odd things often happen when messing with reduced CHARGES of medium/slow powder. Lab tested/published loads only is my motto. I once tried some loads using 3031 in a 338 Win Mag, at charges below the book starting loads and got hang fires (click --- bang). I learned to not do that.

BTW, I commend you sir, for not choosing a 223 as a child's starter deer rifle. Leave the 223 for teenagers and experts, those who already know it all and don't listen well.

KB

reelman1---Your daughter is interested in shooting and hunting--that is great. Keep it fun for her and keep her interested. Sure there are exceptions, but I think a .243 for an 11 year old girl might be a bit much. You didn't mention having a .22 centerfire--so you need one. Get a .222 or a .223 --I think the CZ is a great choice. Let your daughter practice and if she can make a well placed shot--have a sharp knife. This is from years of experience my being there with youth an observing many dropped on spot with one shot from .22 centerfires--none got away. I know Kablowyou with all his years of keyboard experience and NO actual experience will disagree. None of this to say there is anything wrong with a .243--maybe too much for an 11 year old girl just starting out? Both of you will love shooting the .22 centerfire.

use Reloader 7, IMR 4198, H 4198, SR 4759, 2400

bptj 4227s... reload data is available 'from the factory' on all of those powders..

and you'll find more consistency for accuracy that with H 4895 Reduced loads...

Trail Boss may not give you the velocity you look for as it is meant to be around 1200 fps on the top end.. it was developed for Cowboy Action shooting..

The key to developing Reduced loads, is if you want to use a certain powder, just start at just below max and work your way slowly down..

it isn't that big of a deal, as some on this forum make it out to be..

also pick up a Cast Bullet manual.. there is tons of data in those on about any round you might want to use...just don't start at their max load and you'll be fine..

I use a lot of reduced loads, as I don't need a 500 yd round to take a blacktail at wood's ranges where I hunt..and a lot of bullets perform better at reduced velocity at 100 yds and under than they do at high velocity and are always more accurate... and most folks can shoot them easier, as they are not flinching anticipating that recoil..

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
I think a .243 for an 11 year old girl might be a bit much.

It's a balancing act. Consider the hunter and the hunted - or if in Texas, the shooter and the shootee, since generally baiting deer and sniping from an elevated stand with a rest isn't considered "hunting".

You made the right choice getting a 243 as a starter cartridge. A kid can quickly outgrow the 223, something some adults have failed to do. With a 223 you are stuck with something not designed as a deer cartridge. At least in a year or less, when she advances, she will have a nice deer and hog rifle, to last a lifetime, and skill from the practice with reduced loads. It's quite common for some guys, especially grandfathers, to want to start kids too young or too small for a real deer rifle. Your reduced loads idea mostly resolves this problem, and allows her to grow into it. I firmly believe that if a kid is not able to handle a 243 adequately, he or she should grow and practice more on paper targets, and try again next year for the actual hunting.

I agree that the cast bullet manuals are a good source of acceptable powders, espeially if you want to have various partially used cans of powders on the shelf. The 243 isn't known as a cast bullet cartridge, although cerrtainly it can be used that way, if cheap enough or determined enough. I can't imagine why.

As I imagine it, these reduced loads are a transitional thing, which will pass in six months to a year. I would much rather have a partial can of H4895 on the shelf, than 2400, for example, unless I had an alternate use for it.

Big deal - small deal? That is the question. I can not imagine anything simpler and with a high probability of success, and little worry about safety, than to simply use the load previously given in the link to Hodgdon's youth loads site. I think that's what one would use as an example of a no-brainer.

KB

Thanks for the advice guys.

I already have several .22 centerfires. She already shoots my 10.5" AR15 but I do not consider .22 centerfires adequete for deer except in the hands of an expert and only then on perfect shots. I would prefer her to use a slightly larger gun and the reduced loads are a way for her to get used to the 243.

I live in WIsconsin and about 1/2 of the state is shotgun only, I can't imagine having a small girl have to learn to hunt with even a 20ga. slug. Even if I take her in the shotgun zone she will be using the .243.

reelman--Do you have actual experience to share with us as to the .22 centerfires not being adequate on deer? If so what rifle and what bullet? A well placed shot from a smaller gun trumps a not so well placed shot from a larger gun. Using a larger gun does not increase the kill zone. Now Ol Kaboreyou with his vast keyboard experience shooting all those deer that know a .223 is not adequate can type you out several stories on his keyboard to the contrary. But he is a real hunter he wears camo and face paint while at the keyboard.

CM, it's been a while since we exchanged pleasantries. I missed you too, and been meaning to follow up to see how your snake oil sales have been doing in this economy?

I just want to let you know that my Ruger 458 is back from the gunsmith, so I'm back in business for my next deer hunt. Perhaps you want me to post some pictures of the little darlin.

Hoping all is well with you.

KB

With all due respect to both parties..

why do some of these threads have to turn into a pissing contest...

Lord knows I am guilty of the same thing on the political forum, but I don't take that seriously anyway...

I read and take both of your gentlemen's posts with equal interest.. some I agree with, some I don't...but the different perspectives always make me think and evaluate my own opinions continually..

capetman, of course a well placed small bullet trumps a terrible shot with a larger caliber. But the same shot with a larger caliber is better than with a little bullet. What the little bullet won't do is penatrate if it's not a perfect broadside shot. And one does not always get a perfect shot or they make a bad shot, when this happens I will always go with the larger caliber and heavier bullet (within reason of course).

I shot one deer on a hard quartering away shot where the bullet hit right where the hip meets the pelvis bone and the bullet penetrated out the opposite shoulder. This was with a 100gr Partition out of a 243, can a 223 do that?

reelman,
Congrats on the 243. Keep us posted on how the reduced loads work out for you.

KB

Reelman--You can speculate all you want as to what a bigger gun or a smaller gun would have done---truth is it is speculation and you'll never know. The only thing for sure is you don't know until you pull the trigger. The story we didnt get as I suspected, was one about a .22 centerfire with a well placed shot and the deer got away. Place even a .22 cal bullet in a deer's lung, heart or liver and you need a sharp knife---fun is over. Until a few years ago I would have agreed with Kabluey ---to a degree. What I have actually witnessed the past several years has involved more and more .223's and .222's and I imagine if I shoot another deer it will be with .223. Actual results have not been what I would have guessed. I have used .243 for many years and many deer, my grandson and one son in law did as well. Best I can tell it wasn't doing a thing the .223 doesn't do. 100% drop them in their tracks---certainly not what I would have expected. Last deer I shot was with my .243 and it was a most unusual deal. At the shot, it didn't fall nor run. Usually one or the other. This deer turned and slowly walked with ever so slight of a stagger--maybe 30 yards then stopped. I could see where I had hit it and knew the end was near. The deer was just standing and swaying some. I walked up to it while it was still on it's feet and probably could have kicked it over. Then it fell. I had taken out both heart and liver--how that deer moved an inch is beyond me.

quote:

I had taken out both heart and liver--how that deer moved an inch is beyond me.

adrenaline....

but it was going into shock and was mentally very disoriented...

same thing can happen to a human that is shot or in an explosion..

at least according to all that military medical training I went thru... yet thankfully never had to use in combat...

SeafireB17g--I suspect that adrenaline and going into shock and disoriented was a very accurate description of what was going on. On the other side of things, I saw a deer shot with .223 that was dead right now that from where hit would have expected it to go down, but not be dead. It was hit too far forward through both shoulders--no vital hit but was instant lights out. Never know till you pull the trigger.

Deer can go into shock and collapse and NOT be dead...

I shot one once, that collapsed... I dragged it 50 yds back to my truck... he wasn't moving...

so as I was digging inside of the truck for my knife.. to hell if he didn't get up, wobble and drag himself across the road.. and then dive into a batch of blackberry bushes....

turns out the shot had gone low and not hit him in the back of his neck... but nailed him in the ass and broke his pelvic girdle....

as the sun was going down, I lost him in that blackberry thicket although I hit him once more with a 45 ACP, that I went into the thicket with, along with a flashlight...

sorry to say I lost that one...

was out the next morning at day light, but never found him... after looking for 6 hours...

I know the poor thing died a lingering death..

If I have any doubts afterwards, I shoot them again...in the neck or head...depending on what side arm I may have with..

Interesting. I often imagined that perhaps the issue of whether the deer was really dead would somehow be relavent when using a 223.

I also wondered when we would see a post telling the truth about some negative results with the 223. They all seemed to be somehow miraculous success ratios.

Thanks for sharing that with us. It's always good to read stories of actual experience, and adventures.

I have never had to worry about a deer getting up and running off, since I mostly use a real deer rifle for the task, but I did hear a story once, from a friend who knew the brother-in-law of the guy it actually happened to. Apparantly he stunned a deer with a 300, and went to gut it, and the damn thing nearly gored him, several times, before he could get loose from it, and kill it with his knife.

Heck, he probably should have used a 223, since at least he could have dragged it to the truck and tied it to the bumper, before it woke up.

I like the idea of carrying a 45 ACP as backup when deer hunting with a 223. I can see the logic of slowing them down before the finishing shot up close with the 45.

KB

Kabluey--Nowhere in Seafires post did he mention what rifle he was using. Your assumption that it was a .223 stands a real good chance of being wrong---but if you are there is nothing new about that--in fact it's situation normal.

Funny that you should mention assumption. You assumed that I was serious.

I assumed a 223 because it fits the scenerio. Doesn't matter if that's what was actually used or not, since it could be whatever he chooses to say it was.

KB

Just the starting loads of any of the listed loads in reloading manuals will have quite a bit less recoil and muzzle blast than max loads, and the POI may not be too far off when using the same powder bullet combo and differing charges. I would just use the minimum charge of your favorite 243 powder if it groups well enough.
Good luck.

Kabluey--Yes indeed it fits your zero actual experience and lots of keyboard experience scenarios.

quote:

Get a .222 or a .223

or shoot 55 grain bullets in the .243.

But whatever you do get some damn good hearing protection

Noise can hurt the kids more than the recoil!

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Kabluey--Nowhere in Seafires post did he mention what rifle he was using. Your assumption that it was a .223 stands a real good chance of being wrong---but if you are there is nothing new about that--in fact it's situation normal.

260 Rem in a Ruger 77, 100 grain partition...

for what it is worth in the world of 223s...

some one left some 3/8 inch steel plates at the range.. I was shooting a 223 ( bolt action) with a load of a 55 grain SP at 2500 fps MV....
These plates were the size of a dollar bill or so..

I set up a couple and shot them at 100 yds..

What surprised me was that the bullets were penetrating right thru them....

So I threw them in the vehicle.. went home and loaded up some more rounds at the 2500 fps speed, and then loaded up some with the regular MV of 3150 fps... same bullet...

at the MV of 3150 fps, the bullets were blowing up when hitting the steel plate at 100 yds.. leaving a small dent at best...

at an MV of 2500 fps, the same bullets were penetrating straight thru the plates...

Tried it again with straight 55 grain FMJs... and got the same results....

so a slowed down 22 caliber bullet, can actually be a more wicked round than one might expect...

I usually use these lower MV rounds for shooting sage rats here in Oregon...and it does blow them up... but so does the higher velocity rounds also..

you gentlemen can feel free to draw whatever conclusions you desire here.. I am just passing it on... without the intention of starting an argument over..

Seafire--That is interesting about slower velocity penetrating the steel plates and faster didn't. As you invited me to do I will draw my conclusion. The plates were 100 yards away and MV was 2500. So that should give 2140 at 100 yards. Kabluey has identified that shooting from an elevated stand is not hunting. (You have to use a Hewlitt Packard Supreme Magnum keyboard like he does to be really hunting). So from my elevated stand I am going to rope my deer. My ammo will have a MV of about 3200 fps. But I want velocity of 2140 to get the desired penetration. So I will use a rope that is 262 yards long. I will get down from the stand and shoo the deer to the end of the rope before I shoot it. That 262 yards should reduce my velocity down to 2140 and I wont be shoting from an elevated stand. Of course the deer will be laughing at me shoting him with a .223 so I'll run to the end of the rope and cut his throat.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

But whatever you do get some damn good hearing protection

Noise can hurt the kids more than the recoil!

+1

Sometimes we forget to mention the obvious, with the BS distractions. Hearing protection for kids is essential, and often assumed, but certainly worth mentioning.

I'm still glad the choice of the 243 is a done deal, thus all the talk and recommendations for a 223 is like pissing in the wind, or maybe like peeing on the carpet.

Another kid taught right from the get go.

KB

Carpetman..

I use those lower velocities primarily for high volume varmint shooting...

but I have admit to using slower velocities when hunting at wood's ranges, or under 250 yds.... which is most game for what I hunt...

I speculate that it has to do with bullet integrity... how well will the bullet hold up when it hits its mark... needs to be in that window where it will open up, but before it gets to the point of impact that it will just blow up..

I've always been a follower of the theory, that the most important thing in hunting is shot placement, then bullet integrity second...

On the 223 argument, I have always been of the school of thought, that it isn't for everyone...
because too many hunters ( whether they like to hear it or not) are not good enough shots, so the 223 is not a big enough round for them to take game cleanly...

where on the other end, you have guys that the 223 would be a more than adequate Elk round.. because they understand the bullets parameters, they understand animal anatomy, and they know about and how to apply shot placement, from the right distances where the bullets integrity and the shot placement can accomplish the job...

as little as any of us would like to hear and it invites me being flamed to no end... but not everyone who carries a rifle in the woods and has purchased his hunting license... is in reality a hunter, no matter how much they think they are...

so back to your post... and I apply this ONLY to ME...

If I had to use a 223 for deer hunting, I would not be feeling undergunned in the slightest..

at under 200 yds, if I had the choice of loading my rounds with an MV of 3200 fps or 2500 fps, I'd pick the 2500 fps, and would be using any of the following as bullet choices..
60 grain Sierra HP, 60 Grain Hornady SP, or even better, my top 2 choices are the 63 grain SMP Sierra or the 70 grain Speer SMP...

that's just me, but I know where the bullet must go, I know I can get it there, and I know what shots I'd have to pass on..

but I have confidence in any of the above bullets would be more than up to the task at hand...

then if my buddy was hunting with me and carrying an AR with a 50 grain ballistic tip, at 3300 fps.. and he knew how to use it and his ammo, would I feel he was undergunned?? not all...

Meanwhile if one of the average nimrods from our local range was out there, with his 7 Rem Mag and his 6 x 18 by 50 Nightforce scope on top, and his fresh ammo with a 160 grain Nosler Partition or TTSX Barnes all ready to go, would I feel he was ready? Well, I'll figure most of the deer would be pretty safe, regardless of how perfectly trendy the nimrod was outfitted..


Its the man that knows his equipment and knows his game, and knows how to apply it that will bring home the game....

if the other types due, it was pure luck and the grace of God... nothing to do with skill or knowledge...

quote:

by seafire:
the 223 ...isn't for everyone... because too many hunters ( whether they like to hear it or not) are not good enough shots,

quote:

More continued:
where on the other end, you have guys that the 223 would be a more than adequate Elk round.. because they understand the bullets parameters, they understand animal anatomy, and they know about and how to apply shot placement, from the right distances where the bullets integrity and the shot placement can accomplish the job... ...

100% pure . Sure glad he makes posts like the above, because it completely explains what he knows about Ballistics - not a thing!
-----

quote:

By ReelMan1:
of course a well placed small bullet trumps a terrible shot with a larger caliber. But the same shot with a larger caliber is better than with a little bullet. What the little bullet won't do is penatrate if it's not a perfect broadside shot. And one does not always get a perfect shot or they make a bad shot, when this happens I will always go with the larger caliber and heavier bullet (within reason of course).

I shot one deer on a hard quartering away shot where the bullet hit right where the hip meets the pelvis bone and the bullet penetrated out the opposite shoulder. This was with a 100gr Partition out of a 243, can a 223 do that?

Excellent post which the Ballistically Challenged and those with no real First-Hand Experience just do not comprehend.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
SeafireB17g--I suspect that adrenaline and going into shock and disoriented was a very accurate description of what was going on. On the other side of things, I saw a deer shot with .223 that was dead right now that from where hit would have expected it to go down, but not be dead. It was hit too far forward through both shoulders--no vital hit but was instant lights out. Never know till you pull the trigger.

Steal What thread. .223 deer killer for the hundreth time roger

Well I went with some Trailboss at 10gr behind an 80gr Hornady SSP bullet. The recoil is VERY minimal, hopefully I can work the load up some by fall.

As to the 223 for elk I guess it would be fine if in the hands of someone who could place the shot right where it needs to be and restricted the range but then again a 22LR would also fit those peramiters if the person realized that he needed to shoot them in the brain from 10' away to adequetly kill the animal. The "bigger is better" thing can get out of hand but I also feel that the "little is better" is just as out of place often times.