Who ever thinks a 243 is going to die off is on crack. More and more guys are using them for 1000 yard Benchrest and F class. It might not be as popular in the hunting fields as it used to be but it is not going anywhere.

well i guess ill just have to sell my 243 as some say it is a poor choice for deer as number 35 elk fell yesterday a 200 yard shot right in the boiler room poor elk he ran 75 yards and fell over dead must of been a lucky shot???and it was shot with what most call a poor bullet it was a 95 gr nosler BT after shreading the lungs it broke the off shoulder lodging just under the skin it weigh 47 gr. this was an average size bull elk.

A great read - thanks for the posts.

I think I somewhat over estimated the deer weight, the game dealers scales read 150lb for a good sized buck.

bigbill0690 there is no way you killed an Elk with a B-tip in a 6mm cal don't you know the 180gr in the 30cal don't kill them? I don't see how that 95 in a 6mm could. Can you post a pic of that bullet? I told a buddy of mine that I think I might use my 6-284 with a 105 Berger on our Cow trip in December. He said well I know you can kill it with that so go for it. I told him since we will be hunting 7000ft + and with the velocity and energy I have at that elevation I would feel comfortable shooting out a ways if I had to.

I don't think anyone really questions whether or not the 243 is a true killer. It is obvious that it is.

I chimed in only when I read that the 243 is BETTER than some larger bore calibers.

This was somewhere in the middle of the thread.

As far as the elk and 243/95 Btip kills. This is certainly possible. But I question the 'breaking the offside shoulder' part. If this is so, that is remarkable IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:
I don't think anyone really questions whether or not the 243 is a true killer. It is obvious that it is.

I chimed in only when I read that the 243 is BETTER than some larger bore calibers.

This was somewhere in the middle of the thread.
.....

Doc:

That is what I was trying to say.

Having never fired a .243 at game, I thought it best to leave the discussion to those with field experience. I have seen a number of deer killed with 130 grain bullets from a .270 and 150 grain bullets from a 30.06 / .308. Most of them did not survive long enough run any distance.

For the last 20 years or so, I have shot a .308 or 30.06 with 165 or 180 grain bullets. I can recall two deer that ran any appreciable distance. One was a doe that I shot with a 180 grain round nose remington core-lokt bullet. I hit here a little further back than I like (I usually shoot for the shoulder) and hit the rear of the lungs. The bullet hit between ribs on the way in and did not knock the deer down. The exit wound was not impressive - about 1" in diameter. This deer ran about 75 yards and died. The other was a buck hit similarly - with a 180 grain nosler partition. He ran about 40 yards and died. I do no know if a .243 would have performed much differently.

I do understand that the use of more frangible, high-velocity bullets could have made these two kills happen a little faster, but I have had a philosophy of using tougher, heavy for caliber bullets (like 180 grainers in 30 calibers).

I shot a buck a few years back, which was a quartering toward shot from an elevated stand. The shot was not an ideal, broadside shot that we usually hope for. This deer was running through a thicket and momentarily paused. Maybe he winded me a little or knew something was up. Anyway, I took the shot as it presented itself. Maybe the deer would have presented a better shot, but maybe he would have turned and ran away without a shot opportunity. The bullet entered about six inches from the base of the neck and travelled through about 16 inches of neck and spine, through the front of the chest cavity and and was found low at the off side shoulder. The deer dropped in its tracks. I do not know that a .243 would have been able to kill that deer any faster or better.

Each person has the responsibility to shoot a cartridge he has confidence in and that can cleanly take the game being hunted at the shot angles likely to occur.

I am not calling another's choice of caliber wrong, but disagreed with the statement that the .243 killed better that a .270 or 30.06. Picking on someone's rifle is a little like calling a guys's wife ugly.- Dangerous. If the gun/caliber makes a shooter happy and does what he needs it to do, then that is the right caliber for him.

Like I said before I have shot deer with some pretty big cals. Same result just about everytime with a lung shot with a big cal shooting a heavy bullet. Deer tends to run off and die. With smaller cals they seem to anchor more often then not on lung shots. I am not talking shoulder shots as any thing in the shoulder drops them. I am talking no bone lung shots thats where the small bullets they expand fast and work well. As for the 95 B-tip that has a very thick jacket on it. I have shot those at 3600fps and have yet to see one come apart totally. I have even shot through 3/8inch plate with them at 300 yards. At 243 velocity I do not see them blowing up at all on an animal.

lung shots are for archers.

I agree Doc but somtimes you just don't hit bone even when you are aiming at it. Again I do agree bone is the best option.

I will say that the .243 is more than capable of taking deer in the hands of an experienced, ethical hunter. I was in deer camp with a first-timer a few years ago, and he was using a .243. Long tracking jobs, resulting from poor shots. Pretty ugly stuff. He'd have been better served with a .308 or an '06. He wasn't an experienced shot, so maybe he shouldn't have been there in the first place. Bottom line, if you don't hit them where you're supposed to, things will go bad. generally speaking, a larger bullet will give you a LITTLE better margin for error. JMHO

I have found the .243 more than adequate on deer up to 220# when hit in the heart lung area. My son uses a .243 with 95 grain Federal Fusion to take deer and exotics on Hill Country ranches and has for a few years now.

The problem with the .243 on larger bodied animals is that there is usually no exit wound and the entrance wound is small. If the area being hunted is thick with lots of cover and the animal runs off, this lack of a good blood trial may mean you are faced with the possibility of a lost animal.

It is for this reason that when hunting on our South Texas lease in heavy cover, we leave the .243 at home and take his .308 and the 150 grain bullets.

After years of experience I have come to prefer an exit hole with LOTS of blood flowing out of it.

Just my two cents worth.

Mario

Ok, let me take the opposing viewpoint. If I can shoot a cartridge with a larger bore diameter and roughly equivalent recoil, why would I want to shoot a .243? Case in point, a .257 Roberts or a .260 Remington can be loaded to kick about the same a .243. Why not shoot the larger caliber gun? It may not make a big difference, but I don't see a downside.

quote:

(Posted by bigbill0690) well i guess ill just have to sell my 243 as some say it is a poor choice for deer as number 35 elk fell yesterday a 200 yard shot right in the boiler room poor elk he ran 75 yards and fell over dead must of been a lucky shot???

Great shot bigbill, .243/6mm cal rilfles are able to take large game that is for sure. The only thing I didn't like was that your elk made 75 yards, of course this can happen with any caliber. I've shot elk in some places where if they made 75 yards after the shot you would have a hard time finding them. For that simple reason I will not use this caliber of rifle on anything larger than deer. I can't fault anyone for using this caliber though, hell I caught a bunch of flack for wanting to hunt elk with a .30-30 on a different post.

I have taken numerous deer with a .243 at ranges up to 200 yards and have come to the conclusion that if you use a properly constructed bullet you can get 'em on the ground.If you can't kill one with a .243 maybe golf would be a better passtime.

My experiance in 20+ years of hunting is that more heart/lung shot deer will run than not.This has been true for me,you may have differant results but I dont think so.Even had a couple with broke shoulders run off! Deer can and will make it a long way with well placed shots.I see it happen every year with the deer I shoot.If you can't track them don't shoot them.There is no magic bullet that will give you DRT results everytime.If there is someone let me know so I can quit tracking them.

To my surprise, I did shoot a whitetail Doe one time with a muzzleloader (at about 10 yards) through the onside shoulder, with a Barnes bullet and she did run about 10 yards with a completely shattered shoulder. BUT, the bullet did not exit! Her lungs were soup and the bullet was well expanded and lodged just under the offside skin. The blood trail was remarkable, as it looked like someone poured blood from a cup the whole ten yards. And that was from the entrance hole.

Mature deer can be pretty tough. The deer that comes to mind was about 200 Lbs. I shot it with a 375 H&H between the trees at 192 yards. It took off like a scalded dog. I figured I must have muffed the shot. On the follow up I cut his tracks and the first thing I saw was nice pink frothy blood. Good sign. That deer ran nearly 100 yards and accross onto the next property. Nice to have good relationships with the next lease holder. The bullet absolutely shattered the on side shoulder. Made mincemeat out of every thing in the boiler room. Still he ran a hundred yards. Some deer are tougher than others.

I use a 30-06 mostly for deer. Some like theirs over easy, and some like them sunny side up. Use whatever gun floats your boat. Shoot straight and have fun.

Over the years I have been out with many Scottish gamekeepers who pretty regularly shoot 100 or so red deer annually during their cull. I have been impressed with the high percentage of those who use the .243 as their personal rifle.

Al

quote:

Originally posted by Argali:
The reason the .243 suffers a bad reputation is because it is easier for a hunter to put the blame on an inanimate object, rather than tarnish their own reputation or bruise their own ego.

O K its the ides of Febuary and everyone is too relaxed ... Or too busy with the Iron dog ,,Yukon Quest.., Fur Rondy or getting ready for the Iditarod .........,,,,,,,,,,/////////////....,.,/.,,I have a neighbor that has killed several boat loads or deer with his 243 win. He has seen brown bear killed with them and the 270 , I think he took one with his 243 also .. he has killed a few elk with it ...I think he shoots a 100 gr bullet and has just 1 factory load that shoots well in his rifle and that is what he uses... He also leaves his scope set on 9 power...,, He mostly shoots them in the neck or head...And usually from relatively close range.....,.,.,...Most people loose deer alot more often than they admit and I am opposed to loosing deer ... I don,t think my neighbor has lost many tho ... I,ve even lost a couple and it wasn,t because of caliber ...Mainly I didn,t understand where the deer did go once wounded....And didn,t realize a deer could go along ways even when shot with a 375.. The 243 is unreliable on alot of body shots and that is what gives it ,its bad reputation....with a clear shot it works ok ,, but alot of people won,t wait for a good shot opportunity......I feel the 260 Rem is a good 1st centerfire rifle for a young or new shooter/ hunter....unless they live and hunt in DG country ,, in which case the 35 whelan is a good place to start or the 338 win....,I,ve shot a few deer thru the heart with the 458 Win Mag with 510 gr soft points and it works great..You can eat both halves of the heart...And do it from any angle ... . That is why I am not a big fan of little rifles .. I view hunting as something so important that not being able to take a shot because of this or that little problem with the way an animal is standing is to me a waste of my time.. So I use big rifles and practice with them so I can always hit my target .....And know my limitations when I can,t..

quote:

Originally posted by WoodsyAl:
Over the years I have been out with many Scottish gamekeepers who pretty regularly shoot 100 or so red deer annually during their cull. I have been impressed with the high percentage of those who use the .243 as their personal rifle.

Al

I might too if I were culling deer, but I'm not.

When I hunt, I want my rifle to be something I have absolute faith in to have to ability to make the difficult shots and finish the job. I think anyone would be stupid to say that a .243 won't kill deer, clearly it will do so just fine under most conditions. I do consider it marginal for deer and really can't get my head around why some people get a kick out of using the smallest caliber they can get away with for deer. There's no doubt that anything a .243 will do on deer will be done just as well or better by a 260, 270, 7mm-08, etc. I challenge anyone to tell the difference in recoil between a 243 and a 260, yet to me the latter is a much more reliable deer killer. Maybe the reason I've seen relatively poor results out of the 243 is that around here they're typically used by guys that don't shoot much. Probably the reason they're using a 243 in the first place is that they're afraid of the recoil of a 270/30-06, and don't want to put in the practice time to learn how to shoot them. In my opinion the absolute worst thing you can do is give a kid a 243 as their first deer rifle. Marginal deer caliber + poor shot equals a recipe for disaster. I've got two 243's in the gun safe, but they don't get used for deer hunting, there are much better calibers sitting next to them for that purpose.

To be honest, I just don't understand the mentality of insisting upon doing "the most with the least" that is exhibited here. A yugo will get me and the wife to the mall, but my pickup gets me there in a lot more comfort and gives us room to put stuff. Why use something marginal when there's better choices? Sure it'll get it done most of the time, but a more suitable round allows you to focus on the more important aspects of hunting instead of worrying if your rifle is up to the task.

Recoil in a .270/30-06 to me is non-existent and I am 165lbs and 62 years old with a bad once dislocated shoulder.My favorite rifle is a med. wt. Ruger77 in .280 and when I pull the trigger I dont notice it going off.The hardest kicking rifle I have ever owned was a 6 1/2 lb 7mm remington Parker-Hale with a dried up recoil pad it would kick the snot out of you but I never flinched until I shot it about 3 times.w/regards

I just love these 243 threads. I don't know which is worse...the 243 isn't worth crap or the 243 will kill a charging elephant.......

I'll preface my reply by introducing myself. My name is Troy Beatty, retired Alabama Game Warden of 25+ years. I taught fireams and shot on the state rifle team. I run a farm now and cull a number of deer each year. I've hunted deer since 1964 and I've killed over 300 head of deer and big game on three continents, with everything from a .22short to a 375H&H. I own a 243Win and a 6mmRem, probably killed near 50 deer with the two.

dakor, are you on crack? a 243 is a better deer killer than a 270/30-06? What a load of bs. Moose and elk at 600 yards? More bs. YOU ever killed a deer at 600 yards much less a moose with a 243 at 600 yards? You'd have to shoot a varmit bullet to get it to open up at all at those reduced velocities.

I say different than you and I'm not a poor shot or lacking in field experience.

big(cals) don't until the speed drops off??? WTH! A 300 Weatherby shooting 150 gr Hornady soft points will knock the crap out of a deer at fifty yards. Velocity=expansion or did you skip that class?

The 75 gr Hornady HP is a varmit bullet with fragil construction for quick expansion, it's a marginal deer bullet(yes, I've actually shot deer with that bullet), it sure isn't an elk bullet. I'd wager most elk guides wouldn't even allow you to hunt with it in their camp.

A 243 to stop brown bear, probably would work if it was laying on the dash of a big truck as you ran over the bear. Stop a brown bear? horsechit. I wonder how many mountain men got killed trying to "stop" a big bear with a lead ball?

The doe you shot with the 375H&H didn't drop because in essence you shot her with a "solid", a bullet that failed to expand because it wasn't designed to expand on 100 pound animals.

My take on the 243? It's a marginal deer load, it will kill deer if you stick to shooting deer in a greenfield, off a rest, at modest ranges, and shoot accurately. If you try to push a 243 thru a 250 pound buck hard quartering away at two hundred yards...good luck. And don't tell me to wait for the perfect shot...in actual hunting you don't always get the perfect shot, which is why you shoot something that will get the job done under the worst conditions you may have to face. The 243 won't do that job reliably. Period. My 7mmRM with 140 Nosler Partions will...every time.

Bottom line is that if you shoot enough deer with a 243 under all hunting conditions you WILL eventually lose a deer for no other reason than you stuck to shooting a 243. My thoughts, your milage obviousely varies.
troy

The .243 has a poor reputation because it is too often used beyond it's capabilities with predictably poor results.

Old Elmer was right. Some have an obsession for shooting the largest game with the smallest caliber possible, and it isn't good sportsmanship.
--------------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

1894mk2: I kind of pride myself there 1894mk2, in keeping "up" with whats going on in the American Big Game Hunting world.
I honestly have never heard a person who's opinion I trusted (which includes a lot of people) decry the 243 Winchester!
I did not know it had a bad reputation!
I don't, think it does!
I, like you, have killed most every Deer and Antelope I have shot with my various 243's with just one round being expended!
Its as simple as this - use a proper bullet in your 243 and shoot said game in the proper place (heart/lung area) and then go take pictures of and then clean your quarry - PERIOD!
I contend the 243 Winchester does not have a bad reputation.
And that it is a fine to EXCELLENT Medium Game cartridge!
Long live the 243 Winchester - I think its about 52 years old this year and still going strong!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I have shot a lot of deer with a 6mm, and my dad has shot a lot with a 6/225. They are both excellent deer rounds, but I agree with a number of the other posts that you need to use a GOOD bullet. If you use a 100 grain nosler partition, you won't have any problems, even with large deer. I assume a TSX would work equally well.

The bullet is the key. As an example, my brother shot a small buck with a 100 grain factory load, I think it was a winchester powerpoint. He used a Ruger #1 with a 26" barrel, and the deer was rather close, about 40 yds. The deer fell over, but when he walked up to it he could see an area on the sholder where the hair had blown off, and then the deer got up and ran off. He never did get the deer. I think it was a combination of close range, and the long barrel, so the bullet was going too fast, and didn't hold together. That isn't a knock on the 6mm, just bad bullets.

I would never use anything lighter than 95 grains unless it was a TSX. And the 95-100 grain bullets should be a premium bullet like a partition.

The 85 grain Barnes TSX makes the .243 a whole different caliber. 40 plus animals and counting and never not had a nice exit hole. List includes some very large feral hogs.

The 6mm's are all about bullet selection and shot placement. Wait a minute, isn't that any hunting round?

Most people that bad mouth the round can't shoot.

As stated before in many posts, I've whacked a pile of critters with a .243, from antelope to deer all the way up to elk, the .243 has put them down. You get idiots like gumboot spouting off because they have small dicks and think that a .458 will make it bigger, not because they have any practical experience with the mentioned caliber.

A .243 in the proper hands will kill anything in North America, add to it a quality bullet like a Barnes and you're in business.

MG

I think for normal deer hunting, the .243 is a fine load. I have never seen a well hit deer with a .243 go very far. For larger deer and longer ranges, I would prefer something a bit more potent. I have read that some of the early .243 bullets had some issues. Sometimes they would not expand and pencil through leading to long or non-existant blood trails. Maybe this reputation has been hard to overcome despite years of good bullet performance. The vast majority of deer I have seen shot with .243/6mm have been with 100 gr. Rem Core-loct factory load and I have never seen this problem. Sometimes the core will separate, but even on quartering shots, the bullet reaches the hide on the off side.

-Lou

Well, I've personally seen the .243 used on just about everything here in CO including elk. In the hands of a good shot, who carefully picks his shots, sure it'll kill big game. I use mine with light varmint bullets as a varmint rifle. There are so many rounds better suited to big game, why use the .243? When I was in the outfitting business, I would not allow a client to hunt big game with one, but then, no one ever asked to.

I have not personally used a 243 to hunt deer or anything else with yet, but I have one that I am about to start working with as one of my rifles to take west this fall for antelope & prarie dog.
I have a friend that has hunted whitetails in the southeast U.S. for a couple of years with a 243. He is extremely pleased with its performance. The only complaint I have ever heard from him was about hitting tree limb he did not see in the scope causing him to miss a deer completely. Neither of us beleive that it would have made a difference if he was using something bigger or not in that situation.
Last year he tried a 308 that he bought just to have something different, he shot a doe with it & was not pleased with its performance at all. There could be several factors as to why this happened, I am just relaying the experience of a friend. Personally I think highly of both of those cartridges.

The 243 works fine for deer and antelope. The problem comes from the same reasons that are the "real reasons" for failure for ANY calibre.

#1- Poor shot placement. Boy people hate that. If you are a crappy shot, your a crappy shot whether it's a 243 or a 458 Lott. Gut shot and "leg broke" animals just don't make for a fun day, especially for the animal.

#2- Junk bullets, or rather bullets that were never intended for the job at hand. Just because a 75gr varmint slug in a 243 drops a 250lb buck like a bolt of lightening ONE TIME doesn't mean it will do it every time or even ever again. The smaller the calibre and the higher the velocity the more important proper bullet selection is to the successful outcome. The 243 happens to stand at the junction of those two factors. I'd venture to guess that improper bullet selection is probably the main reason some scorn the 243, that and the human tendendcy to blame "something" for our own failures.

HunterMontana, I agree completely.

The 243 has a poor reputation for
1. People can't shoot worth a hoot
2. people use crappy bullets
3. people take shots they shouldn't
4. '' '' '' '' '' ''
5. '' '' '' '' '' ''
6. '' '' '' '' '' ''

I've personally shot myself, seen shot, or know of hundreds of deer that have been killed with a 243. Lots of them dropped in their tracks anywhere from a few yards to over 300.
Facts are if you use a good bullet and place your shots properly
1. Deer die period

And all this about you have to be an expert to kill a deer or whatever with a 243 is just that It not complicated all you have to do is
1. Use a decent bullet
2. know where the heart and lungs are
3. place the bullet through the heart and/or lungs.
That doesn't take an expert to do. You should know where to place a bullet to take out the heart and/or lungs regardless of what cartridge you are using.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jarrod:
I've personally shot myself, seen shot, or know of hundreds of deer that have been killed with a 243.

You know Jarrod, you really shouldn't do that!

quote:

Originally posted by Jarrod:
I've personally shot myself

Dang! Are you ok?

quote:

Originally posted by Pegleg:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jarrod:
I've personally shot myself, seen shot, or know of hundreds of deer that have been killed with a 243.

You know Jarrod, you really shouldn't do that!

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:

quote:

Originally posted by Jarrod:
I've personally shot myself

Dang! Are you ok?

yep healed right up lol.

Did someone say they use a 95 gn BT on Elk? Did someone mention hunting with a crack pipe?

Well. before Al Gore invented the internet I actually thought that the 243 had a great rep as a light recoil deer slaying machine. And then I tried one myself. I must say my experience left me unimpressed. Yes placement is important, but it is the only caliber I ever used with the same kind of bullets hitting in the same target area that failed to give a bang-flop on Utah muleys. For the last 4 or 5 years Ive used a 257 AI with quite satisfactory results.

For me the 243 on deer is still ok, especially for beginners, but there are certianly better rounds out there. Even light recoiling ones. Give me a Bob or 7X57 over it any day.

Sometimes size does matter.

quote:

Originally posted by Wstrnhuntr:
Did someone say they use a 95 gn BT on Elk? Did someone mention hunting with a crack pipe?

Well. before Al Gore invented the internet I actually thought that the 243 had a great rep as a light recoil deer slaying machine. And then I tried one myself. I must say my experience left me unimpressed. Yes placement is important, but it is the only caliber I ever used with the same kind of bullets hitting in the same target area that failed to give a bang-flop on Utah muleys. For the last 4 or 5 years Ive used a 257 AI with quite satisfactory results.

For me the 243 on deer is still ok, especially for beginners, but there are certianly better rounds out there. Even light recoiling ones. Give me a Bob or 7X57 over it any day.

Sometimes size does matter.

If you can't get a bang flop on deer with a 243 you probably should change your target area then.
However between me, family and friends and a few hundred deer later altogether I will agree with what some posters have said here there are times when they leave a lot of blood and times when they leave very little. Of course that also makes a difference where you hit them. Of course when they do run if's usually from being heart shot and then they do the 50 yard dash.
if you don't want to track them hit them on the point of the shoulder and no tracking is involved.