My son is a 12 year old who is of average height and weight for his age. We've got a trip planned to SA next year, and will be able to spend some of our time there hunting private property with a local PH. Possible species will include impala, and possibly kudu. When back here in the US, we'll be hunting game such as whitetail and mule deer, antelope, etc. I am considering the following (4) calibers for his first centerfire rifle, and would appreciate your opinions.

.243 -- The "standard" youth choice, but is it the best choice overall as a rifle he'll have for many years.

.260 -- I've heard great things, but am not too familiar with this one. Is ammo readily available? Are there decent bullet weight options.

7mm08 -- I personally like this .284 bullet for the type of game we'll hunt.

.270 -- Clearly the "boomer" in this group as far as recoil, but a very versatile caliber in a gun he'll have forever. With a muzzle break or magna porting, would it be suitable?

Well, I have to start out by saying I got my first centerfire when I was 12 and it was a Remington 722 chambered in 244 Remington. I thought that was the coolest rifle in the world and I shot a number of deer with it. Matter of fact, I am now 58 years old and I still have not shot a bigger deer than I shot with it in Wyoming one year.

BUT, I have to admit I have graduated to bigger and better things. The 6mm's are great youth guns, very easy to shoot, and pretty darned effective. If you have something the size of a Kudu in mind, you probably want something more.

To me it would be a toss up between the 270 and the 7-08. In fact when I bought a Remington Mountain Rifle a couple of years ago, those were the calibers I considered. I settled on the 7-08 just for the short action and wide bullet weight options available.

I guess I would suggest you take your son to some gun shops and let him handle some rifles. Pick one based on what he thinks feels best. Either of those calibers are well suited.

I personally would recomment the 7-08 for the short action. A friend has a son who has shot a number of deer and a couple of elk now with a Remington Model 7 chambered in 7-08.

Don't get me wrong, I think the 270 is a great cartridge. I have several friends who shoot them and love them. My grandson shoots one and has killed deer and elk with it. However, he is pretty big kid for 13 years old.

I'd go with the 7mm-08 also. Remember that it's the modern version of the old proven 7mm Mauser !I think it's a much better choice than the 243. While each person has recoil limits you still have to learn to handle that recoil.Make sure he's thouroughly familiar with the rifle and get lots of practice.

7-08

7-08 I have had one for almost 20 years couldnt count the number of one shot kills on whitetail.To me recoil is nonexistent w/140 gr partitions.I shot one 4 weeks after I badly dislocated my right shoulder and dont remember it even going off.w/regards

I started out with a full miltary 03 springfield
kick like hell to a skinny 12 year old.

I would go with 7mm-08 or 260 in a well stocked rifle.

I highly recommend the 270. I have taken my 12 year old nephew to the range with my ruger and he shot it for 5 hours and didn't complain a bit. He was about 5-8 and roughly 120 pounds I think.

I did have a Pachmyr decelerator pad on it though. He was shooting 140 grain Bitps with a healthy dose of IMR4831. I think he shot 26 rounds that day.

It is my opinion that if you sink just a tad bit more $ into a rifle, like for a better recoil pad, that changes everything. My nephew hunted with his grandfather for 2 deer seasons using a 243 before he shot my 270.

He liked the 270 much more. And he shot it very well.

It is my opinion that if you start off a young hunter with something like a 270 and a 130 grain bullet, they'll learn to tolerate recoil much better in the future. Just tell him that it's the "bare minimum" and learn to shoot it well. Get him a small shoulder pad and let him get a 270.

My rifle has a 3lb trigger also, and I believe that helps. My nephew shot one target that day and had 2-3" groups at 200 yards. He was very pleased. After watching him shoot that Saturday for 5 hours, and for another 2 hours on Sunday (he shot my 30.06 too with 180 bullets-didn't like it quite as well ), i wouldn't hesitate to take him deer hunting and let him shoot my 270 out to 275 yards. He did a great job at the range.

quote:

270 -- Clearly the "boomer" in this group as far as recoil, but a very versatile caliber in a gun he'll have forever. With a muzzle break or magna porting, would it be suitable?

You won't need a muzzlebreak if you have a better recoil pad. That, in addition to a shoulder pad he can wear will take care of all the recoil. Then he won't have to worry about the loud report of the rifle. However, I did put a break on my 270 factory bbl years ago just to see how much of a recoil reduction it would have....I was very impressed.

A 270 with a break kicks less than a 708 or 243.

You won't go wrong with a 708, but I prefer the 270 for it's trajectory.

Then again, you could always stuff the 270 with those little 110 grain Barnes TSX bullets like I did for my brother. He's killed plenty of game with it out to 260 yards without incident. He's informed me that I need not load any other bullet for him for that rifle.

As posted in theAfrican section...

Muggles,

I am a born and raised Westchesterite and have to totally agree with Fjold. Let the lad handle and experience some recoil in varing levels. He will be far more involved and enthusiastic if he has some say in the matter.

Now to specifically answer the question, for my nephews my brother in law and I choose the .260 and the Ruger short laminate/stainless configuration. The rifle is amazingly accurate and has taken more than it's share of deer sized game over the last couple of years. A side note would be the older nephew was saddled with a .270 and has developed a major flinch. He's enormous for his age 12, and should be able to handle the rifle. Bullets and ammunition are easily available for any of the calibers you are interested in.

Good luck and good hunting.

Gidday Muggles,

260. Load it up load it down it just does the trick. Ammo is pretty available here in NZ so I suspect the States will be better supplied than us.

120 grain BT will do all you want.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

270 win with a limbsaver pad. Remington 700 sps would be a good choice, it already has the pad, 24" barrel and it's not expensive. He won't need another rifle,ever. Go light on the loads(if you handload) or use managed recoil for practice and full house for hunting.

I set up my 13 year old daughter with a Ruger #1 International in .270 Winchester. I loaded a 100 gr. barnes X to 2950 fps. Very accurate, with two one shot bang-flops to her credit. She
loaned her rifle to another 13 year old young lady; first time huntress. Another one shot kill. The deer dropped after traveling 10 yards. These two little gals are now hunting buddies.

Any of the first three on your list. I would lean towards the 260 or the 7mm08. Those two bullet diameters have the widest selection of weights available also. The 260 would be a slightly better dual purpose cartridge than either the 243 or the 7mm08.
I also agree with investing in a good recoil pad, that would be money well spent.

Muggles,

Good luck to you & your son on your SA safari. I applaud your commitment to preparing your son for an enjoyable & successful trip. All of the calibers you mention are potent & lethal with appropriate bullets & proper shot placement. IMO, the 7-08 would be the most likely choice for several reasons, first its ballistics are similar to the 7x57 Mauser, which has a long & glorious history for its performance on African game. With lighter bullets its recoil is minimal & it has sufficient range for a young shooter. Another consideration is selecting the proper ammo. The regal game of Africa can be pretty tough, & well-constructed bullets will help your son realize his optimal potential. Invest in a high-quality recoil pad such as a Simms Limb Saver & premium ammo. Good bullets for the 7-08 & kudu size game would be : 145 grain Speer Grand Slam, 150 grain Swift Scirocco, 160 grain Nosler Partition, Swift A-Frame and Barnes TSX. If you don’t reload, Conley Precision Cartridge can provide almost any load you would need. http://www.cpcartridge.com/premiumrifle.htm

All the best,
Dave

The 7X57 was used for years in Africa & was widely recognized as an acceptable light caliber, so my choice would be the 7mm-08. It is super accurate, light recoil & a gun your son camn use well into the future. Plus, being a short action, perhaps you can find it in a gun that is slightlt shorter/lighter for his age. Good Luck !!

quote:

It is my opinion that if you sink just a tad bit more $ into a rifle, like for a better recoil pad, that changes everything.

I agree, I good recoil pad will turn a 270 into a pussycat at the bench.

If you custom load you can build a load to suit him and he can grow with the rifle for a lifetime of memories with it. I find that most youths with small calibers grow out of them like shoe sizes...

I'd even start him with an 06 since I'm a hand loader.

Good Luck

Reloader

7x57

In my opinion a 270 is madness - my experience of teaching kids to shoot is that avoidance of flinching is absolutely vital.

By avoidance I mean never ever getting them to a stage that they flinch. A flinch is a learnt muscle memory that can be near impossible to undo. My own is only controllable by rigid trigger discipline (and a 2lb or less trigger)

I would limit the size of animal he shoots and hence go for a 243 or similar. This would also meand that there is one more thing to really look forward to when he is older.

I would not saddle any kid with a .243 nor a .410.
A .260 would be a fine choice but the 7-08 would be the pick of the litter.

I can't see that the recoil difference between a 7-08 with a 140 bullet and a 270 with a 130 bullet is that remarkable. 270-youth-madness???

I respectfully disagree. Not everyone has flinching issues. I used to when I first started with a 270. Reducing the trigger to 3 pounds eliminated it. Simple fix.

Doc, I certainly agree.

I've done recoil calculator comparisons between each of the above cartridges and the outcome was surprising, They ALL had virtually the exact same amount of recoil force. The lighter weight of the 08 based rifles pulled the recoil figures up to that of a 270 w/ 130s.

Another very important thing to consider is that a good many of the factory rifles chambered in the 08 based carts don't have recoil pads where a good bit of the LA factory rifles do. In equally weighted rifles the recoil pad wins every time in the percieved recoil department.

When the youngster gets alittle more age and experience under his belt he can move up to 150 grners in the 270 and be set for just about any of the mentioned animals.

Reloader

Get the 270, heck, I'd say go ahead and bump up to a 30-06. Just keep him off the bench with it. Bench shooting and most practice should be done with a .22 rimfire.
Shooting at game I guarantee he won't notice the recoil.

One other little item I forgot is the advantage of a short action's bolt throw versus a long action for the shorter arms. Go .260!

My son is small for his age and at eleven he shoots a .257 Roberts with 100gr. full power loads just fine. I have a bit more comfort with the Bob over the .243W.

I do think the .260R would be a good choice too. Nate

As far as caliber, I would think it would be .270 or .280. Another possibility and one my dad took with me over 40 years ago, was to go with a Remington 740 (now a 742 or other model I think), semi-auto in 30.06. The semi-auto greatly reduced recoil, but still gave a kid (me)a great all around caliber for most big game. I killed my first buck, first elk and first moose with it, and it's still in my safe.

Well I ran some numbers through my recoil calculator as well. I realize that the numbers can change based on the type of powder used due to the variations in amounts and the velocity being generated.

I made my picks based on published factory velocity. I then chose a powder that gave me the same or nearly the same velocity for the bullet weight. I assumed a rifle weight of 8 pounds including scope, etc.

I came up with the following:

.243 with 100 grain bullet = about 10 ft pounds of recoil
.260 with 120 grain bulelt = about 12 1/2 ft pounds.
7mm-08 with 120 grain bullet = about 12.5 ft pounds as well.
7mm-08 with 130 grain bullet = roughly 14 foot pounds
the .260 with 140 grain bullet = about 14 ft lbs (based on the 6.5 X 55)
7mm-08 with 140 grain bullet = almost 15 ft lbs
The .270 with a 130 grain bullet come in close to 19 ft lbs ( or 16.5 ft pounds based on new data inputs I ran below) {edited to avoid confusion}

I did not run the .260 with all bulelt weights. The 6.5 Sweed and the 7X57 in the same for all intents and purposes to their american counterparts it really is a wash.

To me that is quite a difference. Again, I do know that if I had chosen different powders or velocities that the numbers would look different. I put them up simply for comparison and realise that they are not exact.

Based on your desired hunting plans I would look at the .260 or the 7mm-08. Shorten the stock and add a good recoil pad to fit your son and start him off with the lighter weight bullets. You can work him up to heavier bulelts over time.

Another option is to get a .308 Win and start him out wit hthe reduced recoil or managed recoil ammo. This is advertised to bring the recoil energy down to the level of the .243. I believe this ammo is also available for the .270. If you reload you can do the same thing with any cartridge.

I started shooting 30-06 at age 14. It was tough to do so without developing a flinch. It took lots of concentration. My brother was not so fortunate. He still flinches to this day, I am now 39, with anything over a .22LR and does not hunt. It is better to start out with a lighter cartridge and maintain the enjoyment than go too big too fast.

54JNoll, will you run a 270 with a 110 grain bullet? ie., the TSX. Please advise on recoil. Thanks.

I get 13.14 ft-lbs

For the first time in many years, Maryland instituted a black bear hunt here in this state last year. The first bear killed was taken by a 6 year old girl with one shot from her .243 Winchester.

QED. Nuff said.

I just remembered something that completely slipped by. We often times recommend reduced loads, and they have a lot of merit. Slowing down a lighter bullet that normally has a reputation for being "to soft" can yield some very effective loads for youth.

I have some .308W loads in my safe that were made for that very purpose. Loaded a 150gr rn designed for the .30-30 at a relatively minimum load of ball powder( can't remember), they penetrated well and were very accurate.

I don't use reduced loads much at all so I guess I kind-of forget about it. I usually pick a lighter round and load it up to normal performance. It would certainly be a good thing to do if you're planning to buy him a rifle now that he will be using forever.

I still think if a .250 Sav or .257 Roberts are not enough gun, the next step up would be a 6.5mm and I wouldn't have a problem using it on fairly large animals. It's more about where you hit them, than with what. Nate

Doc,

Do you have a velocity you want me to use as well as the powder and amount? I could estimate but it might sway the numbers more.

quote:

The .270 with a 130 grain bullet come in close to 19 ft lbs

All of my recoil calcs came in from 11-12 ft lbs.

I figured the 270 will probably weigh in around 1 lb more in a factory rifle vs the other cartridges which are offered in many light weight factory or youth set-ups.

That was with a 130 going 2800 fps which is a mid range load in 22" barreled 270.

Of course if you want to use max velcoity loads it will definitely increase the recoil.

Reloader

Doc,

I swagged some numbers so others can see what I am talking about how by changing charge weight or velocity you get very different numbers. I am not going to list the powder I based this off of because since I do not have my loading manuals handy (them being 1 hour away) I have no idea if they are safe loads.

But assuming you can get 5X grains of powder X in the case and you can dafely run a 110 grain TSX at 3300 fps you I get a recoil force of 15.9 ft pounds in an 8 pound rifle.

Drop the powder charge by 2 grains to 5X-2 grains and run at 3158 and I get 14.7 ft lbs.

Using 5X-2 grains instead of 5X and assuming you can still get 3300 fps and recoil is 15.5 ft lbs instead of 15.9 ft lbs. Drop the velocity to 3200 using everything else the same and I get 14.9 ft lbs.

The data I listed previously about the .234, .260, 7mm-08, and .270 was run some time ago and I happen to have the spread sheet at my desk.

I just want to repeat that the numbers that I have shown for a cartridge using a 110grian TSX are not right because I do not presently have access to all the data I need. I presented numbers to show how people can get different recoil numbers by using different powders.

Reloader,

I did not use Max loads I used factory published loads. That would also make a difference versus a specific load someone worked up. I also did not meticulously research which powder would match factory velocity using the least amount of powder. Smaller powder charges for the same velocity equal less recoil as well. I also normallized all rifles at 8 pounds full up. A difference of 1 pound rifle weight will definately change the numbers.

Using on line data available from Hodgdon's site, if I load 54 grains of H4350 and push a 130 grain bullet at 3012 fps with a 9 pound rifle I get 14.5 ft lbs. Using all the same data but with an 8 pound rifle it gives me 16.5 ft lbs of recoil. So obviously, I did not use this powder on my first recoil comparision run. Even so there is a difference between 14 or 16 ft lbs for a .270 and 10 ft lbs for a .243.

What I can say is that the estimates I ran placed the recoil of a .270 firing a 150 grain bullet at 3010 fps as having very near the same recoil as a 30-06 firing a 150 grain bullet at 3000 fps. So within my data they correlate very well. But obviously you can have significant differences if you use different powders and different velocities even with the same rifle weight. Heck I even have a 3 foot pound difference with the .270 using essentially the same velocity, the same rifle weight, and same bullet weight ... 16 ft lbs now where I had recorded 19 ft lbs before. Who knows maybee I types something wrong on my spread sheet or into the recoil calculator. But then again, I would have expected to get near the same numbers using equal weight rifles shooting equal weight bullets as near equal speeds even though one was a larger diameter than the other. The only difference would have been the type or amount of powder used to push that bullet. My numbers also correlated well between the 7mm-08 with a 130 or 140 grain bullet as compared to the 7X57 when firing the same weight bulelts at near the same velocity. Recoil levels were virtually the same. Again the same held true of comparisons of the .260 to the 6.5X55 Sweed. I would expect the numbers to be very close since the 7mm-08 and 7 Mauser and .260 and 6.5 Sweed are considered ballistic twins.

So are my numbers the answer? No they definately are not. But as a subset to compare to each other they may have some validity as a relative difference between cartridges under the assumptions I made.

I would say that most people if blindfolded can definately tell a difference between shooting a .270 and a .243. Shoot a 7mm-08 with 120grain bullets and a .243 with 100 grain bullets and thus far no-one has been able to tell the difference. But then again I have only done this with adults and teenagers 16 yrs old and or more.

So if you take a look at the numbers using the "new" number computed using Hodgden's info and an 8 pound rifle we get this ...

243 with 100 grain bullet = about 10 ft pounds of recoil
.260 with 120 grain bulelt = about 12 1/2 ft pounds.
7mm-08 with 120 grain bullet = about 12.5 ft pounds as well.
7mm-08 with 130 grain bullet = roughly 14 foot pounds
the .260 with 140 grain bullet = about 14 ft lbs (based on the 6.5 X 55)
7mm-08 with 140 grain bullet = almost 15 ft lbs
The .270 with a 130 grain bullet come in close to 16 - 16.5 ft lbs

This places the .270 with a 130 grain bullet near the level of a 7mm-08 using a 140 grain bullet at a slower speed. And if you knock off rifle weight for short actions yes you get things really close. I still do not see getting the numbers for the .270 all the way down to the levels of or near the .243 though unless reduced loads are used.

I knew posting numbers would open a can of worms due to the potential variations in the input data.

Either way I still think a young kid will feel the difference and if he gets a .270 he should look at reduced loads either factory or home made.

54JNoll,

I guess I just look at things through the eyes of a hand loader. While doing my comparisons earlier on with a recoil calculator I was using the 243 pushing a 100 grain bullet at a velocity of 2950fps and weighing in at 7.5lbs while using the 270 pushing a 130 pill at 2800fps and weighing in at 8.5lbs. My results were 11 ft lbs for the 243 and 12 ft lbs for the 270. The other carts were right there as well when weighing in at 7.5lbs.

For the above two cartridges I would suggest a load of around 41-42 grns of R22 pushing a 100 grn Partition in the 243 and a charge of H4895 in the lower 40s range pushing a 130 Partition.

I still feel that the 270 would be more effective on game and stay with the youngster for a lifetime of use.

One other point I'd like to add is that I personally know a youngster that shoots a Ruger 243 with the 100 partitions. His rifle does not wear a recoil pad in it's factory form. I personally sighted that particular rifle for the youngster and watched him shoot the rifle several times. In my personal opinion it had more percieved recoil than my wifes 270 while shooting mid range loads with 140s and 130s. I will say that the 270 is equiped with a R3 recoil pad and weighs more than the 243. I'm convinced the R3 pad was the main difference between the two and niether had much percieved recoil to me but, I personally would rather spend all day at the bench with the 270 and mild loads if I were a recoil sensitive shooter.

I think my main point is to try and get the youngster started with a rifle that will have more effect on the game animals as well as give he/she a rifle that will be more useful in their future.

Yes, in identical rifles the 270 with factory ammo (Unless managed recoil rounds) will kick more than the 243 but, that doesn't mean the 270 can't be brought down to the recoil level of the 243 with custom loads.

6 of one 1/2 dozen of the other I guess

Have a Good One

Reloader

Yep I definately agree.

I was going to add a caviot that the info from the Hodgden site was obviously a max load listing and not a factory listed velocity. So any load with less velocity than that will recoil less as well.

I agree with you on another point as well. When it comes to long term versatility the .270 is the definate winner of the listed choices. The 7mm-08 is not far behind. That is not to say that a person ever outgrows a mild shooting cartridge. I have started picking up some mild shooters simply because they are fun. I enjhoy shooting my 30-06. I just have a lot more fun with my 7mm-08 or 7 Mauser. I have recently been playing with a new .243 some too. There are simply way more options available to those that handload becaue we can taylor loads to suit a specific purpose or intent. Which is one of the reasons I got into it many years ago.

Take care

Hey all, sorry I got back on so late. On that data, I used 56 grains of powder and 3200 fps on an 8 pound rifle (barrel is 25.5"). I used the www.handloads.com calculator online.


I don't mean to sound like I want to subject a young hunter to unmanageable recoil because I don't, but I kind of look at it like learning to drive a car.

Many young folks learn to drive whatever their folks or guardian has available. I had to learn on a manual transmission, therefore, driving an automatic was cake.

I've seen small women and kids shoot 7mm magnums, 300 magnums, etc. If they learn to shoot something with a bit more power to begin with, I think making the transition to shooting an even larger caliber is easier, if that is what they choose to do at a later time on their own.

The first "deer rifle" I ever shot was a 270 and I was a kid. I, like many, just had to learn to shoot it and that was that.

I think my brother's 270 is an IDEAL set up for a youngster. It has a pachmyer decel. pad and he shoots the 110 tsx on everything.

Muggles,

I sure hope your son isn’t reading all this ranting about recoil & becoming disillusioned or intimidated. I also accompanied my dad to Africa when I was 12 & took a wart hog & a wildebeest from a blind overlooking a pan (water hole). That hunt remains one of my most treasured memories, along with other hunts I shared with my father. I can still recall almost every minute detail of the hunt except any discomfort from the kick of Dad’s .340 Wby. Now I seem to care much more about incidental things like that than I did then. 12 year old boys a pretty tough & I’ll bet your boy is so excited about the safari that he won’t have any problem with recoil from any rifle under a .378. All of the calibers are good with more than adequate range, & hopefully this rifle will only be his first of many. Starting him out on an Impala & Kudu will likely make him a dedicated hunter for life.
Best of luck & keep us posted on the hunt.

Dave

Doc, using "Point Blank" I get a value of 14.9 ft pounds with those numbers. I understand and went through the same thing. My father used a 30-06 and that is what we learned to use as a dear rifle. It meant learning to deal with the recoil. To me it meant the price of admission to being considered "man" enough to have the privilage of shooting a "real" deer rifle. I learned on a Rem 700 with hard plastic butt plate. But I am not going to put my son through that.

I do agree that free recoil and felt recoil are totally different things and cannot be related in numbers. I deal wih numbers and stats on an almost daily basis. And believe me you can prove just about anything you want with numbers. Felt recoil is another thing entirely. You change the entire nature of recoil through the use of a good recoil pad like the Limb Saver, R3 pad or Pachmyer decelerator. Stock fit is another large factor. If the stock is too long for the shooter they are now all stretched out and the body has no room or ability to absorb or roll with the recoil. Its like trying to snow ski or water ski with your legs straight versus bent. Also the width and overall surface area of the butt plays a role as well. A nice wide butt disperses the recoil force over a large area of setting much of the felt recoil.

So with a proper fitting stock, wide butt, good recoil pad the .270 can be made to "feel" like a softer shooting gun than many cartridges with less "free recoil". Case in point, I have two 7mm-08's, a 30-06 and an 8X60S. One of the 7mm-08's is a Mauser witha wide checkered steel butt plate and classic style stock. The other is a Weatherby, has a recoil pad but is narrower than the Mausers plate. My 30-06 has a recoil pad and is wider than the Weathe by as well and my 8X60 has a nice wide steel plate also. I will shoot as many rounds as you want me to from the Mauser, no problem. It is also about 1/2 pound heavier then the Weatherby. I will also shoot the 30-06 and 8X60 way more often than that Weatherby. About 20 rounds from the Weatherby is all I want to shoot. The stock does not fit as well and the style of the butt alows it to raise up into my face more. It is just not fun to shoot even in a "mild cartridge". The 8X60 is actaually lighter than the Weatherby but is a joy to shoot when compared to the Weatherby. Of course my reloads are not pushing any speed records either. So that plays into it some.

Another component that we have not touched on at all is the velocity of recoil. A lot of free recoil moving slow gives a shove while less recoil moving fast is more of a punch. That effect flt recoil as well as the recoil impulse is spread out more. Which is the theory behind recoil pads. They spread out the recoil impulse to a longer timeframe thus lowering felt recoil.

One reads "I learnt on a full house 30-06, etc,etc, and just had to get used to it". That may be well and good but how many boys got turned off by the same experience and avoided guns for the rest of their lives? Or developed flinches that took years to work out if ever?
Start the boy out with something that he can shoot, and shortly shoot well. One fellow said "start him out with a 30-06 and avoid the bench". Exactly where is the lad gonna shoot? And how much? Is he going on stand and only then his Dad hands him a bullet and sez, "when the deer lines up in that round thingy, pull the trigger?"
When my boys started, they did a lot of bench shooting. And we dated and saved all the targets so the kid could see his progress.

7-08

Just get the kid a .308 or 30-06 and shoot some of the new low-recoil loads until he is comfortable with the gun and then go to full loads. All reports indicate the loads work real well and you have more bullet weight than a .243.