To be a bit controversial are these two calibres with a 100 grain bullet at 2900fps (or thereabouts) fantastic or dismal on large red deer?

I have a .243" that I've used on muntjac but I've always taken the .270" I have for anything larger.

So would I really be seriously disadvantaged using the .243" for traditional Highland stalking such as on the BASC Arran Scheme?

So please you thoughts for and against the .243 Winchester/6mm Remington.

Richard

Please! This debate has been done to death some many times in so many places.

We'll be having the 6.5X55 V .270 debate next.

Yes...but I'm thinking of buying a .240 Holland and I'm having doubts about whether it is up to the job. And asking about .243" Winchester or 6mm Remington is the easiest way to get opinion!

All I've heard so far are that they aren't and tales of two or three shots being needed to drop the beast.

So it is not .243" vs 6mm but are cartridges of that type (and I'd include the .240 Weatherby and .244" Holland) in general worthwhile?

I'm thinking of becoming a "one gun" man that's why with just the .240" Holland for British use.

(And I know the bullets are a "bastard" size etc., etc.)

Enfield,
A one gun man in the UK? Then think either the 6.5x55 or the 275 Rigby. Both cover the Muntjack to Red range.
When I first started stalking it was with a 243, after some spectacular kills a hind perfectly hit ran off, finding her took many hours in the forest. Had the rifle been a 6.5 the bullet would have exited, so too with a 7x57,(or most other 7mm cartridges), and in doing so left a blood trail.
The 6mm when they work work well, but in my view they are below the minimum for all around reliability on deer, that starts with the 6.5mm.
Others will likely disagree with me, none the less, the above are my two-a-penny thoughts.

quote:

The 6mm when they work work well, but in my view they are below the minimum for all around reliability on deer, that starts with the 6.5mm.

That's my thinking too, sadly. I was hoping to hear contrary opinion.

Gidday Richard,

The 6mm\243 is perfectly adequate on animals up to the size of large Reds as long as you do your bit. In the 70s and early 80s I used a 243 for meat hunting in the mistaken belief that it would result in less blood shot meat.I did not lose 1 animal of the hundreds shot with it.

Having said that I had a good Weimeraner to track a few that went a fair way. I was using 90gr Speer hotcores.

Now I use a 260 and a 30-06 and even then I sometimes end up with a tracking job. Just recently I shot two Fallow bucks using the 30-06 and 150gr corelocts. They were both through the centre of both lungs and both exited but one went about 300 yards and the other would be 500 before they decided to fall over.

Just shows it depends on the individual beastie.

This is probably not much use to you but is my experience.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

No, it is useful, and thank you for taking the time to post it. The more contributions the fuller picture I can obtain. The observation about the meat is helpful. I have found that a fast .243 on muntjac is a bit bloody too at thirty yards!

I have a friend who bought a 244 Holland, new for £500, from Lloyd at Pipewell and took FOUR shots to drop a stag. It went back to Lloyd that same week with a request to rechamber it to .270. Lloyd refused so it was sold. My friend took £900 for it in a private sale and was delighted!

I have the same two calibres for the same reason but I have been told by several stalkers that they are perfectly happy for me to shoot reds with the .243 especially as it is my favourite rifle and they think I will be more confident with it resulting in better bullet placement.

I've not yet lost a beast shot with the .243 and nothing has gone more than 50 yards.

Having said that, if I were starting again and looking for one calibre it would probably be a 6.5 x 55

I have a .243 that I use for woodland stalking and I feel that it is marginal on fallow, let alone reds. Of course it will kill with the right bullet placement but every fallow chest shot runs, just a question of how far! I chest shot a quartering fallow last season and it ran 200 yards, no exit wound and no blood trail to follow - good job it was in the morning rather than the evening as I wouldn't have found it. The bullet jacket was found inside the ribs on the far side, the core was nowhere to be seen. I'm trying Nosler partitions now!

Dont do it, buy a .25-06

Richard

My apologise for being a bit terse in my first reply. I assumed we were in for yet another my gun shoots straighter then your gun debate.

If as you say you're in the quest for the holy grail as in a one gun solution to your UK hunting. I concur with the majority so far. You'll not do far wrong with a 6.5X55, and as you seem the sort of guy who likes the older calibres they don't come much older or much better. If you wanted to be a little different than the crowd you could always opt for a .260(6.5-08).

quote:

Originally posted by DJM:
Dont do it, buy a .25-06

All bang and less bite than a .270. IMO

Non, no problem, my post could have been read both ways. Certainly I'm still considering my purchase of the .240 Holland...but I am not myself 100% convinced that it will fulfil the role I want from it.

Now...had it been in .275 Holland I would have had no hesitation whatsoever!

Its been said before:

.275 Rigby !

Rgds Ian

Have you considered the 308 as a round that will do it all here in the UK?

Perhaps you want something more interesting and I'm all for that as we are too long dead to buy something boring and if something a little obscure takes your fancy then get it and enjoy it. If that is your motivation then ignore me totally.

On the other hand with a 308 (or a 30-06) you would always be sure you had a rifle up to the job for big reds. For smaller deer you can load it down to pretty much look like a 243 and I believe that GS Custom (and perhaps lots of others) do 100 grain bullets suitable for large game that could be loaded to 243 velocities and should give similar performance. There is the 110 grain V-Max for fox and the like. There is a 123 grain Sako load that a number of stalkers use for all their highland reds and a 130 grain Barnes bullet giving you several "light" large game options. Then there are the standard 150 -165 grain offerings ranging from the inexpensive offerings which are good enough for deer to the premium bullets which would give you a wider margin on difficult shots.

I'm a very inexperienced shot so my views are only worth what you paid for them but as far as I can see with the 308 you will never have any doubt that you have enough gun for reds and you can also pretty much match 243 performance and, if we are talking distances below 250ish yards, the performance of everything inbetween. You can buy ammo in every shop, there is a wide range of bullets, it is supposed to be easy to reload for, some say it is accurate whatever that means, nearly every rifle made is chambered for it and I have one! With a bit of research the only things you don't have covered with the 308 are rats and rabbits.

No it is the idea of the "one upmanship" of having a Holland and Holland rifle actually! And .240 Ap[ex is the calibre that it happens to be in. So I'm trying to decide on that basis. I like the rifle but have reservations about the calibre.

I have shot Red hinds on Arran with a .243, the furthest the beast travelled from the bullet strike was 50 yards, I have also used 7mm & .270 on Red hinds, Resulting in zero travel from the bullet strike, .243 is o.k. if your'e prepared to have to look for your beast, .243 is considered a fox rifle.

Something of a contradictory post there Steve!

quote:

.243 is considered a fox rifle.

quote:

I have shot Red hinds on Arran with a .243, the furthest the beast travelled from the bullet strike was 50 yards

I'm sure I read in one of Lea McNally's articles that he had shot most of his red deer, stags, and hinds, with a .243.

But we digress.

.275 or as it should be known 7X57, is good but why bother with it? When the .308 is better, with greater availability of ammunition, wont cost you an arm and a leg to purchase a decent one. plus why pick a round capable of killing an elephant when you only want to shoot foxes?

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:
No it is the idea of the "one upmanship" of having a Holland and Holland rifle actually! And .240 Ap[ex is the calibre that it happens to be in. So I'm trying to decide on that basis. I like the rifle but have reservations about the calibre.

I do know of highland stalkers who use a 243 for everything so if you fancy the rifle, and I think it would be great to own a H&H, then go for it. You will always be aware of your limitations and so will restrict yourself to shots you know you can take so there will be no problem.

If necessary you can always avail of an "estate rifle" facility in the highlands and use the H&H for everything else. There are very few bad rifles so any estate rifle you borrow will be just fine and you can use your H&H where you feel it is suitable. Sounds like a win win situation unless the BASC Arran Scheme is an absolute as I think you need your own rifle for that.

In Belgium, the .243 is not allowed for big game, the legal minimum being set at 6,5 mm + 2200J E100. It is admitted for stalking (no drive hunting) roedeer only.

Mr Mertens thank you very much for that. Belgium Law advice is also helpful. Am I correct that I can use .270 Winchester in Belgium for everything including roe to boar?

I keep thinking,but I know it is not true for Germany, that Belgium maybe has a minimum of 7mm for pigs?

Thanks to all who contributed! Thepath seems to be leading me to just keeping my .270!

Our Austrian neighbours shoot quite a lot of their red deer with the .243, being the 6 mm Rem a little less popular. Also considered absolutely sufficient even for the big stags are the 6.5x57 (R), 6.5x65 (R) and the 6.5x68 (R).

They are usually very good shots, even at large distances, that might explain in part why the feel comfortable with these calibers and do suffer Magnumitis (or Copperitis) to a similar degree as their Teutonic neighbours.

I do not intend to be rude to or about Enfield, but there is a good deal of difference twixed a pro and a recreational/sporting shooter. The 243 will do fine for the man if it's his day to day tool who is aware of what it's capabilities are. There is also the difference of when you are on a stalking trip and may have only one opportunity to take a stag, in such a case hit the bugger with something that will do him a good amount of harm. Enfield your 270 should be fine for such a thing.
If money is not a problem then by all means get the Holland for the smaller stuff, Roe etc. and keep the 270 for Reds.
No man should be restricted to one rifle.

quote:

I do not intend to be rude to or about Enfield, but there is a good deal of difference twixed a pro and a recreational/sporting shooter.

No there is no offence taken and I agree 100% with what you've said. I'm not out every day, it may be the only shot I get that week and yes I'm afraid that when the trigger is pulled I want to have total confidence that if I do "pull" the shot slightly it still will kill.

Than being said I don't "pull" shots. But the disappointment would be if I retired my .270 and then was disappointed in the Holland! What do you then do? Dump it?

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:
if I retired my .270 and then was disappointed in the Holland! What do you then do? Dump it?

No No No, don't be silly, you send it to your new Best Mate in New Zealand

quote:

No No No, don't be silly, you send it to your new Best Mate in New Zealand

Can you send us, care of Martin Johnson here in UK, some rugby coaching manuals in return?

Enfield,
Why's that, aren't the English very good at Rugby?
I could send a manual, but only on the understanding that you forward it to the Welsh and Irish coaches once the English have read it.

Perhaps some netball training manuals and a cricket textbook or two as well , oldun?

They (the 6 mm´s) are not useless, but not what I would consider a proper red deer calibre.
In my neck of the woods both 243 Win / 6mm Rem and 25-06 have roe as an upper limit and are not allowed for big game.

No doubt the kill, but the margins are on the light side if something goes wrong.

In Norway 6,5x55 are the smallest caliber legal for big game ( rein deer, red deer, moose and bear).
Different turf, different rules I guess.

Good red calibers as far as I have experienced them are, 6,5x55, 270 Win, 308 Win and 30-06 (as well as my trusty old 35 Whelen .
Others might do as well but I limit my advice to the one I have used my self.

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:
So would I really be seriously disadvantaged using the .243" for traditional Highland stalking such as on the BASC Arran Scheme?

Hi there, I think that the 243 should be ok for traditional open hill guided stalking, but I don't think the BASC scheme in Arran fits this description.

Though I have not been myself, I understand it is conducted in heavy forestry with correspondingly larger beasts and extraction is always an issue...

Any reason you can't hold onto the 270 as well as the .240 Apex? The H&H sounds like a delightful rifle and I'm sure it would kill a highland stag no problem, if you place your shot and are aware of its limitations.

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:
Mr Mertens thank you very much for that. Belgium Law advice is also helpful. Am I correct that I can use .270 Winchester in Belgium for everything including roe to boar?

I keep thinking,but I know it is not true for Germany, that Belgium maybe has a minimum of 7mm for pigs?

Thanks to all who contributed! Thepath seems to be leading me to just keeping my .270!

The Belgian legal minimum being 6,5 mm + 2200J E100 for big game, a .270 Win is thus legal for any game and/or hunting mode. However, I would advise a heavier caliber -ideally a 9,3- if you plan to drive hunt.

I love this particular topic and find my attitude differing according to experience.

A 243 is extremely pleasant to shoot - sure a 6.5x55 isn't exactly harsh but the recoil impulse of a 243 is lesser. It does lend itself to accurate shooting which as we all know is the key to success.

For big deer (read large fallow does and up) it bullet choice and placement must be absolutely perfect if results are to be acceptable. Key for this in my experience is expansion. To seek really deep penetrating bullets in a 243 is IMHO very unwise, expansion is needed to get a good wound channel.

It's very easy to be glib about 'bullet placement'. My experience is that we are not just talking a vital shot (eg CNS, heart, heart lung, lung and liver or liver) but specific points within that. That means a head shot must not be taken low down the nose of a deer that has raised it's head straight on to you as the bullet might not get to the CNS. It means that a pure lung shot might result in a deer that runs a LONG way and live a long time after the shot.

So with my 6mm rem and 90gr ballistic tips I never had an incident on fallow (never shot reds with this rifle)

With my moderated 243 and 105gr speers or 100gr partitions I shot 3 large west country hinds and a stag calf with zero problems (all dead in 50yards) and about 50 fallow with a speer 85gr BTSP. Only problem that occured with that was a head shot too low down the nose which I followed up successfully.

With my long barreled 243 shooting sierra 85gr BTHP I've shot about 20 fallow with one pure lung shot that was still alive enough an hour and ten minutes later to get up an run off 200yards (found dead next morning on follow up - perfect lung shot but not great expansion) a fluke that never the less would not have happened with a slightly more expansive bullet.

So I will continue to enjoy using a 243 locally on big deer when I am out primarily for roe deer or happy to pick my shots. When I go further afield I will generaly use a bigger calibre as I cannot afford the time to go away and come back the next morning but if I had to have one rifle for UK hunting it would have to be a 243 or 6mm rem due to the amount of roe stalking I do (unbeatable).

1894mk2
No disagriement about the pleasantness of the 243 Win out of any rifle.
Mine was a Remington Mod 7, and a bit on the light/flimsy side.
I had two mishap with it that made me turn my back to the cartrige, both on roe bucks.

First one a clear miss from a ground stand, aprox 60 meters. After doing some detective work I found a coarse straw approx 2 meters in front of me that was clearly hit and clipped in two, which had deflected the bullet.

The second one was a gut shot on a roe buck from a high stand at aprox 80 meters, and again it was a small tuft of grass which I didn´t see that deflected the bullet, causing the misshap.
It took us the rest of the morning to track the buck down with a dog and finish the business.

One can say that the fault is all mine for not making sertain that the path was clear, and I have no problem with that.
But I lost my faith in the little dandy, sold it and got myself an Kimber Montana in 308 Win instead.

Sooner or later such things will happen, and a bigger calibre and heavier bullet will sertanly give a stalker an edge.

Today my "go to" deer rifle (both roe and red) is the 35 Whelen with Zeiss Victory 2,5-10x50.
A nice combo that flatten the critters with less meat damage than the fast and light.
Just my two cents

I agree with Arild except for Caliber, 9.3x62 is better. A real man can't live without.

A little more seriously. How much weigh the biggest red bull in all GB? I do not remember how much was the weight of the one that I hunted in Romania, but a friend of mine told me that there was a big weight difference with the one hunted in Scotland.

I used a 7x64MM and I'm still complaining my decision. The 9.3 it would have been the better choice, But I already wrote several time the story.

I think both the .243 and the 6 mm Rem really cry for a Barnes TSX!

quote:

Mine was a Remington Mod 7, and a bit on the light/flimsy side.

Nothing flimsy about the Mod7!

One of the best seriously light weight and with the short 18" barrel one of the best truck rifles around.

I just love my Mod7 .243 using 85gn HP as you might be able to tell.

Its quick handling, flatish shooting, and 85hp expand extremely well dumping all of their energy where its needed.

H5
After looking up the word flimsy in the dictionary, I understand that the mod 7 is not flimsy.
It´s defenately a tough little rifle (oposite to flimsy).

Its not that easy to always pick the right word when english is not ones first language

What I ment to say is that I felt the Mod 7 was a bit light up front, and not the easiest rifle to shoot accuracy from field positions.

Am I forgiven ?

quote:

Originally posted by Arild Iversen:Its not that easy to always pick the right word when english is not ones first language (

Arild

There are many many people who have english as their first language that struggle to pick the right words.

The Mod7 is light up front. Thats one of its joys in my book. As with everything practise makes perfect. I found moving my hold slightly further forward along the fore end and wrapping my fore arm around the sling to add a little more tension helps.

A friend who collects cartridges on his FAC kindly showed me some 240 Holland loaded rounds yesterday. I was not very impressed! They don't look much more, in terms of capacity, than the .243 Winchester and less, in terms of capacity, than the .244 Remington!

More and more I am coming to the conclusion that this rifle may not be right for me in my particular case and what I want to do with it. And with the stalking that I undertake.

ES,

If you need a bit more oomph, there's always the 300 H+H....

FB