quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Finally we get the real story.
Yes it will work. Yes you can snipe deer with it. I do not really consider sniping deer like varmints part of my hunting and never plan for it. Just like I do not shoot deer with a .22 CF.
Not only is range and energy a factor but so is the wind and where I hunt the wind is pretty much a given.
It is not my first choice and apparently it is not your first choice either. But you are basing all your claim on a single bullet.
I will always stand by what I say for the .243
The .243 is a SORRY round to use on a deer at 350 yards.

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:
SR:

My rifle is 6" low at 350. I site in 2.5" hi at 100. What's your point?

And how do you "know" that it's a piss poor killer. (I have empirical evidence to the contrary).

Oh, I guess you know that the same way you know that "Anyone that claims the .243 is a good round to use at 350 yards has no clue what the drop is at that range."

BTW, the 243 is not my first choice at 350, but it WILL work.

I'm not arguing with your conclusion (that the 243 is not the best choice for YOU).

I'm questioning your stupid statements. To wit:

"Anyone that claims the .243 is a good round to use at 350 yards has no clue what the drop is at that range." I proved you wrong on that pretty quickly.

And do you really think an 80 gr bullet at impacting at 2700 fps which expands and retains 100% of its weight of its weight is a piss poor killer?( it broke both shoulders and exited. the large axis buck dropped on the spot)

quote:

And do you really think an 80 gr bullet at impacting at 2700 fps which expands and retains 100% of its weight of its weight is a piss poor killer?( it broke both shoulders and exited. the large axis buck dropped on the spot)

One shot doesn't prove a single solid effing thing. And you know it just as well as the rest of us.

quote:

Originally posted by Doubless:

quote:

Yes sir....you definitely are entitled to your opinion.....but do you mind telling us what the ft-lb energy is at that range from a 100 grain spire point started off at 3100 FPS?

Vapo, the #6 Nosler Manual shows 1262 ft-lbs @ 300 yards if launched at 3100 FPS. It also shows a 10.7" drop from a 100-yard zero. Just about half a deer's body depth.

If we sight in the gun at 200 .....well things can change?

1,200 ft-lb is clearly enough to be a killing shot assuming properly placed.....but then....if improperly placed a .30-06 won't do the job either.

Even if initial velocity is off the mark by a full 150 FPS the energy at 300 is still adfequate for a clean kill......many folks use a cartridge with much less energy at that range with success.

Sorry fella.....IMO the .243 and 6mm types are fully adequate for 300 yard shots as I've witnessed some kills substantially longer .....and DRT as well.

As a matter of fact these rounds just might be the best one can find for pronghorns and typical mule deer and whitetails....granted, I'd likely pick up a .270 Winny for the task but several friends I hunt with have proven the worth of the 6mm family with more than adequate results.....in short....they work and to a full 300 yards and surprisingly more.

quote:

granted, I'd likely pick up a .270 Winny for the task

You just reinforced my point, Vapo. Not that it won't do the job, it is just marginal: retained energy, ballistic coefficient, exit hole for blood letting and all. There are better calibers for the job. That is all I ever said...

quote:

Originally posted by Doubless:

quote:

And do you really think an 80 gr bullet at impacting at 2700 fps which expands and retains 100% of its weight of its weight is a piss poor killer?( it broke both shoulders and exited. the large axis buck dropped on the spot)

One shot doesn't prove a single solid effing thing. And you know it just as well as the rest of us.

No, one shot doesn't prove anything, but it does illustrate the ballistics cited.

Putting an 80 grain projectile that retains all of its weight at 2700fps on a small-medium deer can be called responsible hunting. Punching through both shoulders is what one would expect and what one asks for. Olarmy has made his case and everyone acknowledges that that represents about the limit that should responsibly be undertaken with the cartridge. In addition, his choice of bullet has a decent BC for 24 calibre and is better than a slower roundnose bullet and not to be compared to any similar weight varmint bullet. With the 243 the bullet choice is more important than with the 338s.

The fact that many would chose a heavier, more powerful round does not take away from the ability of the 243 to meet a minimal standard for adequacy. Probably most important is that a hunter practice with the rifle and load so that they are aware of its windranging at 300-350 yards. Sounds like some fun at the range.

quote:

The fact that many would chose a heavier, more powerful round does not take away from the ability of the 243 to meet a minimal standard for adequacy.

And I guess you would take the guy that was the absolute last name on the list of graduating MDs as your heart doctor, too, wouldn't you?

quote:

Originally posted by Doubless:

quote:

The fact that many would chose a heavier, more powerful round does not take away from the ability of the 243 to meet a minimal standard for adequacy.

And I guess you would take the guy that was the absolute last name on the list of graduating MDs as your heart doctor, too, wouldn't you?

Give it up doubless, you're a real piece of work. You don't like the 243, others do. Geesh, does Jesus Christ have to post the final words in this thread to shut you up? Why don't you start the 223 thread up again for deer. Millionth time I asked you, what's your minimum cartridge for whitetail deer? Don't throw in the yardage bullshit. There's different distances depending where you hunt in the U.S.. Don't start with the bullet drop crap either. I know what the 243 drops and what distances it's good for.

quote:

Originally posted by Doubless:

quote:

The fact that many would chose a heavier, more powerful round does not take away from the ability of the 243 to meet a minimal standard for adequacy.

And I guess you would take the guy that was the absolute last name on the list of graduating MDs as your heart doctor, too, wouldn't you?

I would be very grateful for his advice.
As for my personal choices, I happen to like the 416 Rigby 350 gn at 2800fps for plains game. For deer I'm happier with a 270 over a 243, but I load 338WnM 185 TTSXs at 3100. That's my choice. I would go heavier for elk, an animal I've never had the priviledge of hunting. (probably 225TTSX, a load that works well in Africa, too.) In the meantime I'm looking forward to working with a 243 next month to put it through its paces and see what it can be as a grandkids gun.

quote:

Originally posted by Doubless:

quote:

And do you really think an 80 gr bullet at impacting at 2700 fps which expands and retains 100% of its weight of its weight is a piss poor killer?( it broke both shoulders and exited. the large axis buck dropped on the spot)

One shot doesn't prove a single solid effing thing. And you know it just as well as the rest of us.

Deer ain't hard to kill. I've killed enough over the past 50+ years. I know a bullet that impacts at 2700 fps , expands properly, retains 80 grs, and penetrates is going to do its job pronto if its put in the right place. Do you disagree?

243 is a great cartridge...everything from woodchuck to whitetails...cheap to reload and ammo everywhere. No recoil...great for kids.

My favorite coyote cartridge....just wish I was better at calling. Hard to beat...but that could be said for other cartridges. But it does seem to cover the 55-100 grain envelope very well.

quote:

Deer ain't hard to kill. I've killed enough over the past 50+ years. I know a bullet that impacts at 2700 fps , expands properly, retains 80 grs, and penetrates is going to do its job pronto if its put in the right place. Do you disagree?

No, I don't. I just think you are asking a whole lot out of a bullet that starts at 100 grains. And as I have said before, the mono-metal bullets exacerbate the problem because they don't expand enough to leave a large hole for letting blood out.

The problem is not killing the deer, it is finding it after it has been shot.

I find it rather humorous looking at all those on here who love the .243 but willingly admit they would choose another caliber for deer as their first choice. That is all I have ever said: there are better cartridges. The .243 has been called the minimum acceptable by someone other than me. Seems to me I am agreed with on a whole lot of fronts.

But the almighty Smokin Joints has told me to give this up, so I had better mind him, hadn't I? After all, he is the foremost authority on everything...

quote:

Originally posted by Doubless:

quote:

Deer ain't hard to kill. I've killed enough over the past 50+ years. I know a bullet that impacts at 2700 fps , expands properly, retains 80 grs, and penetrates is going to do its job pronto if its put in the right place. Do you disagree?

No, I don't. I just think you are asking a whole lot out of a bullet that starts at 100 grains. And as I have said before, the mono-metal bullets exacerbate the problem because they don't expand enough to leave a large hole for letting blood out.

The problem is not killing the deer, it is finding it after it has been shot.

I find it rather humorous looking at all those on here who love the .243 but willingly admit they would choose another caliber for deer as their first choice. That is all I have ever said: there are better cartridges. The .243 has been called the minimum acceptable by someone other than me. Seems to me I am agreed with on a whole lot of fronts.

But the almighty Smokin Joints has told me to give this up, so I had better mind him, hadn't I? After all, he is the foremost authority on everything...

I've lived in Texas. I thought I'd never meet a Texan I didn't like. While there the people were just friendly and great. Well I've met two now here, doubless and sr4759.

Now you listen to me you piece of shit. I don't do drugs and I don't drink. I haven't called you names or modified your name to suggest a name.

The 243 is a fine dual purpose cartridge varmint/deer, for short range.

Doubless when will you be telling the militaries around the world that the smaller then 100 grains 5.56 isn't sufficient for killing two legged deer? Why don't you get a big campaign up and going against that since you're so hot on stopping all ARF members from using the 243?

Have you ever done steel penetration tests with the 243? You'd be surprised what those "little" bullets can do. I propose a test. You stand behind a whitetail deer at say 200 yards and I shoot at you aiming through the deer. I'll even use a lightweight varmint bullet. We'll see how sure you are of penetration.

quote:

Have you ever done steel penetration tests with the 243?

quote:

Now you listen to me you piece of shit. I don't do drugs and I don't drink. I haven't called you names or modified your name to suggest a name.

You are correct: you resort to cursing me. A real sign of maturity.

What is your definition of "short range"? You going to applaud the 350-yard shots trumpeted in this thread? Pick one side or the other.

And if you don't know why the military uses FMJs and the small caliber 5.56, you might want to research that a bit. The design is NOT to kill.

Finally, when deer start to be made out of steel I will do a penetration test. I know about the 22-250 that bored completely through the steel plate when the '06 bullet bradded itself on the surface. That proves exactly what? Don't use a 30-'06 on deer made out of steel?

When you get mad your ability to debate significantly decreases, in my estimation. You start cussing and it is all over.

Like I said: you told me to give it up. I just gave it up...

Funny how the mono bullets have been bashed in this thread also. I've killed somewhere between 15-20 head of game with either a Barnes TSX or TTSX in the past 3 seasons. Of these, the farthest an animal has made it was a kudu at 168 yards, which he made it about 75 yards. The farthest animal I've taken with my 243 and an 80 grain TTSX was an antelope doe at 228 yards, she dropped at the shot.

It's always funny how people say the 243 is a great kid's gun or gun for the wife, but for us manly man type, it isn't enough and we gotta step up in caliber. If it was good enough for me when I was 13 years old, it's good enough for me 25 years later.

quote:

Originally posted by Doubless:

quote:

Have you ever done steel penetration tests with the 243?

quote:

Now you listen to me you piece of shit. I don't do drugs and I don't drink. I haven't called you names or modified your name to suggest a name.

You are correct: you resort to cursing me. A real sign of maturity.

What is your definition of "short range"? You going to applaud the 350-yard shots trumpeted in this thread? Pick one side or the other.

And if you don't know why the military uses FMJs and the small caliber 5.56, you might want to research that a bit. The design is NOT to kill.

Finally, when deer start to be made out of steel I will do a penetration test. I know about the 22-250 that bored completely through the steel plate when the '06 bullet bradded itself on the surface. That proves exactly what? Don't use a 30-'06 on deer made out of steel?

When you get mad your ability to debate significantly decreases, in my estimation. You start cussing and it is all over.

Like I said: you told me to give it up. I just gave it up...

You're wrong on all accounts, I'm not mad. If I cursed you I'd call you a son-of-a-bitch or bastard, which I didn't. You only bring this crap up to try make yourself look better, doesn't work.

Show me where in writing that the militaries of the world state that they are not trying to kill their adversaries.

Guess your brain is dulled from your meds. The "little" 6mm bullets do have penetration. Also the copper bullets have further been perfected that they do expand better.

To answer your 350 yard question no I wouldn't want to take that shot with a 243. On flatness of trajectory the cartridges that shoot really flat would be too explosive on whitetail deer. I'm talking cartridges like the 257 & 270 WB Mags, and the 264 Win Mag. Grant you at longer distances they would be really good. I wouldn't want to shoot a deer close up with one and expect not to have blood shot meat. I don't want to hear bullet drop on the 243. The bullet drop is actually less for the 100 grain 6mm bullet then for a 150 grain from an 06. It doesn't matter as one should sight his rifle to be in the kill zone for a range of distances. The little dinky 6.5 Grendel will rival a match bullet in a 308, but I suppose you relegate that to a non whitetail deer cartridge too.

Now if I were to choose an all around big game cartridge, notice not for varmints, NO I wouldn't choose a 243 and I don't think many others would either.

For back east hunting the 243 is an adequate choice and for shorter distances out west. I don't buy into brush deflecting the smaller high velocity bullets more then the larger calibers either. I've seen too many tests that didn't prove it and one shouldn't be shooting through brush at his game in my opinion. I prefer a clear shot.

Not saying I would take the shot but the .243 does work on big deer.

688 Cow Elk

quote:

Show me where in writing that the militaries of the world state that they are not trying to kill their adversaries.

Since this has gotten off topic, it is long held military strategy, if you kill an enemy, he is out of the game. However if you wound an enemy, he is out of the game, but also the people taking care of him are out of the game. Killing removes one enemy, wounding remove one enemy and all of the folks necessary to treat the wounded person.

On topic, just like the various .223/.224 rounds, the .243 will kill a deer and I think it is a better choice than any of the .223/.224 rounds. Personally, as I have stated, I don't like the .243 but do like the .257 Robert's and ballistically they are not that different.

Hell I don't like the .270/.308 or .30-06, but they are all proven cartridges and have killed, at least in the .30-06's case, every animal on this planet.

I know of folks that have killed elk with a .243. Not my choice for animals that size, but it worked.

If you like the caliber, that is your prerogative, if you don't like the caliber, again, that is your prerogative.

Trying to convince those that like the caliber that they are wrong or vice-versa is like the arguments over the .223, STUPID, plain and simple. Each of us have the right to pick and choose what we want to use or like and as long as it is legal where we plan on using whatever caliber we have settled on, then everyone else's opinion, is just that, an opinion and really does not mean one thing.

I developed my opinion over poor bullet choices by the folks I was hunting with. In a pinch, with proper bullets, I would use a .243.

Hell in a real pinch, if the gun was sighted in properly and the range was right, I would shoot a deer with a .22 Hornet again.

Can't wait to hear the debate when we start talking about something important! Lighten up fellas. The 243 is the cats ass for some, and too small for others. If you don't like it...don't use it. If you want to tell the rest of us we shouldn't use it move to New York and concentrate on something usefull like banning large sodas.

quote:

Originally posted by Quintus:
Can't wait to hear the debate when we start talking about something important! Lighten up fellas. The 243 is the cats ass for some, and too small for others. If you don't like it...don't use it. If you want to tell the rest of us we shouldn't use it move to New York and concentrate on something usefull like banning large sodas.

BINGO!!

Well actually I don't like it. Owned several and they were accurate but as a reloaders cartridge, far inferior to the 244 Remington. The 244 was done in by the "on the Olin take" gunwriters who made up lies about the twist making it no good (like 10 gr of bullet weight means anything).

Just look at the old Olin Farms gatherings and you'll see all "the usual suspects" who, as well as the 244, hated the 722 as it was less expensive, more accurate and a real short action unlike their beloved Model 70.

Betamax and VHS was just more of the same.........

Nilo Farms.

Maybe I'm too ignorant to know better but I shoot paper out to 1,000 yards with the 243 and know the drop in 25 yard increments for my load.

I've taken deer, antelope, coyotes and piles of prairie dogs and ground squirrels with the 243. On the game animals I have taken, I've never not recovered one and that includes an antelope buck at 460 yards, taken with one shot that was DRT.

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
Maybe I'm too ignorant to know better but I shoot paper out to 1,000 yards with the 243 and know the drop in 25 yard increments for my load.

I've taken deer, antelope, coyotes and piles of prairie dogs and ground squirrels with the 243. On the game animals I have taken, I've never not recovered one and that includes an antelope buck at 460 yards, taken with one shot that was DRT.

Balderdash!

It's already been established that no one knows the trajectory of a 243 beyond 300 yards.

Furthermore, it will BARELY kill anything at 350 yds. Beyond that, those tiny bullets just bounce off!

You have to be kidding. You just claim you shoot deer with varmint weight bullets. I am not sure why you would want to harp on killing a deer at 350 yards with an 80 grain bullet.

I am not convinced you have done what you say you have done. On top of that your deer turned into an axis buck?

And the bullet didn't exit? That total expenditure of energy inside the buck is bullshit. Your bullet just did not have the energy to exit. Not only that but it did not hit at 2700 fps. We both know that did not happen don't we. That requires a MV of 3775 and that does not happen with a .243. It sounds like you also have a short pace - way short.



How many times did you say you have done this?
In the wind? How many times? How many deer?

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Finally we get the real story.
Yes it will work. Yes you can snipe deer with it. I do not really consider sniping deer like varmints part of my hunting and never plan for it. Just like I do not shoot deer with a .22 CF.
Not only is range and energy a factor but so is the wind and where I hunt the wind is pretty much a given.
It is not my first choice and apparently it is not your first choice either. But you are basing all your claim on a single bullet.
I will always stand by what I say for the .243
The .243 is a SORRY round to use on a deer at 350 yards.

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:
SR:

My rifle is 6" low at 350. I site in 2.5" hi at 100. What's your point?

And how do you "know" that it's a piss poor killer. (I have empirical evidence to the contrary).

Oh, I guess you know that the same way you know that "Anyone that claims the .243 is a good round to use at 350 yards has no clue what the drop is at that range."

BTW, the 243 is not my first choice at 350, but it WILL work.

I'm not arguing with your conclusion (that the 243 is not the best choice for YOU).

I'm questioning your stupid statements. To wit:

"Anyone that claims the .243 is a good round to use at 350 yards has no clue what the drop is at that range." I proved you wrong on that pretty quickly.

And do you really think an 80 gr bullet at impacting at 2700 fps which expands and retains 100% of its weight of its weight is a piss poor killer?( it broke both shoulders and exited. the large axis buck dropped on the spot)

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
Maybe I'm too ignorant to know better but I shoot paper out to 1,000 yards with the 243 and know the drop in 25 yard increments for my load.

I've taken deer, antelope, coyotes and piles of prairie dogs and ground squirrels with the 243. On the game animals I have taken, I've never not recovered one and that includes an antelope buck at 460 yards, taken with one shot that was DRT.

Now there's a man who knows his rifle.

You have to be kidding. You just claim you shoot deer with varmint weight bullets. I am not sure why you would want to harp on killing a deer at 350 yards with an 80 grain bullet. Have you never heard of the TTSX? I mentioned this bullet in my first post. It is hardly a varmint bullet

I am not convinced you have done what you say you have done. You have shown that you are convinced of things that are wrong On top of that your deer turned into an axis buck? I said 7 deer including exotics

And the bullet didn't exit? Reading comprehension problems. The bullet exited after breaking both shoulders. That total expenditure of energy inside the buck is bullshit. Your bullet just did not have the energy to exit. Not only that but it did not hit at 2700 fps. You got me there. Typo. 2400 fps. Energy is still 1000 ft-lbs We both know that did not happen don't we. That requires a MV of 3775 and that does not happen with a .243. It sounds like you also have a short pace - way short. Range lazered
At any rate feel free to use whatever you enjoy and I will do the same. And feel free to keep believing that "anyone who claims the 243 is a good round to use at 350 has no clue what the drop is".

Here is my 243 experience.

I have killed several deer with the 243 in a Ruger No1-A. I always used handloads with either a 100gr Sierra, or a 95gr Nosler Partition.

My wife used that same Ruger, and later a Remington Model 7, with those same two bullets to kill several whitetail deer, a few Mule deer, including one monster in body size and several antelope.

I never shot anything much over 200 yards with the 243, but the wife killed mule deer and several antelope at 300 yards to 350 yards...

The 243 worked for us like the Hammer of Thor.

As far as I can remember we never had to shoot any animal more than once...

quote:

Originally posted by taylorce1:
Not saying I would take the shot but the .243 does work on big deer.

688 Cow Elk

That Elk couldn't have fallen deader with a
(name your favorite Magnum here). Great shooting by the little lady.
Thanks for posting that Taylorce1

Some of the people on this thread think they were successful in tearing down all the .223, .224 users, now they've moved on to the .243.
I guess they will keep tearing down everything until they get to their 7 Rem Mag or 300 winny as the only reasonable minimum for deer.
I love when the experts here tear apart people's real world experiences and then refuse to believe them as if we are all liars or something.
Really guys lighten up people actually shoot deer and elk with cartridges you won't approve of and they do it successfuly even at distances you aren't comfortable shooting at. All the internet bullying won't change the facts that it goes on very successfuly every year.

The hunting rifle and it's bullets are tools. I would not use a varmint bullet with the 243 on deer on purpose. You can get a Philips screw out sometimes with a straight blade screwdriver but it's not the right tool. Look at the world of shotguns, they have different size BB's for different game. You don't, for example, use #8's for turkey. Oh yeah, it will kill them if the range is close enough, but not the proper tool.

quote:

I would not use a varmint bullet with the 243 on deer on purpose.

It sounds like the guy specifically used a deer bullet, the 80 grain TTSX. As a monometal bullet it will have guaranteed penetration for any deer-sized game. And I would much rather use the 80gr TTSX than a 30-cal 130-grain varmint bullet. Deer bullets and varmint bullets must be distinguished at all the calibres, 24 to 30. Only at 33 calibre and up does it seem that bullet makers quit making frangible varmint bullets, so that any of the bullets will be adequate for deer.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

I would not use a varmint bullet with the 243 on deer on purpose.

It sounds like the guy specifically used a deer bullet, the 80 grain TTSX. As a monometal bullet it will have guaranteed penetration for any deer-sized game. And I would much rather use the 80gr TTSX than a 30-cal 130-grain varmint bullet. Deer bullets and varmint bullets must be distinguished at all the calibres, 24 to 30. Only at 33 calibre and up does it seem that bullet makers quit making frangible varmint bullets, so that any of the bullets will be adequate for deer.

No no, I'm not talking about him and his bullet. I'm just saying I wouldn't use a varmint bullet for a 243 on deer.

BTW
taylorce1
that was a nice video. Most probably a spine-shot to drop the animal like that.

And I appreciate your comment that you would not take the shot.

I think that I would pass, too, especially with a 243. At 688 yards the 243 only has about 700 ftlbs assuming a good bullet and hot load. That is a tad on the underkill side. Even with larger calibre I've never shot an animal over 400 yards.

Will the various .223/.224 cartridges kill deer, Yes when used within the parameters of the cartridge's ballistics and the abilities and confidence of the shooter to accurately place the shot.

Same thing for the .243/.244/6mm cartridge/rifle combos. Same thing for the various .257's, same thing for every caliber up to and thru the 50BMG.

As long as the shooter is competent and confident and works consistently within the limits of the cartridges capabilities and his/her own capabilities, if they can place a proper bullet for the job at hand in the proper place on the target being aimed at, they will kill whatever it is.

I personally feel the .223/.224's are not the best choice, but I see lots of deer killed annually with those guns. I personally don't like the .243, but that is a personal choice as the round has a proven track record as a deer/pronghorn gun.

As much as I do like the larger calibers for MY OWN hunting, I always prefer to guide someone with a gun they are comfortable shooting accurately, rather than someone that is half way afraid of their rifle due to muzzle blast and recoil.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
BTW
taylorce1
that was a nice video. Most probably a spine-shot to drop the animal like that.

And I appreciate your comment that you would not take the shot.

I think that I would pass, too, especially with a 243. At 688 yards the 243 only has about 700 ftlbs assuming a good bullet and hot load. That is a tad on the underkill side. Even with larger calibre I've never shot an animal over 400 yards.

I usually pass on anything over 300. I'd rather not have to shoot farther than 200 yards if I can help it. To me, how much energy a particular cartridge has at ranges beyond 400 yards is entirely irrelevant, because any animal I see that far away gets a pass unless I can get closer.

Under field conditions, that kind of a shot is pretty iffy. I shoot paper at ranges up to 500 yards, but paper doesn't crawl off and die in the brush over the course of several hours or days if a gust of wind catches my bullet and blows it off course.

quote:

Originally posted by kjjm4:

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
BTW
taylorce1
that was a nice video. Most probably a spine-shot to drop the animal like that.

And I appreciate your comment that you would not take the shot.

I think that I would pass, too, especially with a 243. At 688 yards the 243 only has about 700 ftlbs assuming a good bullet and hot load. That is a tad on the underkill side. Even with larger calibre I've never shot an animal over 400 yards.

I usually pass on anything over 300. I'd rather not have to shoot farther than 200 yards if I can help it. To me, how much energy a particular cartridge has at ranges beyond 400 yards is entirely irrelevant, because any animal I see that far away gets a pass unless I can get closer.

Under field conditions, that kind of a shot is pretty iffy. I shoot paper at ranges up to 500 yards, but paper doesn't crawl off and die in the brush over the course of several hours or days if a gust of wind catches my bullet and blows it off course.

I shoot animals as far away as I want. I shoot a number of my rifles at long distance practice with the loads that I hunt with, use a laser rangefinder, use a solid shooting position usually prone with my backpack as a rest. If the weather conditions cooperate I will shoot as far as my confidence allows.

Here's a 732 yard coyote with a 6.5mm:

quote:

I shoot animals as far away as I want.

Testimony of a gut shooter?

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

I shoot animals as far away as I want.

Testimony of a gut shooter?

Well there self imposed Police of the internet or should we just say internet Bully?
What are your self imposed restrictions for cartridge and distance for deer? I know you have them because you've rip everyone to shreds who doesn't do it per your specs, lets here thexpert babble on......
You'v done nothing but "bully" people in all the threads lately lets hear your side...
Shhh everyone the "expert" is about to grace us with his wisdom....

quote:

Originally posted by Snellstrom:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

I shoot animals as far away as I want.

Testimony of a gut shooter?

Well there self imposed Police of the internet or should we just say internet Bully?
What are your self imposed restrictions for cartridge and distance for deer? I know you have them because you've rip everyone to shreds who doesn't do it per your specs, lets here thexpert babble on......
You'v done nothing but "bully" people in all the threads lately lets hear your side...
Shhh everyone the "expert" is about to grace us with his wisdom....

Are you defending anyone that shoots at anything so far as he can see it? What is your wisdom or do you have any to share? Have you ever shot a single head of big game at 350 yards? Have you ever seen how far the wind moves a bullet at that distance, especially a puny varmit weight bullet.

oldarmy above retracted the velocity that his bullets impacted at. The energy that he is quoting is about the same energy that a 30-30 hits with at 200 yards. Does any one here want to defend using a 30-30 at 200 yards regularly?
How about using that same energy at 300 yards with an animal that can disappear in 2 strides?

My comments about the .243 are valid and are based on experience of 3 hunters. What I have said is the .243 is not suitable for use on deer at 350 yards with any weight bullet and especially not with a varmint weight bullet.
If you do not happen to like the way I present the facts or defend them that is your problem.
I would suggest that you are unable to defend your point of view.
Before posting your view here please go consult the ballistics charts for any and all commercial cartridges. The laws of physics imposes limitations on the trajectory and energy that can be delivered with bearable amounts of recoil. Not only does this apply to the .243 but all cartridges. I used to think anyone could figure this out but I guess not.

Does your lazer compute wind defection?
You said the bullet expended all it's energy in the deer - but it exited? That is not my definition of expending all its energy...

You are hitting animals at 300 yards with the same energy that a 30-30 hits with at 200 yards.
Not any overwhelming amount of energy. Especially on a larger animal.

Keep believing that your laser will keep you from losing animals with basically a varmint weight bullet at 350 yards. I will still think what you are doing is unreasonable.

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:
You have to be kidding. You just claim you shoot deer with varmint weight bullets. I am not sure why you would want to harp on killing a deer at 350 yards with an 80 grain bullet. Have you never heard of the TTSX? I mentioned this bullet in my first post. It is hardly a varmint bullet

I am not convinced you have done what you say you have done. You have shown that you are convinced of things that are wrong On top of that your deer turned into an axis buck? I said 7 deer including exotics

And the bullet didn't exit? Reading comprehension problems. The bullet exited after breaking both shoulders. That total expenditure of energy inside the buck is bullshit. Your bullet just did not have the energy to exit. Not only that but it did not hit at 2700 fps. You got me there. Typo. 2400 fps. Energy is still 1000 ft-lbs We both know that did not happen don't we. That requires a MV of 3775 and that does not happen with a .243. It sounds like you also have a short pace - way short. Range lazered
At any rate feel free to use whatever you enjoy and I will do the same. And feel free to keep believing that "anyone who claims the 243 is a good round to use at 350 has no clue what the drop is".