I have a Ruger 243 model 77 International with the 18.5 inch barrel. With a 100gr. Sierra gamekings and a hot load of imr 4064, it will break 2800fps. With a max load of imr 4350, 2700fps is all it'll do. Accuracy with the 4064 loads is consistant under 1 in. Would you consider the 100gr. sgk an adequate deer cartridge at 2800fps? Prefering heavier and larger caliber bullets, I'm a little leery of it. What do you think?

Thanks,

Joe A.

I don't shoot Sierras. Period. My late father lost a buck in the TX hill country when a 150-grain Sierra Pro Hunter out of his 7.65 ARG came apart in a load that clocked about 28o0 at the muzzle. The previous year we found a jacket from the same box of bullets (I handloaded for him...) in the entrance shoulder of a doe. Two failures too many. Hill country whitetails aren't that big.

We have shot a number of deer in the 180-200+lb range with Sierras from the 63gr in 223 to the 100gr Pro Hunter in a 25-06 and have never lost a deer. I have not tried the Game Kings.

I have a 243 22" barrel and getting 3000 fps out of 95 grain bullets. Performance on deer is pretty good inside 150 yards but marginal outside that. The trajectory is impressive but the energy is not. Plan on chasing blood trails on longer shots. My longer well hit deer have run off not showing any signs that they were hit much like an arrow strike from a bow. Conversely 150 grainers from a 270 will fold one up at 400 yards.

Your gun was not designed for long range anyway so as long as you keep your shots inside 200 yards you should be fine.


Add: Using 95 grain solid base ballistic tips, got complete pass through both lungs, large exit hole right at 200 yards but the doe ran strong to the woods. Shot a large buck inside 100 yards with an identical hit and folded him up on the spot. The only difference was velocity/energy but it seemed to make a difference in my two examples.

Personally I think you are fine...

that is a nice compact rifle...and a joy to carry...

you are not handicapped with the 6mm bullets at all...

if you need more velocity, consider the 90 grain ballistic tip...

wise choice with 4064... but you can't explain that to the crowd that thinks 4350 is the answer for everything...

RL 15 is also a good choice...

ive used 100 grain pro hunters and game kings in the 6mm and have never lost a deer shot with them and my old rem classic has accounted for a truck load of deer thru the years. ive shot them as close as 25 yards and as far as 350.

I think this load is good for deer sized game; however, as Finlander stated, it will start loosing velocity & energy pretty quickly out past 250 yards. If you will limit your shots to about 200 yds you should be fine.

I have used the GameKings with whitetail deer with good success. However, I'm now using the 90 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip (as Seafire suggested) and I find I like it better.

I'm using the 85 gr Sierra BTHP Gameking in my .243 this year. I culled a couple of does with it last year and was quite impressed. I tried the 100 grain Gameking in my but it just didn't shoot nearly as well as the 85 grainer in my gun. The reviews on MidwayUSA's site for both bullets are uniformly excellent. But the other posters are correct; the .243 is not a long range deer rifle. Keep your shots within 200 yards.

LWD

I'm having a hard time with this. I have a short barrel Model 7 that shoots about 1 1/4 inch groups at 100 yards. I would feel comfortable and confident that any deer this side of 300 yards would be a dead dear.

I'm not understanding how a post of a 275 yard shot at a mule deer with a supressed .223 shooting a 40 grain varmint bullet got high marks from lots of regulars on this forum, but the .243 is not a long range deer rifle and should be limited to 200 yards? And this is coming from a guy that also shoots a 240 Wby with a 26 barrel, I believe faster is better, but I've shot enough rounds through the .243 with a 18 barrel to realize how stinking fast that bullet gets there and and what a great carry gun it is for me and one day for my kids.

I don't quite get the logic. The .243 in a compact rifle and short action is the ultimate deer rifle in my opinion and Not limited to 150 or 200 yards. My go to load has been Nosler 90 grain solid base (discontinued) that I picked up as seconds on special a few years back.

quote:

Originally posted by keithv35:
I'm having a hard time with this. I have a short barrel Model 7 that shoots about 1 1/4 inch groups at 100 yards. I would feel comfortable and confident that any deer this side of 300 yards would be a dead dear.

I'm not understanding how a post of a 275 yard shot at a mule deer with a supressed .223 shooting a 40 grain varmint bullet got high marks from lots of regulars on this forum, but the .243 is not a long range deer rifle and should be limited to 200 yards? And this is coming from a guy that also shoots a 240 Wby with a 26 barrel, I believe faster is better, but I've shot enough rounds through the .243 with a 18 barrel to realize how stinking fast that bullet gets there and and what a great carry gun it is for me and one day for my kids.

I don't quite get the logic. The .243 in a compact rifle and short action is the ultimate deer rifle in my opinion and Not limited to 150 or 200 yards. My go to load has been Nosler 90 grain solid base (discontinued) that I picked up as seconds on special a few years back.

I agree with you 100% and never said you couldn't kill deer at range, just that you shouldn't expect to drop em in their tracks, which is true! It's an ethics issue to use enough gun to kill or kill humanely.

How did you know it was a bullet failure if you didn't recover the deer?

Back to the question: While I'm no fan of the .243, I would think that a 100gr hunting bullet at 2800fps would be a good start toward killing stuff.

I think the main bit of information gained from these folks using little bullets from varmint rifles to kill deer is that it doesn't take much to kill and deer. "course we never hear about the rude failures, we only hear the success stories.

Between my son in law, grandson and myself we have used the .243 on a bunch of deer. This was with fairly mild loads (2800-2900 fps range) and using cheaper bulk packed Winchester 100 grain bullets. My late bro's favorite deer rifle was his short Rem 600 in .243 and he too took several deer with it. Over 20 years ago my son in law and I tracked one that he shot for a long distance and never found it. Have no idea where he hit it. That's the only one that has gotten away. To me there really is no question here, Besides using the .243, have lots of experience with .222's and .223 and some with 22-250 using 55 grian Winchester bulk packed. The only deer I shot last year was an unusual deal to me. When I shot it, it slowly turned around and walked about 40 feet---never ran. I could see it was staggering. It stopped and was swaying a little and I could see the wound and knew it was gone. I walked up to the deer while it was still on it's feet and shortly it collapsed. I could have touched it while it was on his feet. Only one I have walked up to that wasn't down. This was with .243--all I've used for years. I gave my grandson a .308 and he and that .308 are a heck of a combo, but he's not doing anything with it he wasn't doing with the .243.

Wasbeeman, I will recount what my now departed father told me.

He shot shoulders, like he did all his life. His idea was to break the animal down. When he shot, the deer fell, thrashing. It kicked around until it got up against a bush of some sort, with all four legs in the air. The kicking continued, and the animal somewhow rolled to its stomach, and got its back legs under it. The deer was in the bottom of a draw, and Dad said the deer's mouth was open and its head on the ground, but it was plowing, literally funneling leaves into its mouth. He hated to see the animal suffer, so he got out of the stand and decided to cut off the animal, took off in a brisk walk to intercept the animal. He never found it, and we didn't either when we looked later. We went back to where the animal was standing when Dad shot, and where the thrashing occurred beside the bush, and no blood. None. Period.

What would you attribute losing the deer to, with a bullet obviously failing to exit, and obviously breaking down the deer's front end?

quote:

What would you attribute losing the deer to, with a bullet obviously failing to exit, and obviously breaking down the deer's front end?

No disrespect intended, but I'd attribute it to he didn't hit it in the shoulder. If there was no blood and all that thrashing around with the deer on it's back and upside down and right side up again it should have looked like a crime scene. I've "splashed" lightweight bullets off coyotes out of a .204 that left a hole in the hide baseball size and enough blood spraying out to make "Dexter" squirm.

I'm reminded of the old wives tale of the guy shooting a deer "dead" and walked up to it, slung his rifle over the antlers and got out his skinning knife....the deer promptly jumped up and ran off with his rifle. Supposedly he'd hit the deer in the anlter and just knocked him out.

Bullet "failure" or not, there should have been blood with all the acrabatics described.

Year before last my nephew hit a deer a little too far forward---hit in the shoulders with a .223 using 55 grain Win bulk packed and the deer dropped dead right there. No vital organ hit. Looking at the wound I would never have guessed that result.

quote:

I'm having a hard time with this. I have a short barrel Model 7 that shoots about 1 1/4 inch groups at 100 yards. I would feel comfortable and confident that any deer this side of 300 yards would be a dead dear.

I'm not understanding how a post of a 275 yard shot at a mule deer with a supressed .223 shooting a 40 grain varmint bullet got high marks from lots of regulars on this forum, but the .243 is not a long range deer rifle and should be limited to 200 yards? And this is coming from a guy that also shoots a 240 Wby with a 26 barrel, I believe faster is better, but I've shot enough rounds through the .243 with a 18 barrel to realize how stinking fast that bullet gets there and and what a great carry gun it is for me and one day for my kids.

I don't quite get the logic. The .243 in a compact rifle and short action is the ultimate deer rifle in my opinion and Not limited to 150 or 200 yards. My go to load has been Nosler 90 grain solid base (discontinued) that I picked up as seconds on special a few years back.

I based my statement concerning 200 yards limit on the .243 on energy ratings alone. I haven't shot a deer with my .243 at any long distances, so, I suppose I can't say, definitively, that such should be the limit. However, using a 90 grain bullet the energy of the .243 drops below a thousand by the time it reaches 300 yards.

I also know that energy alone isn't a good way to determine effective killing power. Terminal performance of the projectile will have a lot to do with how well it will kill at any particular distance. Of course, bullet placement is very important when you think of stopping ability of a particular round. There are so many factors involved that I should probably not have been so quick to place a 200 yard limit on the .243. I'm sure there are hunters using really good ammo, who are themselves very effective at proper bullet placement that can easily kill deer consistently to 300 yards and beyond with a .243. There are other people who shouldn't be shooting at deer 300 yards away even with a .300 Win mag!

This thread is taking a different tack altogether. All of these great deer killing stories do not relate the ranges they were shot.

As for bullet placement and having killed a few deer in my lifetime too I can recall how placement effected performance. Double lung hits with Nosler Ballistic tips were the most effective next to brain, spine or other nervous system hits. Double lung hits with partition type bullets do not destroy the lungs in the same way allowing the deer to catch a breath. I have watched steam pumping from both sides as the lungs fill with blood. I have taken quartering shots, which are so great for bow hunters usually yield the similar results with bullets. If the deer can catch a breath in one lung and get to his feet, your chasing a blood trail.

Heart shots are just like you or I having a heart attack, painful but not crippling. Expect the deer to do a high kick and run a spell, again were chasing a blood trail.

Shoulder hits follow the African dangerous game philosophy. Anchor with a good bone crushing shoulder hit and follow up with a vital hit to finish em off. Shooting deer in the shoulder should yield the same results, put em down and follow up to kill. Expecting a shoulder hit to kill is subjective and depends totally upon what vitals were severed in the process. They can be destructive on both bone and meat and I avoid it with Ballistic tips. The one that I hit forward with a 150 grain NBT from a 270 win. shattered both scapulas and showed a tremendous exit wound but all of the vitals were still intact enough that the deer required a finisher.

I have never lost one and but know many who have. We give due diligence to deer recovery and have found that these deer were all poorly hit in the first place regardless of caliber. On thinned skin game I'll take a double lung hit every time.

quote:

No disrespect intended, but I'd attribute it to he didn't hit it in the shoulder. If there was no blood and all that thrashing around with the deer on it's back and upside down and right side up again it should have looked like a crime scene.

None taken, and you are absolutely correct, unless the one thing I believe happened: the bullet came apart inside the animal, and never exited. Once the jacket comes off, what you are left with is nothing but plain old lead, and it fragments very readily. There should have been blood everywhere, but not one drop. I have to believe, based on recovery of the other bullet, that this box of Sierras wasn't worth the tax paid! So... I don't shoot them. Not worth losing an animal!

See my post here:

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/...ternational_Who_has_

Now I have shot deer at 200 yds, DRT, and another moments later at 400 that went down after 20 yds, Struggling hard to stay on it's feet that long, double lunged, exit size of golf ball. First was a spine shot.

Both from a 6mm BR 105 amax at 2850, a fragile target bullet, DEADLY when precisely placed used w/in limitations. The spine was shot intentionally due to short range and AS EXPECTED prior to the shot, it BLEW completely w/in 2" or less.

Shot another deer w/6BR, 70 TNT, broadside lungs at 200, ran less then 60 and flopped over dead. Another w/mannlicher 243 above in the neck at 45 yds, same TNT about took head off!

Point is, SHOT placement, with a bullet that not only penetrates to the vitals You INTEND to put it thru, With expansion. That spells quick death In my experience.

Last season, 2 deer, both 6 BR, 95 B tips, one neck = other lung, under 150 yds, both died quick...neck in tracks.

SOOOO, personally, I feel the 243 is like the 6BR, Utterly DEADLY on deer, When used w/good bullets, placed well.

MY choice:

85 TSX/XBT, 80 TTSX, and 95 Btips.

All expand well, retain weight and penetrate. The Barnes I would steer into the heaviest bone, and would even shoot elk/bou/bear/moose to 250 yds or so and if required to get to vitals and no better shot - straight into the heaviest bone and expect it to get thru.

6mm's IMHO are marginal in frontal area, they BENEFIT from a good expanding bullet, yet cannot afford to lose alot of mass, as they are light to begin with, but today's better bullets IMO put the 243 right w/a 260/120 in killing power, esp. if using the Barnes as they are light enough to fly fast which helps open, yet that XBT I shot my hog retained either 84 or 85 of the original 85 grains. That ensures good straight line penetration to/thru vitals, WITH good frontal area w/petals doing their job.

I think ANYONE not having confidence in a 243/6mm or even little 6BR need only try it ONE more time, placing either of the above Barnes thru vitals and I doubt you will EVER have anything to say but raves about the performance.

It is a deadly combo, and the 95 Noz BT is also very good, shot 5/8" at 200 yds from my Dakota Predator 6BR, and the heavy for cal jacket lets them drive deep, after opening well.

Oh, for the record, watched my son SMOKE two Tx deer using an 1885 Low Wall 243 w/85 BTHP Sierra I loaded around 3200. Grapefruit sized hole in the spine of one at around 300 steps, 2nd blew a hole in on shoulder looked like a 270 hit it, range on that 2nd deer was 265 or so. That deer did a 'dead run' about 40-50 yds or so, but was dead and just needed to realize it! I LIKE that 85 BTHP, and the 87 Hornady BTHP and SP would do similar (not v-max) but those bullets are not best if you need to get thru much bone IMO.

Hope that gives HOPE, CONFIDENCE, and Peace of Mind to you 243 users who are of little faith

Good hunting guys, but seriously, try a Barnes or 95 Noz BT and just see for yourself!

just about all my deer loads are SIERRA BTSP...never had a problem 25-06, .260 rem. 7MM-08 .308 I just loaded some 100 grs .243 for a friend of mine.. yeap, sierra

I like to thank all who replyed and for keeping the discussion in a civilized manner.

Thanks,

Joe A.

"Once the jacket comes off, what you are left with is nothing but plain old lead, and it fragments very readily." Sounds like it worked like a Nosler Partition. Your putting the bullet down on what someone told you that they did not know, for sure, happened?