Post by: splitshot on February 08, 2011, 11:04:32 AM
Post by: Woodchuck on February 08, 2011, 11:09:19 AM
Post by: fishermanjoe on February 08, 2011, 11:12:16 AM
Post by: 7mag. on February 08, 2011, 11:22:43 AM
Post by: jackelope on February 08, 2011, 11:27:54 AM
A .223 will kill a deer, so will a .22LR if you hit them in the right place.
:twocents:
Post by: 7mag. on February 08, 2011, 11:34:11 AM
shot placement.
A .223 will kill a deer, so will a .22LR if you hit them in the right place.
:twocents:
That's right. There are several states that allow deer hunting with a .22 cal. centerfire's.
Post by: Birdguy on February 08, 2011, 09:06:36 PM
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on February 08, 2011, 09:14:26 PM
I'm serious and not being smart.... I've asked this type question 50 times and havn't got an answer that I'm satisfied with yet.
I love shooting my 300 ultra so doubt I'll change anytime soon... but it isn't the best brush gun I'll have to admit.
Post by: danceswitharrows on February 08, 2011, 09:20:46 PM
Post by: hoyt2002 on February 08, 2011, 09:22:34 PM
Post by: cascademountainhunter on February 08, 2011, 09:40:49 PM
Post by: hoyt2002 on February 08, 2011, 09:51:16 PM
Post by: MichaelD on February 08, 2011, 09:53:03 PM
Post by: 6x6in6 on February 08, 2011, 09:55:21 PM
Post by: bobcat on February 08, 2011, 09:59:59 PM
Post by: Bob33 on February 08, 2011, 10:02:00 PM
However, if you follow that logic then a .277 bullet isn't much larger than a .257 bullet, and a .284 bullet isn't much larger than a .277 bullet, and a .308 bullet isn't much larger than a .284 bullet....
If bullet diameter makes absolutely no difference, then elephant and grizzly bear hunters would use .243s. They don't, and for good reason.
There's nothing wrong with using a .243 on deer. A .257 caliber bullet is just a bit bigger, and everything else being equal, a bit better.
By the way, 6mm is about .244.
Post by: bobcat on February 08, 2011, 10:06:42 PM
Mike, the difference between a .243 caliber bullet and a .257 caliber bullet is about 14 thousandths of an inch. Most deer aren't smart enough to know the difference.
I like the way you put that! :chuckle:
Post by: 6x6in6 on February 08, 2011, 10:21:25 PM
Post by: Hangfire on February 08, 2011, 10:29:12 PM
The .243 is a great gun to shoot, accurate, but equip for the animal it will be used on. If I was starting a young hunter out, I would go with a .308 or 30-06 with reduced loads. You don't want some thing that is going to kick to hard and take the joy of shooting away. That is part of the beauty of the.243.
Post by: Bob33 on February 08, 2011, 10:29:56 PM
That was good Bob. See sig. :chuckle:Thanks! I'm honored. :chuckle:
Post by: hokey97 on February 09, 2011, 06:33:40 AM
Post by: CHUCK S on February 09, 2011, 08:28:53 AM
Post by: uplandhunter870 on February 09, 2011, 09:04:09 AM
its a good round just have to keep its limits in mind, its not the should mounted howitzer a 300 wsm is.
Post by: C-Money on February 09, 2011, 09:15:50 AM
Post by: addicted on February 09, 2011, 09:17:08 AM
Post by: Curly on February 09, 2011, 10:08:03 AM
several questions. is a 243 good enough to kill a large buck deer? is there much difference in a 243 and say a 25-06,260 rem, 6 mm. or a 257? i will be getting a deer rifle soon and want some expert opinions. i had a 243 but my grand daughter wanted it so thats why i am looking. thanks, mike w
Sure the .243 will kill a large buck, but why go with a .243 when you can get a 25-06 instead? I guess I just don't see the reason to buy a .243 when you could go with another cartridge that has better ballistics, like the 25-06. The only advantage of the .243 would be less recoil and the rifle would be lighter..........but if you aren't concerned with recoil and shaving a few extra ounces off of the rifle, I don't see the reason to go with a .243........... :dunno:
Post by: Rick on February 09, 2011, 10:34:30 AM
If it is all about shot placement, why don't we see people using .243s brown bear hunting?
I'm serious and not being smart.... I've asked this type question 50 times and havn't got an answer that I'm satisfied with yet.
Because this is America where bigger is ALWAYS perceived as better.
Look at the Inuit tribes. The vast majority of them use small calibers for hunting, even polar bears.
.22 Hornet
.223
.243
Light,handy,low recoil,easy to shoot. Ammo is cheap.
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on February 09, 2011, 10:40:21 AM
You will find that bear faster if it was a vitals shot from a 243 over a gut shot 300ultramag 8)
See, I think most of us agree with that statment, however, statements like this make it sound like it's all shot placement and that the 2 guns are of equal value on a bear.
If so, then why not take a .243 brown bear hunting?
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on February 09, 2011, 10:44:23 AM
If it is all about shot placement, why don't we see people using .243s brown bear hunting?
I'm serious and not being smart.... I've asked this type question 50 times and havn't got an answer that I'm satisfied with yet.
Because this is America where bigger is ALWAYS perceived as better.
Look at the Inuit tribes. The vast majority of them use small calibers for hunting, even polar bears.
.22 Hornet
.223
.243
Light,handy,low recoil,easy to shoot. Ammo is cheap.
So your saying a .243 is just as good for big bears?
Post by: Mongo Hunter on February 09, 2011, 12:48:45 PM
Post by: bobcat on February 09, 2011, 01:20:01 PM
if you want to hunt bigger game though or shoot at farther ranges I use a 7mm, that sucker will kill everthing from Praire dogs to really big game.
Which one:
7mm Mauser, 7mm-08 Remington, 7mm Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum,7mm Winchester Short Magnum, 7mm Remington Magnum,
7mm Weatherby Magnum, 7mm Remington Ultra Magnum......
When you only give the bullet diameter it doesn't mean much. :dunno:
Post by: Skillet on February 09, 2011, 01:23:05 PM
.243 Around here is just fine for deer sized game. 25-06, 30-06, 7mm, are more powerful but are over kill for deer around these parts. around here .243, 270, .308 are perfect, I would use .308 because you can get military surplus for super cheap at gun shows. if you want to hunt bigger game though or shoot at farther ranges I use a 7mm, that sucker will kill everthing from Praire dogs to really big game.
Just curious - how is the 25-06 overkill and the 270 perfect? Isn't that backwards?
FWIW (this coming from a multiple 30-06 gun owner), I'm really starting to appreciate the .308-based cartridges more and more. Now that we have the 338 Federal, nearly every needed caliber is covered between the .243 and .35 (in the .358 Winchester), all from an efficient and relatively small package.
Post by: bobcat on February 09, 2011, 01:31:51 PM
Just curious - how is the 25-06 overkill and the 270 perfect? Isn't that backwards?
:yeah:
No such thing as overkill anyway. Dead is dead. If you're talking about standard hunting cartridges anyway and not a howitzer or something. I wouldn't even consider a 375 H&H 'overkill' on deer. As Bob33 says, the deer aren't smart enough to know the difference. :chuckle:
Post by: Mongo Hunter on February 09, 2011, 01:37:01 PM
if you want to hunt bigger game though or shoot at farther ranges I use a 7mm, that sucker will kill everthing from Praire dogs to really big game.
Which one:
7mm Mauser, 7mm-08 Remington, 7mm Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum,7mm Winchester Short Magnum, 7mm Remington Magnum,
7mm Weatherby Magnum, 7mm Remington Ultra Magnum......
When you only give the bullet diameter it doesn't mean much. :dunno:
7mm i was refuring to is the 7mm rem mag.
Post by: Mongo Hunter on February 09, 2011, 01:37:37 PM
.243 Around here is just fine for deer sized game. 25-06, 30-06, 7mm, are more powerful but are over kill for deer around these parts. around here .243, 270, .308 are perfect, I would use .308 because you can get military surplus for super cheap at gun shows. if you want to hunt bigger game though or shoot at farther ranges I use a 7mm, that sucker will kill everthing from Praire dogs to really big game.
Just curious - how is the 25-06 overkill and the 270 perfect? Isn't that backwards?
FWIW (this coming from a multiple 30-06 gun owner), I'm really starting to appreciate the .308-based cartridges more and more. Now that we have the 338 Federal, nearly every needed caliber is covered between the .243 and .35 (in the .358 Winchester), all from an efficient and relatively small package.
Sorry miss spoke about the 25-06 vs 270. in anycase what I was trying to get at is a 308 is a light gun, low recoil, ammo is cheap and it will kill deer just fine.
Post by: Curly on February 09, 2011, 02:21:05 PM
For a light, short action rifle, there are some good options: .257 Roberts would be a very good deer cartridge (slightly better than the .243), but if you don't reload, it may be difficult to find ammo. .260 Remington I'd consider to be just about perfect for deer, but if you don't reload, it may be difficult to find ammo. .257 Weatherby can't be beat as far as performance, but cost of ammo is high and recoil is quite a bit. Next cartridge option might be .270 WSM.......I've never shot one so I'm not sure about recoil, but I'd assume it would kick similar to the .257 Weatherby. Next cartridge to consider would be the 7mm-08........it could be the perfect deer cartridge too. Low recoil, but what about ammo cost and availability, I don't know.??? Seems like it would be easier to find 7-08 ammo than .260 Rem........ That might just leave the .308 Win as the winner for short action deer rifle cartridges (unless a guy reloads) because of low cost ammo and low recoil and decent ballistics for any sane range of shooting a deer. I'd much rather have a .308 Win in hand than a .243. I can't think of any reason to hunt with a .243 for deer over a .308 Win......unless the shooter is recoil sensitive.
But when you start looking at long action rifles, it is hard to argue against the boring old 270 win because of light recoil, ammo cost, ammo availability, and ballistics. The 25-06 is just a step below the .257 Wthrby in performance, but recoil would be less than the .270........but ammo cost may be slightly more because it is not as common.
Those are my thoughts anyway........ :twocents:
Post by: Fullabull on February 09, 2011, 04:21:22 PM
Good luck,
Fulla
Post by: BLR 243 on February 09, 2011, 04:50:44 PM
Post by: danceswitharrows on February 09, 2011, 05:29:53 PM
You will find that bear faster if it was a vitals shot from a 243 over a gut shot 300ultramag 8)
See, I think most of us agree with that statement, however, statements like this make it sound like it's all shot placement and that the 2 guns are of equal value on a bear.
If so, then why not take a .243 brown bear hunting?
Well I am certainly not advocating taking a 243 brown bear hunting :chuckle: But on a deer sized animal (like was stated in the question in the opening post) a vitals hit from either 243 or 300UM would produce the same effect, dead deer. If he was asking about brown bear hunting I am sure he would have had more answers about stopping power and penetration
Post by: Raul Duke on February 09, 2011, 07:27:26 PM
Rem 6mm, YES My 17yr old has havested 2 dead with his 6mm . first one at 250yrd. Droped it in its tracks. 2nd one at 75yrd. went about 10ft.
Both great guns for deer. I have no problem letting either of my boys take a shot up to 400yrds. (maybe more, but that means I have to pack it further, so we limit them to 400) As others have mentiond, Shot Placement, Shot Placement,Shot Placement.
Post by: shockeere on February 10, 2011, 08:29:53 AM
1) low recoil (very nice for someone who likes to shoot a lot to get ultra comfortable with a piece of equipment. I want it to be "an extension of my arm" - and my 7mm would rather blow my arm off :chuckle:)
2) short action firearms can be more maneuverable. my 25" long action remington 700 is a bit more unwieldy than a 22" .243...
3) cost to shoot (handloading) I have found .243 bullets to be cheaper, and they take less powder
4) versatility. As has been mentioned before, one can use it as a varmint gun as well. 58gr vmax or 55gr nosler BTs at 3800-4000 fps with decent ballistic coefficients translates into some major varmint slaying, and the above features only compliment this. The 7mm is also very versatile, but still rather large for me.
5) the kids can use it too.
6) it's so popular, that an amazing variety of rifle choices exist chambered in .243. I was wanting to get a .257 Roberts, but I found myself pretty limited in rifle choices and I'm sold on a CZ 550, which unfortunately doesn't come in Roberts.
it should be noted that I'm 6'3 185 lbs and that's only my opinion. Your mileage will vary.
If you are a great shooter and have the confidence to take super far shots and typically hunt plains where you can see for days and don't feel like getting closer to your target, perhaps a larger caliber is more suitable. Good luck! and be sure to report back and let us know what you decide and perhaps some success stories as well :)
Post by: jackelope on February 10, 2011, 09:19:47 AM
Post by: jager on February 10, 2011, 09:21:16 AM
Post by: Bob33 on February 10, 2011, 09:28:56 AM
Whats the difference between a 6mm and a .243?If you're referring to the 6mm Remington vs. the Winchester .243, the 6mm is about 100 ft/second faster in general. Bullet diameters are the same. When Remington introduced the 6mm it was called the 244 Remington. It was designed to shoot lighter bullets which limited its effectiveness as a big game caliber. Winchester then introduced the Winchester .243 with a twist rate that could accurately shoot heavier bullets. It caught on, and the 244/6mm essentially faded away.
The 243 is much more popular today than the 6mm. There is a vast amount of factory ammo available. If you handload, the 6mm does have a very slight edge.
Post by: martin1 on February 10, 2011, 04:06:22 PM
Post by: Schwag173 on March 01, 2011, 05:10:07 AM
several questions. is a 243 good enough to kill a large buck deer? is there much difference in a 243 and say a 25-06,260 rem, 6 mm. or a 257? i will be getting a deer rifle soon and want some expert opinions. i had a 243 but my grand daughter wanted it so thats why i am looking. thanks, mike w
CAN it do the job? Yes. Would it be my first choice? No, not even my 30th choice. Almost anything between .257 and .308 will handle any deer perfectly well. In fact, if it was my granddaughter, I'd rebarrel her rifle to .260 Rem or 7mm-08. For yourself, nothing wrong with the same cartridges unless you might go for tougher animals (bear, elk, etc). In that case, step it up to something .308 - .338.
Post by: muleracks on March 03, 2011, 03:58:15 PM
Post by: timber tiger on March 03, 2011, 04:17:29 PM
Post by: Hornseeker on March 04, 2011, 12:46:32 PM
The 6mm and the 243 both use the same diameter bullets... which are about .244...
However.... 6mm is actually equal to 0.2362204724412 inches... Or lets just say, ".237" :lol4:
As for the 243 and deer.... Its a great choice. Buy good premium ammo or reload some Barnes or partitions or something good in there!
Post by: Curly on March 04, 2011, 01:00:39 PM
However.... 6mm is actually equal to 0.2362204724412 inches... Or lets just say, ".237" :lol4:
But wouldn't you round down to 0.236 since it is only over by 0.0002........... ???
:)
Post by: FC on March 06, 2011, 03:49:42 PM
How many here who say .243 is a poor choice own another rifle?
Since the question was asked regarding usage of a 243 for brown bear. The difference is that you might need to STOP a brown/grizzly bear from actually attacking you and if you are having to make a shot at an animal running toward you it's likely you won't be shooting as neatly as you would from a bench, deep penetration and the ability to get through multiple big bones might come in handy. If hunting big bears/moose in the brush I would want the most potent cartridge that I could shoot well in my hands, deer/elk/black bears are a different story entirely.
Post by: Schwag173 on March 08, 2011, 02:46:08 PM
Post by: casey58 on March 09, 2011, 10:12:32 AM
Post by: rtspring on March 09, 2011, 10:44:16 AM
just my :twocents:
Post by: hokey97 on March 09, 2011, 09:20:17 PM
Post by: KDB on March 15, 2011, 02:31:55 PM
Post by: demontang on March 15, 2011, 03:25:08 PM
Post by: Skillet on March 15, 2011, 04:26:31 PM
If you go 243 make sure you use a well made bullet
That's the issue, really.
Some food for thought -
We used to kill a bunch of ducks and geese with my 2-3/4" 12 guage. As much as I wanted one for the cool factor, a 3" gun was viewed as a bit of an unnecessary "*censored* extender" among my grandpa and his hunting buddies. Thing is, we did all that killing right before they banned lead. When it became "steel shot" as the only alternative, those good ol' boys really started becoming more interested in increased payload. So, as the projectiles became inferior, the bigger payload was more valued. Even 3-1/2" mags are commonplace now.
Rifles have basically gone the other way over time. Projectiles have gotten better and better. Now, for example, you can send 100 grains of .243 fury in the form of a Barnes bullet with great BC and have reliable terminal performance on deer-sized game vs. yesteryear, where you really needed more lead going through the air as in insurance policy because of a "not quite 100%" reliable performance.
This means, of course, that if you are using "minimum caliber for game" that grabbing whatever is cheapest off the shelf at the gunshop is probably not the best route to go if you can instead reload with premium bullets to ensure better terminal performance. With the better bonded bullets and solid copper bullets out there now, I really think that today's .243 has the potential to be a step above the .243 of 25 years ago.
:twocents:
Post by: DeerThug on March 15, 2011, 07:22:13 PM
Matthew started hunting when he was 8. He is now 17. His 243 has taken 12 bucks (Idaho and Wash combined) a couple of does and 2 bull elk. Never had a crash to deal with.
It is all in the hands of the hunter. Buy what you want and that you can shoot and just go hunting. Forget all of the noise.
Post by: blacktailcrzy on March 15, 2011, 08:12:07 PM
Post by: Lincoln4 on March 15, 2011, 08:25:15 PM
Don't get me wrong, I have a .260, .308, and .300 Win mag and they're great. But that .243 is so sweet to shoot, and in my experience, just slays deer. I gave my old .243 to my daughter, but am seriously considering buying another. :hello:
Post by: demontang on March 15, 2011, 08:36:53 PM
Post by: Miles on March 16, 2011, 12:33:27 AM
Granted I'll always grab my 338 when I go elk hunting the extra power is just insurance for a miss placed shot.02
:dunno:
I guess I'll never understand this type of thinking.
Post by: farmin4u_98948 on March 16, 2011, 06:02:16 AM
Post by: demontang on March 16, 2011, 07:55:04 AM
Post by: Miles on March 16, 2011, 08:20:36 AM
OK look at it this way what happens if the animal turns right as you pull the trigger and your shot hits the shoulder? do you think a 85 gr 243 round would be as good as a 225gr .338 round? I know a .338 will go clean throw both shoulders of a elk now a .243 I think you got a wounded animal that youll be tracking :bdid: You cant say noting like this will happen because Ive seen it and had it happen. :twocents:
Using that logic, why not hunt with a .50 cal? That .338 might go clean through both shoulders but the .50 cal is taking both shoulders with it...
Post by: farmin4u_98948 on March 16, 2011, 08:30:27 AM
OK look at it this way what happens if the animal turns right as you pull the trigger and your shot hits the shoulder? do you think a 85 gr 243 round would be as good as a 225gr .338 round? I know a .338 will go clean throw both shoulders of a elk now a .243 I think you got a wounded animal that youll be tracking :bdid: You cant say noting like this will happen because Ive seen it and had it happen. :twocents:
Using this logic I will hunt with my truck. Why shoot one when you can run over it. I have eaten at the road kill cafe more than once... Now I dont know if that is sick good or sick bad... I forget.. :chuckle:
Using that logic, why not hunt with a .50 cal? That .338 might go clean through both shoulders but the .50 cal is taking both shoulders with it...
Post by: 400out on March 16, 2011, 08:36:02 AM
OK look at it this way what happens if the animal turns right as you pull the trigger and your shot hits the shoulder? do you think a 85 gr 243 round would be as good as a 225gr .338 round? I know a .338 will go clean throw both shoulders of a elk now a .243 I think you got a wounded animal that you ll be tracking :bdid: You cant say noting like this will happen because Ive seen it and had it happen. :twocents:I say this could happen with lots of guns/circumstances I personally don't hunt with that little of a gun for big game but if you make sure the shot is true then you shouldn't have a problem. BUT if your going to put yourself in a position to where the shot might go just a little wrong then step up to a bigger cal. :twocents:
Post by: Miles on March 16, 2011, 08:59:48 AM
BUT if your going to put yourself in a position to where the shot might go just a little wrong then step up to a bigger cal. :twocents:
So if you don't think you can make a good shot, just use a bigger gun... :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: rtspring on March 16, 2011, 09:05:00 AM
I have seen and been apart of misplaced shots on big game. A bigger, heavier bullet sometimes give you a little room for error.......
Just hit'em in the head my :twocents:
Post by: demontang on March 16, 2011, 09:34:12 AM
Post by: Miles on March 16, 2011, 09:57:02 AM
Your logic is that youll never have something go bad when you pull the trigger
Wrong again. ;)
Post by: Miles on March 16, 2011, 10:03:31 AM
Id ranther have the feeling that even if I messed up a shot that the animal wouldnt run off and suffer tell it died :twocents:.
So shooting a .338 gives you a feeling that nothing is going to run off and suffer when you make a poor shot?
Post by: demontang on March 16, 2011, 10:41:58 AM
Post by: wsucowboy on March 17, 2011, 03:00:58 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 17, 2011, 09:17:45 PM
Post by: Miles on March 17, 2011, 11:05:38 PM
Killed plenty of deer with my 243 savage but when I go elk hunting I use my 338, a little more room for error with the bigger rifle :twocents: Miles I don't know what got your panties in a bunch about what demontang has said it seems about right to me :dunno:
There's probably a reason very few people shoot elk with a 243. Don't you think so, Miles?
I know some of you have a very short attention span and find it difficult to understand some rather simple things....Just to help you out I'll quote the very first post that started this thread. Notice the words in bold (it's a hint for you).
several questions. is a 243 good enough to kill a large buck deer? is there much difference in a 243 and say a 25-06,260 rem, 6 mm. or a 257? i will be getting a deer rifle soon and want some expert opinions. i had a 243 but my grand daughter wanted it so thats why i am looking. thanks, mike w
Post by: FC on March 17, 2011, 11:11:46 PM
Maybe he decided on a .416 Rigby...Just in case!
Post by: bobcat on March 17, 2011, 11:17:15 PM
There is nothing wrong with the 243, but if you're going to buy a new rifle, I would suggest getting something just a bit bigger. The 25-06 and 260 that you mentioned would be fine, or step it up just a little more and get a 308 or 270.
But it seems that the thread has turned to using the 243 for elk and it's not that anybody has a short attention span but we are now posting in reply to what the discussion has turned to. It's already been established that a 243 will kill deer, but again, if one is going to buy a new rifle why not get something a little bigger? What is the disadvantage of going bigger than 243? And when it comes to elk, why would anyone ever recommend using a 243 for elk?
Post by: FC on March 17, 2011, 11:37:09 PM
What is the disadvantage of going bigger than 243?
Recoil.
Post by: bobcat on March 17, 2011, 11:44:08 PM
What is the disadvantage of going bigger than 243?
Recoil.
Right. The only disadvantage. Most people can easily handle the recoil of a 25-06, 270, 7/08, or 308, especially when using the lighter bullets available in these calibers.
Post by: Miles on March 18, 2011, 12:03:45 AM
Right. The only disadvantage. Most people can easily handle the recoil of a 25-06, 270, 7/08, or 308, especially when using the lighter bullets available in these calibers.
There you go again anwering questions that were never asked....Follow along, I have put the key terms in bold for you once again.
several questions. is a 243 good enough to kill a large buck deer? is there much difference in a 243 and say a 25-06,260 rem, 6 mm. or a 257? i will be getting a deer rifle soon and want some expert opinions. i had a 243 but my grand daughter wanted it so thats why i am looking. thanks, mike w
Post by: FC on March 18, 2011, 12:28:54 AM
Right. The only disadvantage. Most people can easily handle the recoil of a 25-06, 270, 7/08, or 308, especially when using the lighter bullets available in these calibers.
No argument there although the OP is a Grampa and old people :chuckle: get ouchy shoulders, hell I have an ouchy shoulder now! After breaking my damn collarbone I'm pretty sensitive to how a rifle recoils against me, old finnbear 30-06= OUCH even with a new pad on it but a Marlin 45/70 shooting Buffalo Bore from a bench rest is no pain at all.
The Op seemed pretty interested in keeping the thump light by the question that he asked IMO :twocents:
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2011, 08:53:25 AM
Right. The only disadvantage. Most people can easily handle the recoil of a 25-06, 270, 7/08, or 308, especially when using the lighter bullets available in these calibers.
There you go again anwering questions that were never asked....Follow along, I have put the key terms in bold for you once again.several questions. is a 243 good enough to kill a large buck deer? is there much difference in a 243 and say a 25-06,260 rem, 6 mm. or a 257? i will be getting a deer rifle soon and want some expert opinions. i had a 243 but my grand daughter wanted it so thats why i am looking. thanks, mike w
I'm sure any questions that have been asked have been answered more than once and by more than one person in this thread. But if you insist: A 243 will kill a large deer (but then again so will a 22 Long Rifle).
If you want a light recoiling deer rifle get a 243. If you want something that kills deer better, get something bigger.
Happy now? (key terms in bold)
Post by: Miles on March 18, 2011, 09:09:04 AM
If you want a light recoiling deer rifle get a 243. If you want something that kills deer better, get something bigger.
Thanks...I needed a good laugh. :chuckle:
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2011, 09:14:22 AM
Thanks...I needed a good laugh. :chuckle:
So I take that to mean you ARE happy now? Good. Thanks for answering the question.
Got any more questions?
Post by: Miles on March 18, 2011, 12:10:28 PM
Thanks...I needed a good laugh. :chuckle:
Got any more questions?
No, but feel free to answer them. :chuckle:
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2011, 01:28:11 PM
Post by: Dan-o on March 18, 2011, 04:10:32 PM
Post by: Curly on March 18, 2011, 04:34:23 PM
several questions. is a 243 good enough to kill a large buck deer? is there much difference in a 243 and say a 25-06,260 rem, 6 mm. or a 257? i will be getting a deer rifle soon and want some expert opinions. i had a 243 but my grand daughter wanted it so thats why i am looking. thanks, mike w
The original poster lost his deer rifle (.243) to his granddaughter and was wondering which deer rifle to go out and replace it with.
In a different thread, he posts that he will be reloading for his 25-06.
will be reloading my tikka 25-06 for deer and maybe antelope. am looking for some good combos for bullet and powder. have not shot my gun yet, but will soon. will put a b&c leupold on top. mike w
So, I guss he must have decided to go with the 25-06 instead of a .243. Good choice IMO. I don't think the 25-06 will kick very bad. :twocents: And, since he's reloading, he should be able to find a low recoiling load that will be good for deer. (I'd probably choose the 100 gr. TSX bullet).
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on March 18, 2011, 08:11:48 PM
Post by: TheSkyBuster on March 18, 2011, 08:52:20 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2011, 09:05:12 PM
Folks that don't have faith in the killin prowess of a 243, or think its "marginal" for deer sized critters haven't used one very much, or are schiity shots. Matter of fact, one of the best boolits in a 243 for bucks, is a 55 grain Nosler BT @4 grand. Wanna see stuff stop happening real quick, plant one those in a bucks shoulder...... Flame on boys, but only if you've done it, not whatcha "think".
I don't know if you're referring to me or not, but I never said the 243 wouldn't kill a deer, or that it wouldn't kill them as "dead" as anything else. Just that it doesn't hurt to go a little bigger. I assume you're a fan of the 257 Weatherby? Why use it, if the 243 is sufficient? Doesn't it recoil more and cost more to shoot?
And btw, I don't doubt that that tiny little 55 grain pill out of the 243 could kill a deer, but I'd hate to see how much a strong cross wind would blow it out at 400 yards. I suspect the BC can't be good at all on what's got to be a short stubby little bullet. Also, I'd guess the shoulder shot you speak of would turn at least the one shoulder into hamburger immediately. Well, I guess at least it'd save you some grinding time.
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on March 18, 2011, 09:22:34 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2011, 09:31:38 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2011, 09:37:08 PM
Post by: fair-chase on March 18, 2011, 10:03:41 PM
Post by: 400out on March 18, 2011, 10:13:06 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on March 18, 2011, 10:21:52 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 18, 2011, 10:23:13 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on March 18, 2011, 10:28:50 PM
Post by: Blsum on March 20, 2011, 07:15:36 PM
Post by: hokey97 on March 20, 2011, 07:45:54 PM
Post by: Kowsrule30 on March 21, 2011, 03:07:16 PM
Post by: JLS on March 21, 2011, 03:15:16 PM
One more thing... this thread was about what rifle a guy should buy for his only deer rifle. I myself have a 243, but I also have a 270 and a 30-06. I sure wouldn't choose the 243 if I were only going to have one rifle. Would you?
I wouldn't complain if that's what I ended up with, but truth be told I think the .270 would be my first choice with today's quality of bullets. Give me a M70 .270 Winnie with 140 grain Barnes TSXs and I'd be a happy clam.
Post by: Phantom Gobbler on March 23, 2011, 10:31:05 PM