.243 Loads for Deer

I reload for my wifes .243. I am using a Nosler 100 grain Partition with Rl-22. The bigger bullet in the .243 likes the slower burning powder, there are a few good choices bullet and powder wise. Shot placement is the key, and it is with any rifle. So far she has taken every deer she shot at with it. She let a few biggger ones go because she was worried about a bad shot, so she left them walk. That made me as proud has getting one. The .243 is about min for deer but it will work just fine, and also will work for a varmint rifle. I am working up a load now for her for that, but not quite there yet. If you do not reload you can buy that same bullet but it does cost alot. There are also a few other good ones in the 100 grain you can buy, and figure out which one will work the best in that rifle. Good luck!
 
I am now using a sierra gamking 100 grain bullet for deer in my .243, but i shoot two deer a year ago with Federals, powershok 80 grains. Both deer died on contact. What was most amazing was the one deer, a big old buck, i shot about 3 inches behind his lungs at 150 yards and i did not hit a single vital. THe buck just dropped like he got hit by a train, and when i went out to get it there was no life left in him. That shot showed me that the .243 is big enough for deer becuase the deer was very big and he must have died just from trama, and i think it shook up its spine, because the shot was a couple inches low of the spin.
 
In 1969, Dad bought this Remington 760 GameMaster for my brother and I to use for mulies and 'lopes. Over the decades, we've tried just about every ammo available. These are a few suggestions:

- 95 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip as loaded by Black Hills Ammo

- 100 grain Winchester Power Point

- 100 grain Hornady Interlock

- 100 grain PMP ammo (South African)

I replaced the stocks in the late 1970's after a bad tumble while hunting in Sweet Water County, Wyoming.

Good hunting to you.
Jack

sdremington1.jpg
 
When it comes to a smaller gun, why does everyone preach "shot placement, shot placement"...
You have to have good shot placement with a 243. I call BullS@#$
I dont care if you shoot a 416 Rigby or a 223 rem, the kill zone on a deer is the same size. It dont matter what gun your shooting, the vital area is about 9" and you have to hit it.
I am not jumping on anyone here cause shot placement IS important, but its funny how when people start talking about using a smaller gun, shot placement is so critical all of a sudden. I guess its not with a 300 mag.
A heart shot is a heart shot.
A gut shot is a gut shot.
It dont matter what gun you gut shoot a deer with, its walking for miles.
A deer wont drop any faster from a 500 S&W thru the heart than it will from a 223.
Personally ,I've seen more screwed up animals with the over-gunned big boys than with the under-gunned boys.

I shoot mainly 30/06 ,but I think for deer and antalope it doesnt get anymore perfect than 95gr or 100gr 243 or the identical twin 6mm.
 
Just guessing but it's probably for a first time deer hunter, or women using it because of the recoil so shot placement is talked about. But you are correct it dont matter what your shooting caliber wise it is important with any of them. There are also a few differnt areas, besides broadside, for good shot placement. I myself use a 30-06 and my wife a .243 both identical rifles down to the scope. She has hunted three years now, and has taken two deer with two shots. We still talk about good aiming spots, safety, etc. What is so bad about that?
 
Shot placement isn't limited to a .243 rifle although many believe that to be the case. Fact of the matter is that shot placement is essential with any rifle. When hunting deer regardless of the caliber I hunt with I aim for the vitals. As far as a .243 is concerned a friend of mine goes out west to hunt elk every year. He bought back a picture of one that was taken with a .243/100 gr. I hunt with guys that have taken deer with 75 grain pills.
 
Seems like most folks do think shot placement is important with any caliber from what I been reading, and it is. I new a guy who had a big black bear coming into his garbage pit at his camp years ago when folks done that. He got up in the middle of the nite, and took a shot with a pistol using a 22 short he thought over its head. The next morning that bear way lying there dead. But I would not use it to bear hunt with.
 
Last edited:
James
I wasnt referring to anyone in particular, it just seems like people always start saying that stuff with the smaller guns. I love the 243 and my wife and daughters are deadly with it also.


Getting a little side tracked and talking about bears, there was a lady maybe 7-8 years ago that was in big trouble for killing a griz. About 25 miles away, the story we heard was some kinda bear was getting in her corral at night. She heard it out there and shot at it with a 22 to scare it. She wasnt far away of course, at the edge of the corral and it was dark out, but the next day in the light she found out it was a griz and she actually hit it in the head and killed it!:eek:
Game and fish did their investigation and if I remember right, since it had been chewing on her horses they let her go.
 
Please don't miss understand my point here folks, AND NO!!!! I am not advocating just shooting at "the Critter" rather then carefully picking your shot.

However, do to the mass/weight/energy factor, using a lighter rifle makes shot placement ever more important!

Lets face it, most of us can spin a yarn about so & so taking his critter year after year with with __________ rifle and how every shot is in the head/neck/???? and he never misses etc. etc. etc. etc.

Back in 1960, during my 17th year, my father died and times were very hard for mom and I.

Thanks to a friend's help we put a critter in the freezer and had meat on the table.

The critter was put down with a .22 to the head. One shot, dead critter.

However, two shots were taken and the next day I finally found the other doe, dead and wasted.

The point is, we can come up with books full of tales of kills made with "sub" calibers and how the rifle kills like lightning, ----- BUT!!!!! ---- all it takes is one mis-que and we now have a different story which includes a wounded animal.

I have a .243 and have take a number of deer with same, but I realize it IS NOT an elk rifle any more then a .22, 17, .22/250, 220swift is a deer rifle.

Therefore, since once we walk into the woods for a hunt the expermentation stage is over, the smart hunter will take a gun of reasonable caliber, shooting a quality bullet AND pick his/her shot.

Because, mistakes/poor shot placement does happen in real life, and I for one do not desire to add any more pages to the book telling about lost and wounded animals left to rot in the woods.

Save the testing for the range, be ethical/reasonable in choice of caliber and bullet, then carefully take that shot, because given enough hunts, you will make a poor one.

And that shooting friends, is when the larger caliber/bullet will pull your fat out of the fire!

Keep em coming!

Crusty Deary Ol'Coot
 
Last edited:
Reloader, I--and maybe others--figure that as a generality the radius of destruction inside an animal is somewhat smaller with smaller projectiles. Seems so, generally, from "autopsies" of a bunch of deer. So, I work for a tad higher grade of precision with my .243 than with my '06. And, I limit the shots I take to somewhat shorter ranges as well as the angle at which Bambi is standing.

I figure most experienced hunters work at proper shot placement; folks with the smaller-cartridge rifles are just pickier about it.
 
A .243 is an excellent caliber for deer. I've killed many with it. By the same token I've killed many with a 22LR and up. And yes, shot placement is critical with any caliber.

For me it's not just killing the deer. Most of my satisfaction comes from making the most perfect shot I can. Nothing is better to me than a well aimed and executed shot that drops deer in their tracks. Unfortunately this isn’t the case with all hunters. To many, the kill is the apex. The shot is just a means to an end.

To these hunters larger calibers equate to more killing power. This greater killing power effect instills the false notion that even a poorly placed shot will somehow lead to a clean kill, the zenith of their hunt. While a bad shot will kill deer, or any other game, it may take hours, days and miles before death. Many have learned that more killing power doesn’t necessarily mean easier kills. Sadly to say many more have not. In their exuberance to kill they forget the fundamentals. They break the chain necessary to accomplish the task at hand to a full and satisfying conclusion.
 
I've defended the 243 many times so I'll just offer picture proof from now on. I'd stick with the heavier 243 bullets intended for deer in the 80 to 100 gr range. Which ever one your rifle groups well. But other than that it's all good.

.243, 159 yard shot, 100 gr Cor-lokt. Bullet exited the far side. Buck ran 30 yards after the shot.

73gyti.jpg
 
If you can afford them the Swift 90 grn Scirocco Bonded is one awesome projectile with a ballistic coefficient of .419, which is very high for this caliber.
 
if its a factory load i go with the 75 gr hollow point from hornady. have killed many deer with them and have seen several other people using them and they have had no complaints. i like to shoot my 257 weatherby or a 300 win mag but i have to say that my 243 will kill just as well if the bullet is placed rite. its all in what ur gun likes because if ur gun wont shoot better than a 2 or 3 inch group with a bullet then obviously u better find sumin else cuz if it groups bad at 100 it will most likely get worse as it gets farther out there. play with different loads and pick out the one that groups the best in your rifle and stick with it
 
Dozens of Whitetail Deer with a Ruger .243 Most with Remington Express Core-Lokt 100 GR.

Not one has ran more than 50yds.

My uncle shoots a 22-250. He has shot several studs with it and claims its due to its shootability. Meaning, He can shoot it offhand or at odd angles from a climber. He doesnt have to worry about the recoil. I agree. I like my .243 for the same reason. I dont jump the trigger so I dont miss. (I have missed 2 deer over my lifetime. Both were when I was younger and before I joined the army and learned to shoot well.)
 
I hear some of you talking about wounded animals because of small calibers but I have personally been on searches for deer that others have shot here in Maine that were hit with a 300 WM, 30-06, 308, 30-30, 270 and these deer went for Miles. It all comes down to where the hit was. You can use a .22 Magnum here but I wouldn't. I have also seen deer torn to shreds by over kill in Caliber. I guess it all comes down to what you are comfortable with. A Man in WV takes over a 100 deer in his life, all with a 22-250, and 99 percent of the time he drops them in their tracks. A guy in Maine takes 2 deer with a 338 and all of a sudden thats the best deer gun. I do know that a double lung shot will result in a kill but you still have to find them. I've seen people give up looking because they didn't see the deer with 50 yards of where they hit it. Once you hit it, keeps your eyes on it. I never dreamed this post would generate this much talk but it's good. Good Hunting
 
.243 for deer?

Lots of whitetails have been taken over the years with the .243 Remington.
I personally would rather use my 6.5x55 for deer but no matter what you hunt with, (shot placement is king).
A 300 Win mag doesn't guarantee a sure kill unless you hit it in the right areas. Bottome line, I would use a 100 grain bullet if hunting a .243 (Remington Core-Lokts are perfect). My wife uses a Remington 6mm for deer hunting (similar to .243) and she has taken untold numbers of deer with it over the last 20 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top