Any reason to use anything bigger than a 243 for deer?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Factory twist for a 243 is between 1:9"-1:10" all the really high BC bullets won't work in factory rifles, this limits the real world range of the 243 since not many of us hunt with an aftermarket barrel. The 95gr VLD is as good as you can stabilize in a 1:9 and it has a BC of .480 if I remember correctly.
 
I wouldn't think twice about taking an average shot at an average-sized broadside deer with a .243 Win, using a decent bullet. I tell my grandkids not to shoot farther than 200 yards with one (marked with ribbons) off a rest in our ground blind.

However, I've killed large moving bucks at 30 yards with a .270 Win, where a .243 Win bullet probably wouldn't have gone through what my bullet did. That's why I shoot a bit larger/heavier bullet.

I've shot a few deer with a .22-250, but light brush conditions near the deer prevented me from hitting the largest buck I've ever seen in the woods. A .270 Win or .30-06 would have improved my chances considerably, but moreover, given me greater confidence about taking the shot.
 
My uncle shot a good sized 8-pt on the run last year from about 30-40 yards with a .243 and 80gr Barnes TTSX. The bullet hit the right, rear hip, shattered the hip and penetrated through the animals body diagonally, hitting the rear of the left lung and stopping near the left, front shoulder.

That video of the elk at 688 yards with the 105gr Berger, you can plainly see the bullet hit the snow on the far side of the elk.

The .243 doesn't lack penetration.
 
I spend pretty good money to hunt big Bucks . Sometimes a less than perfect (sometimes a lot less) shot is all you're going to get . I prefer something heavier than a .243 , because I might have to break some bones to get my bullet into the vitals . That's why I like my .358 Win. , it will go through a Deer lengthways , and upset everything along the way ! My .243 will forever be , a varmint gun . I'm at a loss , as to why some guys think it's macho to hunt deer with a cartridge that's marginal for the job , or inadequate , for other than a perfect shot . Up in Ontario , Alberta or anywhere , where large Deer are the target , you will find very few if any .243s !
 
I'm at a loss, as to why some guys think it's macho to hunt deer with a cartridge that's marginal for the job, or inadequate, for other than a perfect shot.
Click to expand...

It is important in my opinion that a person uses the cartridge he has most confidence in when hunting, otherwise he may be to quick to blame it for a lost deer. If you have confidence in your 358 Winchester then that is what you should use. I have confidence in the 243 Winchester, it has done a fine job for me.
 
Shooting through an elk with a Berger VLD is odd with any caliber, given the range I suspect that was a case of minimal (or lack of) expansion rather then intended penetration. Yes the 243 is less then ideal if you are the type to take less then ideal shots, but I for one don't like Texas heart shots regardless of caliber so I am just as happy with a small caliber.
 
To the question as asked, my answer is an emphatic YES!

And the two main reason I choose are #1) because I have it (something bigger than a .243) and #2) because I can. :D

Now if you are going to ask do I need something bigger than a .243, or would I go and buy something bigger than a .243, for deer, I'd answer differently.
 
Who needs a 243 when the 257 Roberts will do it all?

Low recoil, pushes the bullet same speed but with less pressure, and shoots well.

 
''Nor is it to me. Any yahoo can shoot an animal but providing a quick clean kill, and making sure that the animal does not suffer anymore than necessary is a big part of what hunting is to me.''
Allen, you sound like a man I could happily hunt with:)
 
"That video of the elk at 688 yards with the 105gr Berger, you can plainly see the bullet hit the snow on the far side of the elk."

I'll not argue that the shot was made. After all, it was filmed. Still, I will always consider it to be nothing more than a stunt. Just my personal opinion. I wouldn't even try it under perfect conditions with my .300 Win. mag.
Paul B.
 
Paul B. said:
"That video of the elk at 688 yards with the 105gr Berger, you can plainly see the bullet hit the snow on the far side of the elk."

I'll not argue that the shot was made. After all, it was filmed. Still, I will always consider it to be nothing more than a stunt. Just my personal opinion. I wouldn't even try it under perfect conditions with my .300 Win. mag.
Paul B.
Click to expand...

The wisdom of the shot is not the point. The point is that it clearly and plainly makes a mockery of the idea that a .243 could be considered marginal on an animal 1/2-1/3 that size and 1/3-1/4 the distance.

We can disagree if it exits. I've watched that video numerous times, on a large screen and slowed it down. It seems clear to me that the bullet hits the snow several yards behind the elk, just below the line of it's chest.

In any case, not important, really. It clearly demonstrates the .243s ability on an animal larger than a world record whitetail at distances farther, hell 2 or 3 times farther, than most hunters will ever shoot.

To see something like that and then say that the .243 is marginal (or I've even seen flat out unacceptable) for deer under any normal conditions is just silly.
 
Again not dissing the 243 because I have and would use one again, but you cannot judge the performance of the 243 on elk by one youtube video we don't know if that yawed and struck the spine, or anything of the sort. To me personally the 243 is a dandy 300 yard whitetail gun I don't need it to kill elk at 1,000 yards or knock down charging grizzly bears I have big guns that do that.
 
Don't be absurd. It has nothing at all to do with grizzly bears and elk from 1,000 yards.

People can and do use the .243 on elk on a regular basis. Argue the suitability until your head pops, it won't change the fact that people can and do.

An adult cow elk (at near 500 pounds) can easily be 3 times the size of an average adult whitetail buck. Certainly 2x heavier than all but the largest. Very few places have adult bucks averaging over 175 pounds live weight.

Given that people hunt elk with the .243 (and it is a given), arguing that there might be some situation where it wouldn't be suitable for an animal 1/3 the size is preposterous.

Watch that video. Replace the elk with a deer of any size. Tell me what angle would be unacceptable with a .243 that wouldn't be unacceptable with a .300WinMag (or pick your favorite).

Considering that most hunters will not ever have a chance to make a shot at even 1/2 that distance and most would wisely pass it up if they did, what circumstance leaves the .243 incapable of cleanly killing a deer when some larger caliber would be acceptable?
 
Reckon four pages is enough? :D

I like the comment from a professional hunter in Africa, back in the early days of the .243: "It shoots bigger than it looks."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top