Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Deer Hunting Anyone ever found the 243 lacking?

I've killed dozens of deer with a .243 over 50+ years of hunting and never found it lacking and never lost a deer. I also hunt with a .260 Rem which, like the .243 and 7mm-08, is based on the .308 case and which has a little more recoil than the .243 but generally less than the 7mm-08. If recoil is a concern, I'd go .243 without hesitation. Both the .260 and 7mm-08 have been available before the ammo crunch in managed recoil loads which would work well for you, but I haven't seen those loads available for months.

Anybody who thinks caliber trumps placement needs to spend a deer season in a shotgun zone. Plenty of rodeos with a 73 caliber even at close range if you shoot them in the guts.
Bust a shoulder(preferably front)or spine if you need them down fast for sure.
Don't see why a 243 with a good bullet would have any problem doing that.

I alwyas am curious as to this thing about hogs being tough. I've killed more than a few truckloads over the years and find them no tougher than any deer, and often less tough. Done a lot of them with a 22 pistol while wondering around, over 100 with a bow, and lots with the 223 AR.

Sure the big ones can be somewhat tough, but last one I ran into was about 275, and was popped with a 7x62x39 in an AR at about 70 yards in the shield wiht 125 ballistic tip... made about 50 steps into the brush maybe.

Rost. Just a guess, but maybe hogs are thought to be tougher because their vitals are further for ward than a deer's. So a behind the shoulder can hit the liver instead of the lungs, resulting in a different reaction.

I have found that lung hits usually start them on a short blind run into the thickest cover they can find. 75 yards into the thorns actually doesn't mean they were harder to kill just harder to recover.

I think a lot of this is due to the DRT/bangflop bullshit that exists in todays readily available "cyberspace".

Don't get me wrong, it can be done quite easily, but I'm not a CNS shooter. Strictly heart & lungs for us meat hunters.

A deer hit in the heart / lung area, without breaking at least one shoulder, is always going to run. Sometimes 10 yards, sometimes a 100 + yards, no matter what caliber you are shooting. This can, however, be "somewhat" minimized by the type of projectile used.

I would go 243 all the way. I have never felt like the 243 left anything on the table. My first elk was killed with a 243, and I couldn't even guess how many deer and antelope I've killed with one since then. I probably wouldn't take a 243 elk hunting, but I damn sure wouldn't pass up a shot at a bull just because I happen to be carrying a 243 at the time.

First deer I killed with a 12ga slug (foster type) I had to find the next day. Shot placement admittedly wasn't perfect but I certainly would have felt (at the time) that more blood would be on the ground and a 70lbs field dressed doe wouldn't have went that far.

The .243 is for kids, ladies and girlymen who can't stand the recoil of a real deer rifle.

Started my kids out with reduced 7-08 loads. Would do that again. FWIW IMHO BWDIK and I haven't posted enough pictures.

As said above somewhere, generally speaking, the small calibers are better off in the hands of experienced hunters. The prevailing tendency for them is to make smaller holes--smaller holes may sometimes have consequences...

But not so much that a load of anecdotal evidence won't dismiss

The more you kill, the better you get at it, so no chit, what a surprise--the old farts or rather the more experienced guys, having used the larger calibers figured out the smaller calibers work just as well. No doubt the corollary is just as true, generating geriatric mag enthusiasm.

No less than revelation, that.

And they kill more than the macho fools who can't shoot because they flinch too badly

The only disadvantage I see to the 6mm's is often there is no exit wound, and therefore not much of a blood trail

.243AI (6mm Rem equivalent), 105gr C&C, ~85 yards, deer slightly quartering away, bullet hit just behind near shoulder. Looked like somebody dumped a bucket of blood along the path into the bush.



For an all-around bullet- 80gr TTSX. In the SAAMI .243 I've killed a pile of deer with the 85 X/TSX, and I haven't been picky about shot placement. Over the years I've recovered a few bullets. All have been quartering or directly toward or away shots, all have broken at least a humerus or femur, or both, and recovered near the opposite hide. None of those deer went very far, and only in one direction.

Penetration has never been an issue, nor has expansion, terminal effect, or meat damage. Some deer run 100 yards, but that's the case with any cartridge when using lung shots. If you don't want them to run, shoot mid to high in the shoulder with a bullet that won't go to pieces from an impact like that.

Wow, that left a mark!

Jordan, what powders do you use for the 85 TSX and how fast are you shooting those?

Thanks.

Dad and his buddies all used .243s, and they lost some deer, too. I used one a couple of years, with different bullets than they did (they used 80gr. coyote bullets, I used 100gr. PPs) and killed a couple, but I wasn't happy with the results, so I switched to the .270. Still using .270s 35years later.
It's not that they used .243s, or the wrong bullets, but that they didn't practice much, if any, EVER. A box of ammo would last them years.
I got into handloading and shot quite a bit, the .270s seemed to kill quicker, and with more definitive results. Logically, that SHOULD be the case, and so it has been, for me.

I've had really good luck with IMR4350, and IMR4831 has been good, too. In the SAAMI .243 I get 3300 fps, and I get 3485 fps from the 80gr TTSX in the .243AI using 4350.

This is a long thread so I skipped around a little. I have used both a .243 and .244 to kill deer. One shot I was caught cresting the top of a mountain and had a quick, off hand shot while breathing hard. I hit the deer high, but not through the spine. It still dropped the deer from a ruptured spine. I would call that a "Marginal shot" and had no problem. I dunno, we were killing deer with light rifles long before "Premium bull@#$%" came along. I heard the exact same thing about the .257 Roberts. If recoil is an issue, look around for a 6.5 sporterized Arisaka. They hit hard with 140 grain bullets, and almost no recoil.

Hi Guys, I am in New Zealand where there is plenty of all year hunting, and plenty of caliber variations to choose from. I am a hunter not a seller of firearms, and I own a large collection of hunting rifles. I used a BSA 243 when I was younger and loved it. 85 gr for open country and 110gr for bush shooting. There is always the potential to slip a shot between the ribs without hitting bone. Doesn't matter what caliber you have, they will run a short distance till they run out of puff. The recoil was un-noticed, but again what ever caliber you have if it fits properly you won't feel much at all. I now shoot with a 30-06 and depending on the size of the game determines where I place the shot. I once shot through a tree branch as thick as your arm and still hit a Red Stag between the eyes with the 30-06. I bought a 7mm08 for my daughter and she hunts with that quite happily, but she did get a bruise when sighting this in. For the wife and younger family I would recommend the 243 with the heavier load to help stop game. But, try different bullet weights before changing your firearm. Happy hunting.

Welcome to the 'fire!

I'll start off with this, I have a Sako 243 for the purpose of mixed use varmint/deer. In addition, I've killed deer and wild boar with homemade selfbows loosing fixed blade broadheads on wooden shafts. So, I know from first hand experience that deer and boar can be cleanly killed with low recoiling rifles and simple stickbows.

Flip side of coin, I managed kill permits for about a decade when I had quite a bit of trigger time culling deer each year with various weapons to include selfbows, handguns, muzzleloaders, and a number of centerfire rifles. During that time, I made use of most everything from each deer killed. I preferred taking shots through both lungs above the heart while saving the heart for table fare. Of everything I experienced, one stood out for giving me the longest string of highly effective 1-shot kills while maintaining maximum meat yield and keeping the heart intact. That was my bear rifle I had built chambered 375H&H shooting bear loads. It started out I was vetting the rifle getting some trigger time in preparation for bear hunts, but it turned out that this particular chambering proved most reliable for culling deer. If I didn't care about saving rib meat and the heart, there were a number of combinations that would drop deer lightning fast, but the chest cavity would be jellyfied with much bloodshot meat. This was not the case with my bear rifle shooting full loads.

Going back to your question and my 2cents worth of insight:

Yes, there is a difference in terminal performance and total meat yield between certain larger chamberings and something along the lines of a 243 or 7-08, when speaking in terms of shooting through the chest cavity. But, in reality, as good of an experience I had with my bear rifle, it is obnoxious in recoil and added weight for day in and day out carry when the biggest thing you'd shoot would be a whitetail or boar under 300 pounds. I haven't hunted big bears in a number of year and have since retired that particular rifle. I mostly hunt foothills and the mountains, so I generally appreciate trim light non-magnum rifles using a 308 or 30-06 length receiver. Many areas I varmint hunt also present shots on deer which have a legal minimum caliber restriction of .23 or larger. Therefore, I favor the 243 being it is a popular chambering with supplies easily found, it is highly effective on various varmint, and it performs exceedingly well for double duty on whitetail. Within reasonable shot presentations, there should not be great difficulty finding 243 loads to effectively take deer without wanton meat loss.

Why I maintain my 243 vs maintain a 7-08? I personally find the 243 a better choice for varmint, and I don't find the 7-08 to give me enough advantage on deer to give up the 243 on the varmint end. Recoil for either of these are no issue in my case, but if in your case recoil is a factor, when compared to each other, you'd see something close to a 50% increase in recoil going up from a 243 to a 7-08.

In the end, such a choice is yours to make, not mine. Kinda' like boots and backpacks, what works for me may not work for you.

Good Luck with your choice. Selecting a new hunting rifle should be something you find enjoyable, not something you find agonizing.

I've found the 6mm variety lacking many times over the years. Mostly on whitetail, but once on a nice mulie as well. I still use the cal and will continue to do so, but I never expect the results of larger cals while using them.