For a good many years, I thought the 243 was a poor choice for deer. Then I realized that I was judging it on the people using it, not on the cartridge itself. Too often a 243 is the choice of a beginner, who often has trouble hitting the right spot, which results in either a wounded deer, or a lost one. In the hands of someone who knows what they're doing, it's as good a choice as a 257 Roberts or a 250 Savage. I like a bullet of at least 90 grains, preferably heavier for deer. I've not killed as many deer with as most of claim, but I've killed enough to know it will do the job very nicely.
For years I was a confirmed .243 hater because of all the deer I saw wounded with it. I think it was a combination of handing a .243 to a beginner, plus the guys that never shoot their rifles because they're scared of recoil. Throw into the mix the crappy big box store ammo that most shoot with an already marginal round and you've got a recipe for wounded deer. I'll begrudgingly admit that in the hand of a competent marksman shooting good bullets (nosler partition or barnes TTSX) that the .243 is adequate for deer. I don't see the 6.5 creedmoor as it's replacement, the 6.5 is in a different class to me.
I'll disagree with the 243 not being a prairie dog round. It's an excellent long range prairie dog round when it's twisted right and shooting high B.C. bullets. It's a bit much for general use but when the ranges get way out there it'll do what no 22-250 will do.
A 243 isn't of any interest to me unless it's twisted for the long bullets which means at least an 8 twist. If I were building one now it would have a 7 twist so I could shoot the 115 DTAC, 110 SMK, and 108 ELD-M.
