Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Minimizing - should I get rid of the .243 Win?

This is about the OP, remember, not you or me.

That's where I think I would step up to the .308: I could load it to .30-30 velocities for the bushes (I think the Win 70 FWT is more ergonomic than a 336) or just buy factory 165 grain loads and they should work fine.

Fair point about wife or kids: would 150 grain SPs at ~2600 fps be a mild enough deer hunting load to suffice?

Depends on the wife and kids. I have known some that could handle that easily, and some that couldn't--and not just women and kids, but big strong men.

Shrap doesn't talk about himself. He just posts pictures of himself.




Travis

I wouldn't bother with any of that schit. Let them use the .223.



Travis

Yeah. Marginally fugking UBER!




Travis

I know the feeling. Some days the .375 H&H doesn't bother me, and others the .223 makes me jumpy. Not necessarily in that order either.

Then I read about skeet shooters who wind up destroyed for flinching and use release triggers because their nervous systems are so battered.

I'm getting the impression that there is no such thing as 'recoil hardening': only a TLV for nervous system tolerance over time.

What's your take?



I think of it more as rekindling the flame of marksmanship by removing background complication. I can work on my field positions instead of spending time managing peripherals and working up loads for many different cartridges. A few good rifles in a few proven, mild-for-calibre cartridges would help me focus more on shooting than playing 'rifle Barbie' with gear.

The gunsmithing thing seems a chore since they are not easy to find and then the wait times are in months. The prices of everything have skyrocketed lately due to weak Canuckabucks, so rebarreling or replacing will cost a mint too. You state that one can lay in the weeds until striking when the right deal comes along, but will my barrel last long enough for that to work out? I think I'd avoid target practice with the .243 just to save money. The hassle seems enough to push one to archery...

I've shot so much rimfire in my life that the thought of a barrel losing accuracy after 1500 rounds seems very expensive regardless.

I've known and hunted with people turned into incurable flinching fools by repeated heavy recoil. Essentially they're shooting addicts.

Like many of us, have also found stock fit makes a big difference. My wife always had a bad time with standard factory stocks, because they're designed for men, who have square shoulders and relatively short necks, while women tend to have more sloping shoulders and longer necks. As a result, the toe of the stock was right in the pocket of Eileen's shoulder, and it hurt when the rifle went off. If she lowered the butt so the pad was fully on her shoulder, her cheek was way above the comb, and hurt when it hit her cheekbone.

Then she had a custom stock made for her, on a light .308. It didn't hurt at all, because the pad is fully on her shoulder and the comb on her cheek. But when I shot the same rifle it's miserable, because I'm a typical guy with square shoulders and a short neck. The recoil pad is too low on my shoulder and the comb bites my cheek.

I'm not particularly recoil sensitive but don't shoot my big kickers unless there's some good reason anymore, and there usually isn't. Have also found it doesn't take nearly as much gun to kill most big game as many hunters believe. A good bullet in the right place does the job. My wife and I have shot plenty of big game animals here in Montana with various .22 centerfires, and so far all the animals died promptly.

I agree completely about stock fit and can relate to sore cheekbones. The Knoxx Spec-Ops recoil absorbent 870 stock punched me in the face whenever I shot it. Going back to conventional was worlds better. The Remington 7600 has a high comb that I think would hurt me. Also, my 18.5" Remington Model Seven reared up on its hind legs and belted me whenever it got the chance. Thumbhole stocks never seem to fit me either - they rap the knuckle on my thumb.

I've seen more than a few friends put the toe of the butt in their shoulder pocket. A childhood friend even put his shotgun in the pocket between his shoulder and bicep. It hurts to watch. I kind of hunch and lean forward as I mount either rifle or shotgun offhand, so I may correct for some drop at comb but it's remarkably consistent if that is happening. I read some Fairbairn/Applegate stuff many decades ago that made me think shooting quickly should work with instinctive responses. Relaxed offhand target shooting with rimfires and .223 is a little different: straight up and down/elbow out, rifle knocked but not aggressively.

But I think I'm lucky. The Winchester Featherweight in .30-06 seemed like a fluffy kitten compared to that Model Seven in .308. Featherweights point like shotguns for me - I can look at something, raise and mount the rifle with eyes closed, and the cross hairs will be right where I was looking. The McMillan Compact Hunter fits about the same. Same thing happens with Beretta 686s and Remington 870s. I am very lucky to have such fine designs fit me so well. Winchester Sporter stocks also fit, but don't have the same balance as the Featherweight.

Strangely, I find myself looking across the rib with a Browning double, which is too bad as I really like them too.

I also think that more barrel length is a good thing as muzzle blast is jarring to me. I don't like it when someone shows up at the range next to me with a 16" AR15, but when they are 20" or longer they don't seem to bother me. I hate shorties - too loud! I go plugs and muffs when shooting and it still bugs me.

Reasonable weight seems to help too. I had a 24" push feed Model 70 Westerner in .270 with walnut and a blind magazine that was way nicer to shoot than the Model Seven. But I still think fit was just as if not more important than 5.5 inches of barrel and a half pound. The Winchesters come straight back. The Model Seven gave a bit more drama.

So for me, stock fit, barrel length and reasonable weight all seem to play in that order.

On cartridges: I want to include proficiency with the .308/.30-06 on up as I used to work in bear country, and would like to keep that skill set. We carried 12 gauges before (My first round of sporting clays someone remarked at how quickly I handled the pump for a newbie. Scored 36 IIRC. Funny how the ground targets broke more often! ), but now I think I'd be happier with a rifle at short range as Brennekes are hard to get here and ordinary Fosters leave me a little worried. Way easier to find factory .30-06, .338 WM or .375 H&H that would do just fine. Pepper spray, bangers and firearm. I probably won't shoot the .375 H&H prone, but that's not what I bought it for.

For centerfire rifles most folks could get through life very easily with a 223 and a 308, both have tons of load data and components available, there are relatively inexpensive over the counter loads available if you don't handload. The 308 is easy to download to a reasonable recoil level if you handload. Although I think that you will find yourself shooting the 223 more than the 308 and you will never miss having a 243.

drover

That's even worse.....

This is the genius level reply, unless you are getting a whole lot more % interest in your passbook savings, CD's and other convertible investment vehicles, guns are a GREAT investment, if you buy them right in the 1 st place. Put it in the back of the safe next to your stack of $50 bills,phkk minimizing. You asked. Magnum Man

Your frankness and candor humbles me and makes me feel unworthy. As a result I will now religiously follow your posts.

I got rid of a .243 once.. I got a good one back in the fold, and won't make that mistake again.

I don't understand folks that sell guns.

Having said that, how does it compare?

How many rounds to wear out a .243 barrel vs say a 30.06?

Better than Browning maybe, but even then, not as scenic.

Sycamore

My web-gleaned perception is about 1500 vs 3500 before really noticeable accuracy loss. Very roughly half.

Skatchewan,

How long a .243 barrel lasts depends on how you use it, and your standard of accuracy. I shot out the barrel of my first .243 in less than 1500 rounds because back in those days it was popular as a "combination cartridge," for everything from prairie dogs to big game. I shot it pretty hot on PD's before learning that .243's don't last long that wasy, and there are much better rounds for shooting hundreds of rodents a day. But when I saw "shot out," it still shot well enough for most casual deer hunters.

Target shooters report 1500-2500 rounds with the .243, depending on the particular target game and barrel.

The two rounds several have suggested philthygeezer use instead are the .223 Remington and .308 Winchester. I have seen .223's that had shot more than 10,000 rounds, mostly at prairie dogs, that were still consistently killing prairie dogs at several hundred yards. And a .308 barrel will also last far longer than a .243 barrel even when the standard is target accuracy.

For me, thanks to all the above input, I think that .223 and .308 will be my centrefire target cartridges. The others will be hunting and/or bear deterrent rifles if spending a lot of time afield in remote areas again. I would like to practice with all of them, but the .223 and .308 will be the starch in my diet.

After more reading, I think I would be better off building or buying a single shot Savage in 6BR than owning a .243. Sounds like a nice cartridge. I also like the idea of the 6x45mm wildcat since it seems a simple rebarrel of any .223 should allow the magazine to function.

But then I look back at the .223 and realize it would fill the same niche at far less cost when shooting from field positions.