Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Africa .243 for leopard

You're quite right about using the best tool for the job and the best tool for the job is a rifle that the client can shoot confidently, comfortably and competently and that has the necessary ballistics and bullet choice to do the job.

A .243 is perfectly capable of killing a Leopard with correct shot placement and bullet choice and if it's the rifle that the client shoots best, then and he can't shoot the larger calibres confidently, comfortably and competently, then the .243 should be the rifle of choice for that particular client.

Whilst I don't mean to offend anyone here,........I don't know how many Leopards you guys have shot in total, but I'd bet it's probably not as many as Karl and I have hunted between us and possibly not as many as either of us have had clients take seperately....... Practical experience is a great thing and a shed load better than anything you'll read in books or watch on videos.

When it's your safari, you can choose to use a .700 if you wish, but surely it's unreasonable to criticise another hunter for using the rifle of his choice?

Karl uses his bare hands. A ,243 is over kill for him! A knobkerry to bonk them over the head and a cloth sack to tote them home in.

I need to ask, what do you recommend for your clients? If I called and you tell me to bring what I'm most comfortalbe with. I will tell you that I am comfortable with each and every rifle I own. So of this list, which is your choice? No other game considered.


.250 Savage
6.5 Swede
7mm Rem Mag
.300 Savage
8mm Mag
9.3 X 62

In that scenario and assuming you had a large collection of the more usual calibres, I'd make a 375 H&H as my first choice, but partly because ammo is so readily available in case yours got lost and my second choice would probably be a 30.06, partly for the same reason. As to bullets, my first choice would be Winchester Silvertips handloaded to a moderate velocity, after that, Woodleigh SP (NOT PSP), A frames or Nosler partition etc.

I agree 110%.

Hatari, in your case, I would use the gun with the most suitable scope that groups the best with a reasonable bullet. (Nosler Partition and better, even Barnes X work very well, though in smaller calibers not my first choice.)
I think shakari has mentioned it before, but a .375 H&H in the guts aint gonna kill it either. Shotplacement are really THE most important consideration on a baited cat. Of course, the game changes considerably with a chased (hounds or Bushman) leopard.

Then it's the knobkerry and gunny sack?

I've never hunted with hounds or running bushmen, so couldn't comment except to say that I appreciate Karl's point on that and I defer to his experience on it.

As for scopes, a lot will depend on how the Leopard set up is set up (if you know what I mean) - I like to use red lights so an illuminated scope is unnecessary and I'm not really a great fan of 'em, but with a different set up, I can see they might be an advantage. - The most important things about a scope in these types of scenario are the light gathering capability and the man behind it.

Steve,

I've never claimed to have as much experience hunting leopard as you or Karl. I have hunted leopard once unsuccessfully.

I stand by my statement about the .243. My wife killed a buffalo last year with an unbraked .375 H&H, and she now shoots a .416 Taylor. Using your logic, should I have recommended she bring along a .270, because that is the rifle which she shoots the best?

My logic ran along the lines of recommending that the woman I love face dangerous game with an inadequate caliber would have been asinine. She realized she was not going to be hunting deer here in America and worked hard to learn to use the PROPER tool for the job.

I agree with your reponse that the hunter should take what he shoots best, but you have to factor in some common sense and legal requirements to that response.

Lhook7,

No, I wouldn't, because a 270 is illegal for Buffalo and also not enough gun for that species, but you're comparing apples to oranges. In the case of a Leopard a .243 is a perfectly adequate calibre for the species. It's not my favourite calibre for the species by a long chalk, but it is adequate. - I am of course, assuming the calibre is legal in the country you're hunting it in.

A fairer comparison using your wife and a Buffalo as an example, might be if you had a 375 H&H that she shot well and a 458 Lott that she was scared of and shot badly, which would you prefer here to use? If she were my client, I'd advise her to use the .375 H&H.

No. A fairer comparison would be if we decided to go from a .375 to a .416, which we did.

If you read my post, I did not say the 243 was not adequate. If you are happy with adequate, then so be it. As far as the legality, I'm assuming you would know better than I.

Maybe I just don't get it, but I cannot understand someone going to Africa and being so recoil conscious that a .243 is the largest caliber he or she can shoot comfortable.

I don't hunt Leopards, there are none in Georgia except in zoos.

As you say, when everything goes right, the .243 will do the job, but what about when nothing goes right. Would you prefer a .243 hole in the wrong place or a .375 in the wrong place?

If your client put the .243 in the wrong place and the wounded leopard made it into thick brush, would you follow it up with the same .243, considering that you might also have a .375, .416, or .458 available?

In a charge, you couldn't be sure you would put the .243 in the right place, and at biting distance, I would still rather have a larger caliber in the wrong place than a .243.

Even if neither one would make an in the tracks instant kill, I am betting that the larger caliber would be more of an inconvience to the leopard than a .243. I think the larger caliber would hamper his biting ability a little better than a small caliber.


I also think that a large bullet in the wrong place would kill quicker than the small bullet in the wrong place.

What I mean is, with the large bullet, you might not have to follow the blood trail but 50 yeards, but with the small caliber, you might have to follow it for 100 yards, and I would think that 100 yards would be very nerve wracking.

In your experience have you ever had to follow up a leopard that was only wounded? When the leopard moved at the last second, or the hunter botched the shot?

Would you rather follow up a wounded leopard hit with a small caliber or a large caliber, assuming the wound was in the exact same place?

Lhook7,

You missed my point. I meant that if she shot a 375 well but was scared of the larger calibre, what's better for her to use on a Buff. The 375 that she shoots well and will place the bullet precisely or a larger calibre that she'll flinch from and maybe/probably wound the Buff. - In that scenario, I' prefer her to use the 375.

13579,

Some people really are that recoil concious and the first word of a PHs title should mean that he makes professional decisions. Assuming legality and suitability, that might include smaller calibres than he'd prefer......... but only if he's happy with that choice.

Moving onto your third para, if you check back on my posts, you'll see that I said I'd always have my 500 in the blind...... and that's what I use for all follow ups, including cats. - Not because I need that big a hole in the cat, but because it's the rifle I shoot best.

If you put the hole in the wrong place, the calibre won''t make much, if any difference. The idea is to get the hole in the right place first time and the point if this debate is that a small hole in the right place is better than a big hole in the wrong place.

Yes, I've had many follow ups and a fair number of charges on wounded Leopards and indeed other animals and yes, I'd rather a client use a bigger calibre rather than a smaller one - but only if he could shoot it well. The thing with a Leopard follow up is that you don't know if the animal is dead or wounded until you find it and yes, it is nerve wracking but it's also part of the job.

Regarding your last para, I'd rather follow up a Leopard that had been shot with a calibre the client could shoot comfortably, competently and confidently rather than a calibre he or she was scared of.

I haven't updated my photoshop account for a looong time but below are a few of examples of the results of my follow ups. Note the 500 calibre holes in the faces of all 3 animals.

The bottom pic is an example of what happens when someone uses a rifle he flinches from. In this case, he missed the Buff he was aiming at entirely from 20 yards and hit another Buffalo in the ear. - The grass is stuck in the bullet hole. As it turned out, he just killed another but slightly smaller Buff, but he could easily have gut shot it or hit a pregnant female etc etc.

And yes, I am bloody good at what I do. Not the cheapest admittedly and unashamedly, but I am good at what I do. I've also gotta say that although Karl and I don't always agree, he also knows his business very well indeed and I consider him a true professional, Professional Hunter.

I love my first rifle, a Model 600 Remington 243,but there is NO WAY I would want to use it on Mr. Spots. I took my leopard from a ground blind at 42 paced yards with a 375 H&H loaded with a 300 g NP. It was a bang flop GGROWL experience with a resulting very dead leopard under the bait tree. Low light, high grass, dry mouth,sweaty palms, thick jess, and dangerous game means use enough gun.

I suppose we seem to have a juxtaposition of points here.

I see and fully understand the statements made that if a "light" for game caliber is the arm that the person in question can best shoot that makes up for a lot. Just handing some guy a 460 Wby (or whatever) and saying "this will hit them harder than what you've got" would, in fact, most likely cause more harm than good. I think everyone here, even the "critics", understand this premise. What we, or most certainly I, have such a problem grasping is how the idea that a .243 being an acceptable round for a dangerous game animal is supported by it's being "adequate". I want to look at that word for a moment.

1: sufficient for a specific requirement; also : barely sufficient or satisfactory
2: lawfully and reasonably sufficient

Look, a 22 LR is quite sufficient to kill a man but you'll never see me singing it's praises as a viable defense caliber either. "Adequate" is a word that practically has "but you could do a lot better than this" almost implied with the definition.

I'd also like to reiterate what someone else set forth; if the best you can shoot straight with is a .243 what the *&%^%^ are you doing looking for dangerous African game to shoot? (or even being in Africa at all) Recoil? Here's some generalized standard load comparisons:

.243 x 95gr bullet in 8lb rifle is 8lb recoil
7x57 x 140gr would be 13lb recoil
7-08 x 140gr is also 13 but more vel. (darned efficient round)
308 x 165gr is 18
7mmRM x 160 is 22

There's just no reason I can think of that a 7x57 class rifle couldn't be shot by anyone that can shoot a .243. The fact that we're going after something fully equipped to kill us back with something that's "adequate" is truly beyond my ability to rationalize except to say "You'll never see me doing it.".

Guyandarifle,

You're pretty much right in what you say, but I think you're approaching it from the wrong angle.

Leopard are very different from the other DG species. They're thin skinned and light boned and although they can really stuff you up in the right or wrong circumstances, they die very easily if the right bullet hits 'em in the right place. The other DG species, even the Lion, is considerably tougher, they take a lot more killing and they can 'carry lead' a lot more than a Leopard can. - That's really the crux of the matter.

You're right about a .22 being capable of killing a man but not being an ideal defense calibre. A .22 in the scenario you mention is/would be a good calibre for a shortish range assasination which is essentially what a shot at a Leopard from a blind is. All you're doing is replacing the head shot of the assasin with a heart shot of the Leopard hunter - hence the change from .22 to a .243.

For self defence against humans, you'd obviously want to use a larger calibre such as a .45 and that's exactly why a PH would take a larger calibre on a follow up. - In my case, my .500.

Bear in mind that in the UK and Ireland, the .243 is the most popular calibre, partly because of the licencing laws there admittedly. - But that calibre kills many deer, including red and sika deer and wild boar perfectly effeciently and those species are a lot tougher to kill than a Leopard is. Leopards actually die very easily if the bullet is placed in the right spot......... and believe me, it doesn't have to be a big bullet.

Regarding recoil: - You're using books as a reference. In the real world, recoil that people may flinch from is felt recoil and that depends on weight and design of stock etc etc. The fact is that some people are sensetive to recoil and some are not and as I said, the stock design etc can also affect this. The late Dr Kay hiscocks who was also a PH and PH examiner was about as heavy as a wet tea towel and skinny as hell, yet she shot a 458 Lott like a demon. On the other hand, I've seen guys of well over 6 foot tall that flinched like hell from a 375 H&H. - Flinch factor varies from individual to individual, which is why the PH takes a client to the range on the first morning, he never looks at the target the client is shooting at, he looks at the client to see how he handles the rifle and reacts to the shot.

I boggles my mind that people will perceive a caliber like a .243 as good enough to shoot a blesbok or a springbok with, but not the simmelar sized leopard. The number one reason normally is "It can kill you/ It is part of the big 5." So what? The only likely danger you will ever be in inside a leopard blind, is to die of boredom! It is exciting OK, but dangerous? I think not. Will you take a shot at a blesbok/ springbok/ impala from a blind at a waterhole (ethics aside) with a .243 Win? If yes, what is the big difference in taking this same shot at an unsuspecting leopard on bait? He will likely be dead when he hit the ground if you are even just an average- or slightly below average shot.
Now if some-one has a problem with a follow-up / dog hunt/ chased hunt of a leopard with a .243, I can understand it, as you are in much more immedate danger and up close and personal with the cat. You probably would not tackle a wounded warthog with it either if you have a choice.
If you give me a choice between a handy little open-sigthed .243 for the follow-up or nothing, guess what I am gonna choose, as I trust my shooting ability, and a 100gr premium bullet into a fast advancing cat is far more preferable that tackling it bare- handed again. The number 1 reason most of us (in this case shakari and myself) normally carry our big bores, is because that is what we are used to carrying every day, and we learn to shoot it well.

the 243 is still just as magic today as it was in 1955,53 years old and still kickin butt..........

Karl i think you would agree with me that most of the last couple of posts are more or less repeating itself. i buy into your reasoning to a degree. it is the, lets call it the big picture, that may be a concern. say there is a potential african hunter sitting in front of his desk reading this topic. he was concidering to use a 30 calibre on his dream safari for leopard. he still has six moths to plan this. however he sees that according to this topic 243 is more or less ok. he then comes over(with the 243) after six months and he then has a good or bad hunt it doesnt matter. isnt the correct advice to a guy that has time to prepare to to prepare with the bigger rifle. if one cant face sligtly more recoil what is he doing in africa hunting. if he doesnt want to give our conditions the respect it deserve, what is he doing here.

What he's doing here is excercising his right to come to Africa and spend his money on a hunt with the rifle of his choice and assuming it's a legal calibre, who are you or anyone else to dictate what rifle he must use.

There's lots of reasons somone might be restricted to a small calibre rifle other than just not being able to shoot a larger one. Reasons such as age where a Father and youngish son come on a hunt for example or someone with a physical disability etc........ Should we rule all those people out and tell them they can't hunt in Africa?

It doesn't matter what the reason, the client should be permitted to use whatever calibre rifle he wants to as long as it's legal and no-one else, whether they be experienced hunter, one time visitor to Africa or laptop expert, has the right to preach their opinions to him.

Have to pass along a bit of thought for you minimalists that would feel comfortable taking a whack at a leopard with a varmint rifle.

Hitting the high points of the story, my friends were tracking an unwounded big tom last summer in Zimbabwe. It erupted out of the brush, took a 375 Flanged through the chest, mauled the PH, got blasted loose by a 458, and still had enough steam left to knock down and try to maul another hunter.

Good luck with your 243s....

Darby,

You're talking about a different thing completely. The premise is that assuming good shot placement, a .243 is sufficient rifle to shoot a Leopard out of a tree from a blind, not that it might be a suitable rifle to stop an angry Leopard.

Your post actually supports the idea that a large calibre isn't necessarily the answer to killing a Leopard. - Esp an incorrectly placed shot. On a Leopard, it's not the size of the hole that matters, it's where you put it.........