Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Mule deers thought s on a .243

I have. The Berger 105gr VLD. They penetrate a few inches and then come unglued. Very different than the 95NBT, but it works.

The 95gr NBT I would have no problem hunting just about anything with. Wish they would come out with an identical version weighing around 110gr or 115gr with a high BC. That would rock.


I have Hornady 105 BTH's ready to go for one gun but haven't killed with them yet. Been shooting deer with the Hornady 162gr BTHP out of a 7mm -08 the last week.

I've been wanting to try that load in mine. How'd it work on deer...just a little better than the .243 I'm guessing?

My experience with the .243 is limited, but the two times a hunting "tag along" (not really a buddy of mine) hit a muley with one it took tracking and follow up shots to get the deer to stop. Granted he's a poor shot and hit them in the wrong place both times, but I've seen deer hit in the wrong places with a bit more potent calibers not go as far...they seemed to bleed better even when not hit in the vitals.

I prefer more gun, but with that said, my boys will be using a 243 for a year or two when they're old enough to hunt deer until they can handle a bigger caliber....and I'll make sure they can shoot one well.

The first part is self explanatory. As far as the second part, it's hard to compare the reactions of different deer, shot at different times, under different circumstances. For example, I've been in on tracking parties for not so well 30-06 hit deer that went farther than 243 mishits.

My experience with the 243/6mm is not limited and it(my experience)shows the .243 knocks the snot out of deer and such. The old cliche that one should use enough gun maybe should be use a good bullet and put in in the right place. If you can do that you'll go home happy.

While the above may be true, an old Montana cowboy once said: "The larger diameter bullet you have, the more margin for error..."

This is the way I feel...but yes the 243 can do the job.

What bullet was your "buddy" using? And I would hardly judge any cartridge by crappy shooting.


As for the 162's, they work fine. So far the closest has been at 200 yards even and the farthest 408 yards. All have been lung shots, and they all ran from between 35 yards to around 80. Wound channels look good and all exited. In one week I've gotten more runners with it than I have in nearly a hundred with the 243/95gr NBT combo.

was a guy once on AR that discussed the .257 roberts as being poor, he rated it thus from not a single deer falling when he shot into a "flock" of them. I never go there anymore due to point of view differences.

I dont agree with that. Its all about what kind of damage the bullet does to vital organs. The bullet that is chosen has to have enough energy to reach the vital organs though. But I don't think the difference in diameter between a 243 & 308 cal gives you anymore of a "margin for error"

25 grs. more bullet and a little less wind drift when using a 130 gr. berger.

I use both but for different uses. My .243 is a light easy carrying gun that is also my wifes primary antelope rifle,. My .260 is a 30" barreled 15 lb. antelope at rest rifle. Plus I like clanking steel and rocks with the .260

OK, this thread has me pumped -- I am going to load up some 95 NBT in my 6mm Remington... for whitetails next year...

I've killed quite a few whitetails w/ my 30-30 & 30-06. My 243 kills them just as good whether it's hunting in the woods or open fields.

Somebody (Phil Shoemaker, I think) on the 'fire recently said, "there are no bad cartridges, only bad applications". I think that might be pretty accurate. We could reasonably state, "deer hunting" is one of those applications. Noting that there are many different situations and ranges in which one could hunt deer from the NE "big woods" environments to open plains opportunities at long range, we could break down "applications" to scenarios which you or I would deem a good match for the .243. For example, I could decide that my accurate .243 load with a premium soft point of 80-105 grains at 3150-2950 fps will do the job ideally from 100-300 yards in open or semi-open country when I can place the bullet surgically.

Of course individual mileages may vary a bit here.

Many a cartridge "failure" is probably an application failures which is of course operator error.

I would say the same thing about bullets, to an extent. Where your 80gr SP would be appropriately applied only from 100-300 yards in open country, I would have zero hesitation shooting a deer from any angle, at any range out to 400 yards or so, with an 80gr TTSX similarly loaded.

I'm glad you said that (the accuracy part)... I've been saying it since I got my first batch of AccuBonds and couldn't get the accuracy out of them that I got with Ballistic Tips but the ABs were a little better than the Partitions which I used for decades.

I hunt up close (under 200yds) with AccuBonds now but beyond 200 accuracy starts becoming so much more important and certainty of opening up to create enough shock to anchor game is so much more critical. Then I'm all about the BT's but my evidence I based that on is largely anecdotal.

I've also found that lot to lot consistency is better with Ballistic Tips than any other hunting bullet I've ever used and that can be important to someone that still works and can't always take the time to sight in again each time they open a new box of bullets and before they hunt.

Bob

My experience with the .243 is not as extensive as some, but I've taken 25-30 deer and hogs with the round. I've also taken more than 50 deer/hogs with the similar .250-3000. I have found that either round will kill both (even larger, 300 pound hogs) very well when "properly placed".

A part of that "properly placed" comment, I feel, should include not only bullet placement, but also the mental condition of the animal when shot. On an undisturbed animal the kill is most often quite quick. However if the animal is spooked or being chased they tend to go a LOT farther after the shot before expiring.

When an animal does run (and some always will) it can make for a very difficult recovery without a good blood trail. The .243 and .250 neither one shine in the blood trail category. Although sometimes both will leave a spectacular trail, typically this is not true.

The .243 particularly can cause problems when a heavy bone is struck or the shot is less than perfect. Penetration is just a little short when a hard angled shot or one through heavy bone is taken. The lack of an exit wound just adds to the limited blood trail....even though the animal may well be fatally hit.

Unlike Mule Deer, I do feel the .250 or .257 have a small, but definite advantage over the .243.....but not enough to make one more suitable than the other on deer-size game.

The real advantage of larger rounds (particularly .30 caliber and up) is the reaction of an undisturbed deer that is hit with a "bad shot". By this I mean a shot that hits behind the lungs...maybe hits just the liver or even worse the guts. I know, no one here has ever made such a shot.....but it does sometimes happen to the best (if it hasn't yet....it will sooner or later if you shoot very much game).

I have found that even a poorly hit animal will normally (as long as not immediately pursued and "chased") go just a shot distance before laying down. I have no "proof" but my experience is that the larger the bullet diameter, the greater the tendency. A deer hit too far back with a .30 caliber bullet (or larger) just seems to make the animal "sicker". Most often, after several hours, you will find that animal bedded down and so "sick" that they can be approached and finished (liver hits will be probably dead from blood loss). This does NOT happen as often with smaller bore rifles and even if left alone the animal will get up and travel again after a while.....often resulting in a loss of the deer. It's a small advantage, but a very real one.

My main gripe with the .243 is its use and recommended use by inexperienced hunters (women and kids). These are the very one's most likely to make a less than perfect shot due to excitement or inexperience. The .243 (and .25's) is an "expert's" caliber that can perform very well.....but they don't allow much room for error.

I developed a hellova handgun flinch while shooting a 454 casull at the range. I hit the ground 3' infont of the target.

Whatever happened to Flinch???

That's a good and logically post Rick, which I agree with most of it. Ive only killed 4 whitetails with me 243 all went down within eye site. But the bullet went where its suppose to and did its job like it was suppose to. I only use C & C bullets, factory fodder.
I never took to the theory that larger caliber/bullets compensate or give a person a larger margin of error. Its been my experience that a bad hit is a bad hit no matter what caliber/cartridge youre shooting.

I agree that there is no real advantage to any caliber when an animal is immediately pursued.....and that is MOST of the time. However, when a bit of time is added to the equation (hours) a bigger bore will mean a better chance for recovery.