A Case of Use Enough Gun?

[RR 314]

I believe the cure for the .243 woes is a longer scope. . .

 

[ImNumberOne]

High chance it’ll survive. I’d bet anything the round passed above the body cavity and right below the spine. Good window for a non lethal hit there.

I’ve seen a deer hit there with a .280 survive and see him the next year. Seen others hit there and then later on several weeks later. Cant confirm they survived years long but I doubt they died to bullet wound.

Generally been super tough bullets that punch through without expanding, or light bullets lacking energy at longer range.

A .300 mag have helped. At least knocked him over but overall I’d say just a poor shot the deer would have decent odds regardless

I had a similar experience in So Africa, whike hunting Kudu,
I had a perfect shot at a front quartering shot. Hit the animal and after doing a Head over heels shot, directly between the rt front shoulder and neck, it went down like a ton of bricks at a 10p yard shot.
It took a while to get to it, but just as I got in 5 yards, it suddenly jumped rt up and took off.
We tracked it for 2 days and 25 km.
It shows up on the trail cams and you can see it limping real badly and blood pouring out.
But it survived and 2 yrs later another hunter got'm.
It was easily recognized by the rare blue coat, the rt shoulder shot and 55" horns.
When they skinned and dressed it, they found my 220 gr .300 1/4" from the spine, and perfect hole thru the shoulder, instead of shattering it. - go figure

 

[Ontario Hunter]

I had a similar experience in So Africa, whike hunting Kudu,
I had a perfect shot at a front quartering shot. Hit the animal and after doing a Head over heels shot, directly between the rt front shoulder and neck, it went down like a ton of bricks at a 10p yard shot.
It took a while to get to it, but just as I got in 5 yards, it suddenly jumped rt up and took off.
We tracked it for 2 days and 25 km.
It shows up on the trail cams and you can see it limping real badly and blood pouring out.
But it survived and 2 yrs later another hunter got'm.
It was easily recognized by the rare blue coat, the rt shoulder shot and 55" horns.
When they skinned and dressed it, they found my 220 gr .300 1/4" from the spine, and perfect hole thru the shoulder, instead of shattering it. - go figure

Right. There's a big difference between hitting an animal in the spinal column vs spinal cord. I shot my last bull moose sleeping in his bed at about 60 yards. Hit him in the neck with 180 gr 30-06. Deep snow and brush prevented a boiler room shot. Knocked him over. But then he got up and stood there sick head down. Second shot to the neck floored him again. Okay, he's done. I turned to go back to my pack that I'd ditched when bull was first spotted. After walking about fifteen yards I looked over my shoulder to see the bull was up again and moving off. Oh crap! I shot and missed. Reloaded. Shot again and knocked him sideways but he continued into the trees. By the time I caught up to him he was down again in a small creek. I put the crosshairs on his head and darned if he didn't jump to his feet when the trigger was pulled. Oh no, I knew that had to hit him in the butt. Now I had an empty rifle and had to go back to get my pack. Opened the box of ammo and discovered it contained empties! Wait ... one loaded round at the very end. Back on the track in near knee deep snow I came on a bloody pile of shit, confirming my suspicions of last shot's placement. Beyond the creek I stepped into a large cutting unit. Could see at least two miles but no sign of the bull. Followed the tracks for maybe half a mile and found the bull laying in a shallow draw. His head was up. I walked up to make the finishing shot. This one had to finish him or I'd be down to doing it with my knife (a very poor knife at that). A few yards from his butt the bull suddenly jumped to his feet, spun around, and lunged for me. I shot him through the head just below the left eye. Happened so fast I didn't even have time to get excited. When we quartered him in the garage I found the first bullet actually stuck in the spinal CORD. Second neck shot just sailed through. Third bullet bounced off his hip, essentially giving him a haircut. Fourth bullet missed and fifth hit him in the butt missing his anus by an inch or so. I discovered he'd been shot twice before by some arsehole with a .22 magnum, once in the hump and once in the neck. Neck shot blew up in the hide and the other bullet was stuck in one of the bull's foot thick shoulder vertebrate. So he was shot seven times ... and maybe two pounds of meat lost.

Moral of the story: Even a shot connecting with the spinal cord is not necessarily going to put an animal down for good. And of course, check your ammo reserves before going into the field.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

As was mine.

It is the only .243 that I own, but I have been vastly underwhelmed with the .243 Winchester.

I've taken at least 3 whitetail bucks with it, but all of them traveled more than 100 yards after the first shot.

One of them ran a 200yd radius circle and came back to the spot where I shot it initially. I shot it again, and it dropped with the second shot. The bullet holes were one inch apart!

Rack me up in the "anti-.243" crowd.


On another hunt, my buddy and I were hunting pronghorn in Wyoming a few years back.

He shot one with a .243 Winchester Tikka.

It laid there for 15 minutes.

As we approached, it got up and, literally, started walking off into the sunset.

I handed my buddy my .270 Winchester.

He dropped it for good with that shot.

@Safari Dave
Another man that has witnessed the same as me with that horrible little cartridge ( should be taken off the market)
I have had to finish a lot of animals shot by others with a 243. Step up just a little bit to a good 25 and it's a whole new ball game. More dead animals with one shot.
25s are what the 243 always wanted to be but just didn't quite make it. Close but no cee-gar.
Use a real cartridge NOT A PRISSY PISSANT 243.
Bob

 

[HankBuck]

As was mine.

It is the only .243 that I own, but I have been vastly underwhelmed with the .243 Winchester.

I've taken at least 3 whitetail bucks with it, but all of them traveled more than 100 yards after the first shot.

One of them ran a 200yd radius circle and came back to the spot where I shot it initially. I shot it again, and it dropped with the second shot. The bullet holes were one inch apart!

Rack me up in the "anti-.243" crowd.


On another hunt, my buddy and I were hunting pronghorn in Wyoming a few years back.

He shot one with a .243 Winchester Tikka.

It laid there for 15 minutes.

As we approached, it got up and, literally, started walking off into the sunset.

I handed my buddy my .270 Winchester.

He dropped it for good with that shot.

@Safari Dave - if you can’t cleanly kill a Pronghorn with a .243 then the shot placement was poor to marginal. While I think the .243 is adequate for any deer I agree the shot placement must be carefully selected (Broadside or ‘slightly’ quartering away, or frontal chest). But for Pronghorn antelope even a .243 with a fast expanding bullet (Sierra game king, or Hornedy Superformance) is devastating …at least that has been my experience and I think many would agree that “Pronghorn” are easy to kill with a light caliber….I would use my .22-250 if it was legal but in most States it is not. And I will end with conceding that “Yes, a .270, .300wm, .375 H&H” are “better” all things being equal but they are Not needed for Pronghorn (or coyotes) if you can shoot accurately.

 

[HankBuck]

Right. There's a big difference between hitting an animal in the spinal column vs spinal cord. I shot my last bull moose sleeping in his bed at about 60 yards. Hit him in the neck with 180 gr 30-06. Deep snow and brush prevented a boiler room shot. Knocked him over. But then he got up and stood there sick head down. Second shot to the neck floored him again. Okay, he's done. I turned to go back to my pack that I'd ditched when bull was first spotted. After walking about fifteen yards I looked over my shoulder to see the bull was up again and moving off. Oh crap! I shot and missed. Reloaded. Shot again and knocked him sideways but he continued into the trees. By the time I caught up to him he was down again in a small creek. I put the crosshairs on his head and darned if he didn't jump to his feet when the trigger was pulled. Oh no, I knew that had to hit him in the butt. Now I had an empty rifle and had to go back to get my pack. Opened the box of ammo and discovered it contained empties! Wait ... one loaded round at the very end. Back on the track in near knee deep snow I came on a bloody pile of shit, confirming my suspicions of last shot's placement. Beyond the creek I stepped into a large cutting unit. Could see at least two miles but no sign of the bull. Followed the tracks for maybe half a mile and found the bull laying in a shallow draw. His head was up. I walked up to make the finishing shot. This one had to finish him or I'd be down to doing it with my knife (a very poor knife at that). A few yards from his butt the bull suddenly jumped to his feet, spun around, and lunged for me. I shot him through the head just below the left eye. Happened so fast I didn't even have time to get excited. When we quartered him in the garage I found the first bullet actually stuck in the spinal CORD. Second neck shot just sailed through. Third bullet bounced off his hip, essentially giving him a haircut. Fourth bullet missed and fifth hit him in the butt missing his anus by an inch or so. I discovered he'd been shot twice before by some arsehole with a .22 magnum, once in the hump and once in the neck. Neck shot blew up in the hide and the other bullet was stuck in one of the bull's foot thick shoulder vertebrate. So he was shot seven times ... and maybe two pounds of meat lost.

Moral of the story: Even a shot connecting with the spinal cord is not necessarily going to put an animal down for good. And of course, check your ammo reserves before going into the field.

@Ontario Hunter - great adventures with your Moose and good perseverance that you kept following up and finally got him. Since you’ve taken a few big game animals before and know where to place your shots - just some bad luck missing vitals by inches in a few places. It also contradicts a few comments you’ve made in past posts about not carrying much ammo - I think 5-7 rounds is your normal and comments like “if I need more then that I don’t deserve the animal etc..”. Anyway, you DO deserve the animal - so carry at least 12 rounds. And also carry a “Good” Knife, like the one “Tarzan” carried - don’t worry about the knife being “flashy” as no one cares what you look like (except maybe You) …next wounded animal and out-of-bullets ..you can go down Fighting, leave a legacy and great tale to tell !! Congratulations on a hard earned Moose - enjoyed your story

 

[Ontario Hunter]

@Ontario Hunter - great adventures with your Moose and good perseverance that you kept following up and finally got him. Since you’ve taken a few big game animals before and know where to place your shots - just some bad luck missing vitals by inches in a few places. It also contradicts a few comments you’ve made in past posts about not carrying much ammo - I think 5-7 rounds is your normal and comments like “if I need more then that I don’t deserve the animal etc..”. Anyway, you DO deserve the animal - so carry at least 12 rounds. And also carry a “Good” Knife, like the one “Tarzan” carried - don’t worry about the knife being “flashy” as no one cares what you look like (except maybe You) …next wounded animal and out-of-bullets ..you can go down Fighting, leave a legacy and great tale to tell !! Congratulations on a hard earned Moose - enjoyed your story

To set the record straight: The knife was a POS Schrade Old Timer that soon afterwards went into retirement (compassionate moment kept it from going into the trash). Replaced it with a 1930s Kabar 4" drop point like my dad's. I had extra ammo in my daypack that day. A whole box ... or so I thought. The error was not checking the box when I put it in my pack. The correct context you were quoting above refers to rounds in a DGR magazine, not on my person. I typically have at least an extra magazine's worth of ammo either on my belt or in my pocket. For the Springfield that could be eleven rounds total: six in the gun and five in the pocket. If I can't finish an animal in ten rounds, I should probably use the last one on myself! That day I did not have shells in my pocket because there was a box in my pack. I slipped out of the pack when I first spotted the bull. It's nylon and noisy in brush and I wanted to get closer for a better shot. Had I been on the track at that time, the pack would have been underneath my oversize fleece jacket to keep it quiet. Very effective. I shot the previous bull moose in its bed just before dark in a tag alder thicket after tracking him most of the day. Range was less than twenty yards. Shot through the heart he jumped up and disappeared. I could see the tops of the alders swaying as he tore off. Then a fifteen foot spruce tree shuddered and leaned. That's as far as he made it. Maybe fifteen yards. Typical heart shot. They jump and run like hell till they run over themselves.

 

[Velo Dog]

I know of somebody who years ago poached many deer with a .22 LR. I suppose if that was adequate, a .243 would be plenty. Somebody mentioned .25 caliber should be a minimum, that is .007" (seven thousandth of an inch) larger diameter and .004 square inches cross sectional area larger. Seems rather insignificant to me. So where do you draw the line? You don't. If somebody wants to hunt with .243, that is their choice. I would personally do it shamelessly and my shot placement would be as careful as I could make it. I would also keep shooting until I knew I had a mortal hit.

Good afternoon Pilgrim,

1.
Poachers aka: Criminals and their tactics don’t impress me much, including the stealing of deer from the rest of us law abiding hunters, by means of a .22 Long Rifle, even though said poacher reported that it was adequate.
An Indonesian friend of mine told me of people using shark hooks, baited with cucumbers to catch deer in the land of his birth.
Reportedly, this tactic and equipment was quite adequate, efficient, etc.
I can understand it was very effective and perhaps even perfectly lawful during my friend’s childhood (the 1950’s Indonesia) but again, such tactics are not what decent, people of conscience, would consider as fair play.
Neither is shooting tiny bullets into large animals.

2.
Speaking of tiny bullets, I am the one who suggested a minimum for “average” sized N. American deer (perhaps 150 pounds and under), in my opinion, would be the .257 Roberts with 120 grain bullet.
With that, I agree with you, indeed the bore diameter of .257 is only slightly wider than .243 is.
And so when comparing them on paper, the difference does seem insignificant.

However, being as I am a rifle enthusiast and a hunting enthusiast as well, I have owned and used both the .24 bore and the .25 bore rifles on live critters, as have two friends of mine.
Both of which I have known a little over 50 years.
We have formerly hunted together many times and collectively come to the same conclusion, on the folly of shooting large animals with tiny bullets.
It works most of the time but when it doesn’t work, it is inhumane and unfair.

One of those guys eventually switched to the .270 Winchester, 130 grain bullets for deer but kept his .243 to hunt coyotes.
The other man (Game Warden, now retired) sold his .243 and for a time used a .257 Roberts, 120 gr bullets.
After a few years, he sold the .257 and to this day, he only uses a 7mm Remington magnum, 154 gr Hornady Spire Point bullets, hand loaded.

3.
In my specific experiences, (and the aforementioned Game Warden’s as well), the 100 grain .243 diameter bullet, (muzzle velocity around 3,000 fps) does not penetrate as well as the 120 grain .257 diameter bullet does (muzzle velocity around 2,800 fps).

4.
Clarification:
My recommendation of the 120 gr .257 diameter bullet is not as much about diameter as it is about bullet weight and somewhat about velocity.
The 6mm / .243 diameter bullets are generally used by most owners of those little rifles, up to 100 grains weight.
I repeat, the 120 gr .25 caliber bullet penetrates more reliably through flesh and bone —> especially bone <—
Part of the reason perhaps is the slightly lower velocity.
But, the slightly heavier weight undoubtedly is the major reason for this.

5.
In closing, I cannot stress enough that my recommendation of the .25 caliber, 120 gr bullet, @ 2,800 fps MV, is what I suggest should be the minimum for the most common size hooved critter in N. America.
And as mentioned in my previous post, if hunting when one might encounter larger animals, such as 200+ pounders, the various 6.5 cartridges with 140 gr bullets seem to me would be a better minimum starting point.

6.
In closing, we need to police ourselves as hunters or else, the various Governments will continue to bully us.
Too much of the voting public are simple puppets, controlled by the screeching anti-hunter forces.
The anti-hunters are hopeless haters who cannot be converted.
Large numbers of voters might otherwise be on our side, but for the fact that we sometimes do foolish things, (to include inflicting unnecessary suffering to our quarry).
That sort of thing really upsets these well meaning but emotional nitwits.
If we don’t draw a line somewhere near reasonable, no doubt there would be these embarrassing characters within our (hunter’s) ranks, who think they are impressing everyone by shooting hooved animals by means of a .22 Hornet and similar embarassing carnival stunts.
Such foolishness was perfectly legal in Soviet Occupied California when I was stuck living there.

Anyway, I’ve rambled along too long by now, so long that I’m finally even boring myself.
So, I will stop here.

Kind Regards,
Velo Dog.

 

[Pilgrim]

Good afternoon Pilgrim,

1.
Poachers aka: Criminals and their tactics don’t impress me much, including the stealing of deer from the rest of us law abiding hunters, by means of a .22 Long Rifle, even though said poacher reported that it was adequate.
An Indonesian friend of mine told me of people using shark hooks, baited with cucumbers to catch deer in the land of his birth.
Reportedly, this tactic and equipment was quite adequate, efficient, etc.
I can understand it was very effective and perhaps even perfectly lawful during my friend’s childhood (the 1950’s Indonesia) but again, such tactics are not what decent, people of conscience, would consider as fair play.
Neither is shooting tiny bullets into large animals.

2.
Speaking of tiny bullets, I am the one who suggested a minimum for “average” sized N. American deer (perhaps 150 pounds and under), in my opinion, would be the .257 Roberts with 120 grain bullet.
With that, I agree with you, indeed the bore diameter of .257 is only slightly wider than .243 is.
And so when comparing them on paper, the difference does seem insignificant.

However, being as I am a rifle enthusiast and a hunting enthusiast as well, I have owned and used both the .24 bore and the .25 bore rifles on live critters, as have two friends of mine.
Both of which I have known a little over 50 years.
We have formerly hunted together many times and collectively come to the same conclusion, on the folly of shooting large animals with tiny bullets.
It works most of the time but when it doesn’t work, it is inhumane and unfair.

One of those guys eventually switched to the .270 Winchester, 130 grain bullets for deer but kept his .243 to hunt coyotes.
The other man (Game Warden, now retired) sold his .243 and for a time used a .257 Roberts, 120 gr bullets.
After a few years, he sold the .257 and to this day, he only uses a 7mm Remington magnum, 154 gr Hornady Spire Point bullets, hand loaded.

3.
In my specific experiences, (and the aforementioned Game Warden’s as well), the 100 grain .243 diameter bullet, (muzzle velocity around 3,000 fps) does not penetrate as well as the 120 grain .257 diameter bullet does (muzzle velocity around 2,800 fps).

4.
Clarification:
My recommendation of the 120 gr .257 diameter bullet is not as much about diameter as it is about bullet weight and somewhat about velocity.
The 6mm / .243 diameter bullets are generally used by most owners of those little rifles, up to 100 grains weight.
I repeat, the 120 gr .25 caliber bullet penetrates more reliably through flesh and bone —> especially bone <—
Part of the reason perhaps is the slightly lower velocity.
But, the slightly heavier weight undoubtedly is the major reason for this.

5.
In closing, I cannot stress enough that my recommendation of the .25 caliber, 120 gr bullet, @ 2,800 fps MV, is what I suggest should be the minimum for the most common size hooved critter in N. America.
And as mentioned in my previous post, if hunting when one might encounter larger animals, such as 200+ pounders, the various 6.5 cartridges with 140 gr bullets seem to me would be a better minimum starting point.

6.
In closing, we need to police ourselves as hunters or else, the various Governments will continue to bully us.
Too much of the voting public are simple puppets, controlled by the screeching anti-hunter forces.
The anti-hunters are hopeless haters who cannot be converted.
Large numbers of voters might otherwise be on our side, but for the fact that we sometimes do foolish things, (to include inflicting unnecessary suffering to our quarry).
That sort of thing really upsets these well meaning but emotional nitwits.
If we don’t draw a line somewhere near reasonable, no doubt there would be these embarrassing characters within our (hunter’s) ranks, who think they are impressing everyone by shooting hooved animals by means of a .22 Hornet and similar embarassing carnival stunts.
Such foolishness was perfectly legal in Soviet Occupied California when I was stuck living there.

Anyway, I’ve rambled along too long by now, so long that I’m finally even boring myself.
So, I will stop here.

Kind Regards,
Velo Dog.

Well said.
To be clear, I don't advocate using small bullets for big game, quite the opposite actually. I am in favor of allowing people their choice of legal cartridge, and hopefully they choose wisely. Still, choosing an arbitrary diameter as a legal minimum really doesn't make sense as it is really energy that matters. Among all my firearms is the lowly .25 auto, I think we can all agree it's use to kill should not be attempted on anything except field mice. A friend of mine was once shooting it and the bullet ricocheted and hit him on the forehead with so little energy that it didn't even cause pain. Anyway, if .25 caliber centerfire were the minimum, this cartridge could be legal and grossly inadequate. If they want to make laws about minimums, energy needs to be in the equation, and perhaps the .243 wouldn't make the cut (at least the lighter projectiles)
I still argue that the issue raised by the OP in this thread was less about cartridge selection and more about sloppy aim and lack of follow up. A high back/shoulder shot would have had the same results with a 30.06 with possible increased likelihood of the animal not recovering from it's injuries due to the larger hole blasted. The .243 may have helped this deer live.
Side note, my two teenage daughters both shot mule bucks this year with 6.5 creedmoors. One was 200 yds, the other a little under 100. Ballistic comparison between the 127 gr CM they used vs 100 gr .243 is 300ish lb/ft at 100 yds. It's not a ton of difference, both deer fell like a sack of potatoes, dead, one shot each. Both were broadside through the lungs, one clipped the heart, the other was high enough to be in the fabled "void" below the spine. Both had entry and exit holes. I can't remember if either hit ribs on the way in or out. Both seemed substantially more than adequate for a reasonably well placed shot.

 

[IvW]

I had a similar experience in So Africa, whike hunting Kudu,
I had a perfect shot at a front quartering shot. Hit the animal and after doing a Head over heels shot, directly between the rt front shoulder and neck, it went down like a ton of bricks at a 10p yard shot.
It took a while to get to it, but just as I got in 5 yards, it suddenly jumped rt up and took off.
We tracked it for 2 days and 25 km.
It shows up on the trail cams and you can see it limping real badly and blood pouring out.
But it survived and 2 yrs later another hunter got'm.
It was easily recognized by the rare blue coat, the rt shoulder shot and 55" horns.
When they skinned and dressed it, they found my 220 gr .300 1/4" from the spine, and perfect hole thru the shoulder, instead of shattering it. - go figure

What bullet did you use?

 

[WyoBull]

I find it interesting reading though all these posts how much disdain there is for the 243 Win. I reload for and shoot a 243 win, one of many rifles in my stable. While it is not my main rifle for big game (talking Mule Deer, Whitetail Deer and Pronghorn Antelope here in Wyoming), I do have a load I developed for it using the Barnes 80 gr TTSX that I have the utmost confidence in when hunting these size animals and smaller.
I have been a serious reloader for 45+ years and hunter for longer. I have not experienced the same as many have written about here with the 243 Win so rather than bashing the caliber, or any other for that manner, I will just continue successfully taking animals with it.

 

[roklok]

I too have used the .243 on a lot of deer and have not found it lacking. A good hit with a proper bullet equals a dead deer.

 

[MS 9x56]

I find it interesting reading though all these posts how much disdain there is for the 243 Win. I reload for and shoot a 243 win, one of many rifles in my stable. While it is not my main rifle for big game (talking Mule Deer, Whitetail Deer and Pronghorn Antelope here in Wyoming), I do have a load I developed for it using the Barnes 80 gr TTSX that I have the utmost confidence in when hunting these size animals and smaller.
I have been a serious reloader for 45+ years and hunter for longer. I have not experienced the same as many have written about here with the 243 Win so rather than bashing the caliber, or any other for that manner, I will just continue successfully taking animals with it.

Good luck with that.