Elk, deer and the .243

[ORsouthpaw]

Disclaimer - I shoot a .300 Win Mag on Elk!

However...

Recently I aquired a Model 700 Mountain Rifle in .243. I have since been doing quite a bit of info searching and it seems to be the general consensus that .243 is just too light for elk. I know it will and has done the job on many a deer but why not elk. Most of what I have seen says that a .270, 25-06, .260 is fine for wapiti when a quality bullet is used.

So, we're talking about .027 difference between the .270 and the .243 as far as bullet diameter goes and given that 100gr partitions are availible in factory ammo for the .243. If shots were limited to 100 yards or less and were only quality oppourtunities (Broadside/Quartering Away) why wouldn't the .243 work?

[coldasice]

Here is a 243 shot elk by a 12 yrs old girl dropped in its tracks at 105 yards 100grain bullet

[coldasice]

here another elk killed by a 243 125 yrs by a 15 girl , 100 grain bullet dropped in its tracks, so I think they will work. Just my $0.02

[elkthumper]

the 243 is a good gun. it will do fine on elk, i just personally like bigger rifles just for a little insurance.

[ehunter]

A good bullet and a good shot placement and it will work fine.

[nevermiss]

I seem to recall that noted outdoor writer Bob Milek and his family as much preferred the .243 on elk as anything, and they tagged MANY. A well placed shot will work, with few exceptions. Sure, bigger can be better, but the old saying, "a well placed BB beats a poorly placed cannon shell," works in this instance.

[CombinationLicense]

Originally Posted by ehunter

A good bullet and a good shot placement and it will work fine.

Took the words right out of my mouth ehunter, the other factor in the equation is distance. Most .243 loadings drop below 1500 Ft/lbs of energy after 200 yards which is what's generally accepted as adequate for elk. Not that it won't still kill an elk farther than 200 yards but the margin for error shrinks as the distance increases.



"CL"

[eye_fish2]

I shot a nice 4 x 4 elk this year with my 257 Wby shooting 100gr spire point. He was in his bed and I shot him in the neck, he never moved an inch.

7th elk I killed with a .25 cal, the rest were with a 25-06.

A well placed shot and careful stalking will fill a freezer!

[Don Fischer]

Originally Posted by nevermiss

I seem to recall that noted outdoor writer Bob Milek and his family as much preferred the .243 on elk as anything, and they tagged MANY. A well placed shot will work, with few exceptions. Sure, bigger can be better, but the old saying, "a well placed BB beats a poorly placed cannon shell," works in this instance.

As I recall, Bob Milek liked the 250 Sav. I suppose that most any legal and not legal, cartridge is up to stopping and elk in it's tracks, depends on the bullet and how, where you hit it. If it's standing unalerted or maybe in it's bed, take the path of least resistence.

I really can't imagine using a bullet lighter than 130grs on an elk and think 150 would be just that much better. I have killed, one shot each, two elk with a 140gr 6.5 bullet. One in it's bed and the other about 30yds but running.

[eye_fish2]

I loved Bob Milek's writing. His Petersons Hunting columns were great. Bob was a huge fan of the 25-06 and as an 18 year old man I totally believed Bob and do to this day. I own 3. Love them all. I have never had a second thought about using a .25 on deer or elk. Good bullets and a well placed shot will do it every time.

[Just Fish]

I have a friend that killed many elk with a 6mm ruger bolt action.I agree with everyone shot placement is the key.I like to see the young gals with there elk its good for the next generation of hunters way to go girls.

[Flatfish]

I don't fish chinooks with size 20 hooks.

I don't shoot elk with 24 caliber slugs.
----------

Will both work? In good circimstances..... with a little luck, yep.

Why someone who is capable of firing a .300mag will want to use a 243 on wapati is beyond me

Like a lot of things in life, just because you COULD do something does not make it a good idea.

[Angus]

Back when I rifle hunted I was partial to my 300 wm, never took more then 1 shot to make them pile up, that being said, a guy I used to hunt with hunted everything from antelope to elk with his .243 and was damn good at it. He was also a retired marine sniper and had won numerous awards for his marksmanship abilities. He did all his own reloading and shot just about every weekend. He took a spike bull 1 year that I stepped off at 410 paces, 1 shot, done deal. Don't think I would recommend that kind of shooting to many people but Al new his gun, and his abilities and dumped that elk with 1 shot.

[sidewinder]

Originally Posted by ORsouthpaw

Disclaimer - I shoot a .300 Win Mag on Elk!

However...

Recently I aquired a Model 700 Mountain Rifle in .243. I have since been doing quite a bit of info searching and it seems to be the general consensus that .243 is just too light for elk. I know it will and has done the job on many a deer but why not elk. Most of what I have seen says that a .270, 25-06, .260 is fine for wapiti when a quality bullet is used.

So, we're talking about .027 difference between the .270 and the .243 as far as bullet diameter goes and given that 100gr partitions are availible in factory ammo for the .243. If shots were limited to 100 yards or less and were only quality oppourtunities (Broadside/Quartering Away) why wouldn't the .243 work?

Sounds like you just scored on a nice walking varmint rifle.
I had to edit this. I saw your other post. The guns for your kid. By all means take him elk hunting with the .243. Thats what your getting at is'nt it. Sure the gun will work. Its more of a xperts gun imo, but if thats all the gun the kid has. Just be ready to help him if he needs it. I started my kid out with a .308 because elk were in the picture right from the start. There are many of us that think the .243 is a bit light for elk. Then there are those that swear their 22-250's are all the gun one needs for everything.

[ORsouthpaw]

Originally Posted by Flatfish

Why someone who is capable of firing a .300mag will want to use a 243 on wapiti is beyond me

Like a lot of things in life, just because you COULD do something does not make it a good idea.

Didn't really say I wanted to use it myself. However my son who will be 12 next season might. My question was really why is that the .243 gets frowned on so much when other light calibers are generally accepted as suitable for elk. Personally I don't consider myself recoil sensitive, I feel the reason is a lot of practice with .22's and other light calibers. However I also feel why put your shoulder through more abuse than what's really needed? Could I shoot at an elk with a 50BMG? Sure but my little .300 Winny is much more pleasant.

Someday my son will be ready for a larger caliber however for now a .243 is the next step up. He'll be hunting deer for sure and from the general consensus on here sound's like maybe an elk too.

As always thanks to all for all of the replies!

[SXS]

Ya know, given the right circumstances, a 22LR will kill an elk. Is it the right choice? I think letting an inexperienced hunter use a 243 on anything greater than a deer at 100 yards is not a good idea. Experienced shooters can pull off a longer elk shot but they are (usually) less excited and a better shot than a beginner. Try shooting trap with a 410. Sure it is possible, and cool shots will break a few. I don't recommend it for the casual shooter.

[billc_sbio]

IF I ONLY had a .243 to hunt with I sure wouldn't miss the chance to take it Elk Hunting.

However it wouldn't be my 1st (or even my 5th) choice of calibers.

You've seen pictures and heard stories of numerous Elk that have dropped in their tracks with a single shot from a .24 cal. rifle.

However, you didn't hear about all the ones that didn't!

I've seen several "well placed" (mortal) shots on Elk where they were able to run 50-150 yd.s before they piled up. Most of those shots were with more impressive (ballistically) cartridges than a .243.

In dense woods that's enough for an Elk to disappear! (I once shot an Elk ~30 yd.s away from me and watched it run ~40 yards into the edge of some timber and fall over a big fallen tree, landing legs UP leaning against it. I told some friends right WHERE it was and they walked over and couldn't find it until I told them to look BEHIND that big log!)

Like I said it's certainly "doable", but I'm thinking just NOT a great idea.

(My "backup" Elk rifle's a "little" .30-06 )

[TheRogue]

I bet there's been more elk killed with a .243 (or a 30-30) over the many years than most of the new whiz-bang-boom rifles put together!

Hit where it supposed to be a with a quality bullet, at a reasonable distance (under 200 yds) and it will work fine. I'd much rather have a new hunter pulling the trigger on a .243 that doesn't scare them than a .300mag or even a .270 that they're afraid of.

My .02

TR

[DogZilla15]

A .243 in the hands of the right person is as deadly as any cartridge out there. The right person knows which shot to take and which to pass on. That holds true for everyone and it doesn't mean putting more gun in the hands of the wrong person is ok. Everyone should have the knowledge to make the right choice every time they pull the trigger. The woods are full of adults who can't grasp this simple concept. Expecting a youngster to have this knowledge is possibly asking too much of them and that combined with a .243 may be pressing one's luck a little too far. Good coaching and plenty of practice can certainly overcome this obstacle. Knowing your child is ready for the hunt is up to you (all) and simply being old enough to legally hunt big game is not part of the equasion.

[billc_sbio]

Originally Posted by TheRogue

I bet there's been more elk killed with a .243 (or a 30-30) over the many years than most of the new whiz-bang-boom rifles put together!

Hit where it supposed to be a with a quality bullet, at a reasonable distance (under 200 yds) and it will work fine. I'd much rather have a new hunter pulling the trigger on a .243 that doesn't scare them than a .300mag or even a .270 that they're afraid of.

My .02

TR

I'll bet not!

(That statement may have been true in the early 1960s, but I doubt it even then)

If you made that statement about Deer, I wouldn't question it.

You can go back and read articles written as early as the 1930s and read of Elmer Keith's experiences using the .30-'06 and how he felt Elk hunters needed "more gun" even back then. (Mainly because of the poorer performing bullets available at that time)

Avid hunters, even back then had other choices. (And the .243, being a .308 derived cartridge, ISN'T that old, relatively speaking)

And starting in the 1960s several great cartridges for Elk have been developed and brought out. They've never stopped improving on them.

Sure, I've been woods hunting for Deer and come upon Elk at less than 20'. The time that happened I had a little lever carbine in my hands in .44 Mag. IF it had been Elk season and I'd been carrying that little rifle, would I have taken the shot? Bet your boots...shoot it right in the head at 20', couldn't miss! (In fact I raised my uncocked rifle and aimed it right AT that Elk and said, "You could be mine!")

But would I have shot that same Bull at 150 yd.s with a nice, accurate .243 Rifle?

I'm honestly not so sure.

[gottafish]

Originally Posted by TheRogue

I bet there's been more elk killed with a .243 (or a 30-30) over the many years than most of the new whiz-bang-boom rifles put together!

My .02

TR

Interesting thing I learned about the 30-30. it is one of the most widely use alaskan hunting rifles for moose and caribou in the artic by the inuit tribs. I think because ammo is cheap and everywhere. Ive killed a bear and a few deer with my model 94. I now have a new 336 and cant wait to try it out.

243, My buddy dropped a deer in its from 425 yards with his. and he owns a 7mag and we both think the 243 is the most under rated caliber out there. It just plain gets the job done. But Im a bow hunter and shot placement is key no matter what you shoot. a lot of guys say you need extra for those not so perfect shots. I say "hog wash" You just plain shouldnt be shooting.

My son wants to shoot sag rats with a 45-70. Kids a nut job

My next rifle is going to be a 243. and the one after that is going to be a 375.

[billc_sbio]

Originally Posted by gottafish

Interesting thing I learned about the 30-30. it is one of the most widely use alaskan hunting rifles for moose and caribou in the artic by the inuit tribs. I think because ammo is cheap and everywhere. Ive killed a bear and a few deer with my model 94. I now have a new 336 and cant wait to try it out.

243, My buddy dropped a deer in its from 425 yards with his. and he owns a 7mag and we both think the 243 is the most under rated caliber out there. It just plain gets the job done. But Im a bow hunter and shot placement is key no matter what you shoot. a lot of guys say you need extra for those not so perfect shots. I say "hog wash" You just plain shouldnt be shooting.

My son wants to shoot sag rats with a 45-70. Kids a nut job

My next rifle is going to be a 243. and the one after that is going to be a 375.

Got any references?

I'd love to see the Alaskan guide's packet that would ADVISE you to bring a .30-30 to hunt Moose and Caribou!

It's true that the Eskimos up in the northern regions have long used rifles in .222 Rem and .243 Win. (probably now .223 Rem also) but mainly that's because they use them so MUCH and they make large communal buys on reloading components and by using "smaller" calibers they get more mileage on their purchases of Powder and Bullets (more for less $$$).

Calculate the ENERGY of a 100 or 105g bullet vs. a 180g .30 cal. bullet or a 250g .338 bullet (at their respective velocities).

Then come back and tell me that a .243's "Better"! (Tell me why also)

BTW, I have a .243 Win. and have successfully shot Deer with it before. I also have a .270 Win. and I'd take that any day over the .243. Now that IS ballistically superior to the .243

[Bait Bucket]

When I elk hunt I use a gun big enough to punch two holes in it. The .243 will not do that with any degree of regularity even on close shots.

[ORsouthpaw]

I do have other Magnums in the safe (7mm Rem, .300 Win, .308 Norma) they work on elk... Sure they're heavier and kick a just tad more than a .243. Perhaps I should turn him loose with some real MAGNUM power that way he can shoot through stumps and be overly confident because he walks softly and carries a big gun.

Seriously I guess I knew the answer here all along which in reality is there's no reason a .243 can't be effective on elk when you are patient enough get a "good" shot opportunity. We have gotten in on elk to within 5 yards while archery hunting so I'm fairly confident he can get to with in 100 with a rifle. He also knows the difference between a high percentage shot and forget about shot. Heck we watch the Outdoor Channel all the time Just kidding!

I do understand what some are saying about the margin for error but I also have hunted long enough to know more elk have likely been lost by guys shooting bigger calibers poorly than by hunters shooting light calibers well. I think it comes back to the idea of knowing your weapon's capabilities and more importantly knowing your own. That's what he's been taught and that's what will be further reinforced by hunters safety next spring.

I think we'll start hitting the range using the Federal 100gr partition loads and see where we go from there.

[Joe]

I let one of my boys kill his first elk with his .243 when he was 12. The rifle fits him well and most importantly he can shoot it very well. The deal was if had to be a perfect broadside shot under 200 yards or no shot. He punched a hole thru both lungs on a large cow at 180 yards for a perfect one shot kill. At the time the know-it-all "experts" here on ifish informed me it was unethical......guess they were wrong.

The question you have to ask yourself is are you willing to limit yourself to that type of shot? As Combination License pointed out above once you get past 200 yards a .243 doesn't really have the energy to be certain of a clean kill. My opinion is there are probably more elk lost to guys taking marginal shots with magnums at ridiculous distances than there are from people who make sure of their shot and can hit where they aim with smaller calibers.

[spottedhawk36]

Originally Posted by elkthumper

the 243 is a good gun. it will do fine on elk, i just personally like bigger rifles just for a little insurance.

[Eagleclaw]

off subject a bit but i'm taking my daughter on her first antlerless elk hunt next year if she draws. She has a 25-06 that she shoots pretty well for a 11 year old. Is this enough rifle to take a cow? she'll be shooting 120 grain corelock bullets.

[spottedhawk36]

shot placement is the key, even with higher power rifles in my opinion.

[Don Fischer]

Originally Posted by Eagleclaw

off subject a bit but i'm taking my daughter on her first antlerless elk hunt next year if she draws. She has a 25-06 that she shoots pretty well for a 11 year old. Is this enough rifle to take a cow? she'll be shooting 120 grain corelock bullets.

I got an offer for ya. Load your daughter up in the car and come on out to Antelope. I'll let her shoot my 6.5x55. I'm thinking she'll like it better and it has better bullet's avaliable.

My ex gave up her 6mm for a 6.5x55 I had put together for her.

[Eagleclaw]

Originally Posted by Don Fischer

I got an offer for ya. Load your daughter up in the car and come on out to Antelope. I'll let her shoot my 6.5x55. I'm thinking she'll like it better and it has better bullet's avaliable.

My ex gave up her 6mm for a 6.5x55 I had put together for her.

are you serious? if you are when she gets back from visiting her grandmother we're come out.

[gottafish]

Originally Posted by billc_sbio

Got any references?

I'd love to see the Alaskan guide's packet that would ADVISE you to bring a .30-30 to hunt Moose and Caribou!

Well not tecnical ones but On the alaska forum the locals Ive talked with have told me thats what they use. Alaskan Guide and white people from the lower states would never go there with a 30-30. I know I wouldnt but from what Ive been told on the alaskan fourm that local indians use a lot of 30-30.

Ps. 1982 canadian Moose shot by me (cow) model 94 30-30. 75 yards. took 3 rounds

[anschutz1913]

A .243 will kill and elk, but so will a .22 IF properly placed. But why? Use a larger gun that will guarantee an ethical kill, EVERY TIME!!! I heard from some guy that he shot 8 times at an elk, and missed. Well, I tracked down that herd and found 7 different blood trails. He was shooting a .243.

I use a .338 with a 250 grain bullet. Dont go any lighter than 180 grain please.

ANZ

[CombinationLicense]

Originally Posted by ORsouthpaw

Seriously I guess I knew the answer here all along which in reality is there's no reason a .243 can't be effective on elk when you are patient enough get a "good" shot opportunity. We have gotten in on elk to within 5 yards while archery hunting so I'm fairly confident he can get to with in 100 with a rifle. He also knows the difference between a high percentage shot and forget about shot. Heck we watch the Outdoor Channel all the time Just kidding!

I think we'll start hitting the range using the Federal 100gr partition loads and see where we go from there.

I think you hit the nail on the head here ORsouthpaw. The .243 will work fine for your son within those limitations - and will have manageable recoil as well. I say get him a bunch of practice, be sure of the limitations and take him hunting

Other than that, there seems to be a general misunderstanding of external ballistics and how bullet weight, ballistic coefficient and velocity come into play. There has been several calibers tossed around in this thread with varying opinions attached to each one. To take the opinions out of it, I pulled the down range energy data for each load from the manufacturer's web sites and arranged them by power rating at 200 yards. Obviously the two magnum calibers are in a class of their own but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how each one stacks up against the "magic" 1500 ft/lbs of energy standard.


.300 Winchester Magnum - Federal Vital-Shock 180 Gr Nosler Accubond – Energy Table

3502 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
3075 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
2692 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
2348 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
2039 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1763 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.257 Weatherby Magnum 115 Gr BST - Energy Table

2952 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
2566 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
2226 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1924 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
1656 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1419 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.30-06 Springfield - Federal Vital-Shock 180 Gr Trophy Bonded – Energy Table

2913 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
2542 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
2208 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1911 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
1644 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1408 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.270 Winchester - Federal Vital-Shock 130 Gr Barnes Triple Shock – Energy Table

2703 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
2323 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
1989 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1693 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
1434 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1206 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.25-06 Remington - Federal Vital-Shock 100 Gr Barnes Triple Shock – Energy Table

2288 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
1963 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
1678 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1428 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
1207 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1015 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.243 Winchester Federal Vital-Shock 100 Gr Nosler Partition – Energy Table

1803 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
1515 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
1264 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1047 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
860 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
701 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.30-30 Winchester - Federal Power-Shock 150 Gr Soft Point Flat Nose – Energy Table

1902 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
1358 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
947 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
652 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
463 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
358 ft/lbs @ 500 yards





"CL"

[billc_sbio]

Originally Posted by CombinationLicense

I think you hit the nail on the head here ORsouthpaw. The .243 will work fine for your son within those limitations - and will have manageable recoil as well. I say get him a bunch of practice, be sure of the limitations and take him hunting

Other than that, there seems to be a general misunderstanding of external ballistics and how bullet weight, ballistic coefficient and velocity come into play. There has been several calibers tossed around in this thread with varying opinions attached to each one. To take the opinions out of it, I pulled the down range energy data for each load from the manufacturer's web sites and arranged them by power rating at 200 yards. Obviously the two magnum calibers are in a class of their own but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how each one stacks up against the "magic" 1500 ft/lbs of energy standard.


.300 Winchester Magnum - Federal Vital-Shock 180 Gr Nosler Accubond – Energy Table

3502 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
3075 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
2692 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
2348 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
2039 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1763 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.257 Weatherby Magnum 115 Gr BST - Energy Table

2952 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
2566 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
2226 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1924 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
1656 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1419 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.30-06 Springfield - Federal Vital-Shock 180 Gr Trophy Bonded – Energy Table

2913 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
2542 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
2208 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1911 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
1644 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1408 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.270 Winchester - Federal Vital-Shock 130 Gr Barnes Triple Shock – Energy Table

2703 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
2323 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
1989 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1693 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
1434 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1206 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.25-06 Remington - Federal Vital-Shock 100 Gr Barnes Triple Shock – Energy Table

2288 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
1963 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
1678 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1428 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
1207 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1015 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.243 Winchester Federal Vital-Shock 100 Gr Nosler Partition – Energy Table

1803 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
1515 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
1264 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1047 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
860 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
701 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


.30-30 Winchester - Federal Power-Shock 150 Gr Soft Point Flat Nose – Energy Table

1902 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
1358 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
947 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
652 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
463 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
358 ft/lbs @ 500 yards





"CL"

I'm thinkin my "go to" Elk ctg. got left out!

It looks something like this...
P338B2 338 Win. Magnum 250 / 16.2 Nosler® Partition® Vital-Shok®

3927 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
3396 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
2923 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
2503 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
2131 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1805 ft/lbs @ 500 yards




__________________

[Flatfish]

1-I did not understand this was about a kids rifle. I came to the conclusion you were gonna dump your 300mag in favor of a 243. My bad.

The 243 will kill elk. It will not be forgiving as other calibers on bad shots, or tough angles.

Any 6mm bukllet simply lacks the mass to penetrate thru much. So lung shots on broadside animals are what you want. In my experience, broadside shots on elk are not nearly as common as behind the last rib as they run thru the brush stuff

I figure if the rifleman can shoot a 243, he probably can handle a 6.5x55, 260 Remington, or 7mm08. Any of which have a minimum of 40% more mass (140 grain bullets compared to 100 grain slugs out of the 243) in their slugs-giving the shooter the option of a harder angle than.

Sectional density in the 6.5mms in particular are very high for the amount of recoil they generate. Which equates to penetration.

I do not think they are equal to the capabilities of a .300 or a .338. But they sure do offer a LOT more on elk than a .243 ever could.

[DogZilla15]

All the velocity, energy, penetration in the world is no good if the wound channel isn't big enough. Some of those extra tough, larger caliber bullets will not make a wound channel any bigger than a .243 with a good bullet.

[CamoHunter]

I started two of my sons out with a 243 for deer.

They did not hunt elk for a couple of years until they could step up to a 308. I now have a 7mm-08 that my youngest son will hunt elk with next year. My middle son used it to take a mule deer buck this year.

This is not saying that a 243 will not work in the right circumstances. I just did not feel comfortable having them use it for elk because of the limitations it had, with their inexperience. Your results/feelings may vary...

In the hands of an experienced hunter I believe this is a possible elk caliber, as long as shot placement and yardage are observed.



Camo

[billc_sbio]

Originally Posted by Flatfish

1-I did not understand this was about a kids rifle. I came to the conclusion you were gonna dump your 300mag in favor of a 243. My bad.

The 243 will kill elk. It will not be forgiving as other calibers on bad shots, or tough angles.

Any 6mm bukllet simply lacks the mass to penetrate thru much. So lung shots on broadside animals are what you want. In my experience, broadside shots on elk are not nearly as common as behind the last rib as they run thru the brush stuff

I figure if the rifleman can shoot a 243, he probably can handle a 6.5x55, 260 Remington, or 7mm08. Any of which have a minimum of 40% more mass (140 grain bullets compared to 100 grain slugs out of the 243) in their slugs-giving the shooter the option of a harder angle than.

Sectional density in the 6.5mms in particular are very high for the amount of recoil they generate. Which equates to penetration.

I do not think they are equal to the capabilities of a .300 or a .338. But they sure do offer a LOT more on elk than a .243 ever could.

Well I DID (realize it was for a "kid's rifle")

And I certainly didn't mean to infer that I'd suggest that a smaller stature person should pick up my .338 and take it out to use it (although actually, for 1 well placed shot it could certainly "work" for them just fine)

But my thinking was that this bullet energy comparison would bring to light how SMALL the amount of energy was available from the .243.

I'm saying a kid could practice, practice, practice with a .22LR then HUNT WITH something as large as a .270 Win or possibly even a .308 or .30-'06.

Again, we're talking most likely 1-2 shots (if the kid does their part). And as we all know you don't "feel it" when you take those shots on a live animal. (A kid won't either)

So, you're looking at this

243 Winchester Federal Vital-Shock 100 Gr Nosler Partition – Energy Table

1803 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
1515 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
1264 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1047 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
860 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
701 ft/lbs @ 500 yards

vs. this

.270 Winchester - Federal Vital-Shock 130 Gr Barnes Triple Shock – Energy Table

2703 ft/lbs @ Muzzle
2323 ft/lbs @ 100 yards
1989 ft/lbs @ 200 yards
1693 ft/lbs @ 300 yards
1434 ft/lbs @ 400 yards
1206 ft/lbs @ 500 yards


I'm saying a kid could handle (out hunting) a .270 (or a 6.5x55) just fine!

[billc_sbio]

Originally Posted by DogZilla15

All the velocity, energy, penetration in the world is no good if the wound channel isn't big enough. Some of those extra tough, larger caliber bullets will not make a wound channel any bigger than a .243 with a good bullet.

Ha ha, as Elmer Keith used to say (and he spent quite a few years as a hunting guide BESIDES killing numerous animals while living in Montana and Idaho) "If you want a BIG hole, start with a BIG bullet!"

I guarantee you this bullet made a BIG hole! (it's ~.50 cal expanded)



There's NO .24 caliber bullet that's going to do this.

(Well o.k., maybe, but you've gotta SHOW Me!)

[ORsouthpaw]

Sorry Flatfish, I should have said that this question was for the purpose of putting my son in the field.

I agree with not feeling the shot when hunting, I don't know of anyone that ever talks about how hard their gun kicked when they have an elk hanging in camp. It's the practice on the range and the ability to concentrate on that living target that I'm thinking about.

Let's say you only shoot 20 rounds at the range
243 Winchester Federal Vital-Shock 100 Gr Nosler Partition – Energy Table

1803 ft/lbs @ Muzzle

vs. this

.270 Winchester - Federal Vital-Shock 130 Gr Barnes Triple Shock – Energy Table

2703 ft/lbs @ Muzzle

at 900 Ft/Lbs difference at the muzzle that adds up to 18000 pounds per box. According to the recoil table on Chuck Hawks' sight the 243 produces 8.8ft pounds of recoil while the .270 is just over 16ft pounds and that could be the difference between causing flinching and being able to hold steady and squeeze when an elk is presented especially when your 12 years old. Who know though maybe he'll step up between now and next season and if that's the case I'll be asking the question... does anyone want to trade a their .270 for a nice .243 Mountain Rifle?

[CombinationLicense]

Originally Posted by billc_sbio

I'm thinkin my "go to" Elk ctg. got left out!

Sorry Bill, I would have included it but it wasn't listed in the earlier posts.

BTW ORsouthpaw- I introduced both boys to centerfire shooting with my .22-250 from the bench. They had previous experience with a .22 rimfire and 20 ga shotguns so the .22-250 wasn't too big of a step up. Next I moved them to a .308 with reduced power 130 grain loads and after that to full power 150 grain deer loads. So far there's been no problem with the recoil or noise and this summer they'll both be trying out heavier loads in the .308 and the older one might even move up to a .30-06

That being said, I wouldn't hesitate one bit to have them use the .308 for elk with the right loads AND a good understanding of it's limitations.



"CL"

[Don Fischer]

Originally Posted by Eagleclaw

are you serious? if you are when she gets back from visiting her grandmother we're come out.

Come on out. Go thru Antelope toward Shaniko and it's the last place on the left. Everyone in town knows me, some admit it! 489-3272

[Eagleclaw]

Originally Posted by Don Fischer

Come on out. Go thru Antelope toward Shaniko and it's the last place on the left. Everyone in town knows me, some admit it! 489-3272

She doesn't come back tell next weekend but as soon as we can i'll give you a call.

[Don Fischer]

I just don't buy the theory of letting him shoot a 22 to learn how then giving him a 270 to shoot the elk. I think I'd rather he had a 243 he was familuar with than a 270 he'd never shot before and I wouldn't get him the 270. Maybe I missed something here?

"Don't worry kid, you'll never feel it while your shooting at game". Well when he compares the size of a 270 cartridge to a 22 LR he's bound to think something must be up! Most kids just aren't that gullable. Then what if he misses the first and he finds out it does kick, think he'll just quickly jack in a second round and follow up? Shoot, he just might drop the rifle at the first shot. I would much rather a kid had a rifle he was really comfortable with because he shoot's it in practice. If that means a 243, 250 Sav, 25-06 or 260 over a 270, so be it!

[HOGTIDE]

Maybe you can come up with a better 'compromise firearm' for a younger hunter. Perhaps a .308 win in a medium sized stock. A 180 grain should be a bit more substantial for elk and a properly balanced /weighted stock might kill most of the .308's recoil. Hate to start some one young out with the heartache of seeing a majestic bull's bloodtrail leading through an unending dense forest.

I hunt the west side and I think I am lucky too be hooked up with one of the most successful elk crews on the Oregon Coast(none of my doing here). Their motto is to get 'em down. Use all the firepower you can effectively handle to dump em where you see em. Nobody wants to chase wounded bulls through the endless wet Oregon jungle. I shoot a 300 Wby........I'd go .340 wby if the rifle wasn't so darn heavy to tote.

If you stick with the .243, teach the young man the stealth , patience and decision processes of a bowhunter.Have fun figuring it out.

[Killertraylor]

I've taken two elk with my .243 - one at over 300 yards and the other at 150. I handload, shoot Barnes 85 grain TSX bullets and my gun shoots clovers at 100 yards. I shoot it at 400 yards as much as I can and it groups 3 inches at 400 like clockwork. That being said, I shot my elk this year with a .338 Remington Ultra Mag. I like the increased energy at 400 yards. I shot in a stiff 30 mph crosswind and hit a little further back than I wanted and it still rolled like it had been head shot. Energy kills.

If I knew I wouldn't take a shot longer than 200 yards, I'd carry my .243 without hesitation. It's a great round, and if you put that .243 bullet where it's supposed to be, it will work as well as anything.

[billc_sbio]

Originally Posted by Don Fischer

I just don't buy the theory of letting him shoot a 22 to learn how then giving him a 270 to shoot the elk. I think I'd rather he had a 243 he was familuar with than a 270 he'd never shot before and I wouldn't get him the 270. Maybe I missed something here?

"Don't worry kid, you'll never feel it while your shooting at game". Well when he compares the size of a 270 cartridge to a 22 LR he's bound to think something must be up! Most kids just aren't that gullable. Then what if he misses the first and he finds out it does kick, think he'll just quickly jack in a second round and follow up? Shoot, he just might drop the rifle at the first shot. I would much rather a kid had a rifle he was really comfortable with because he shoot's it in practice. If that means a 243, 250 Sav, 25-06 or 260 over a 270, so be it!

Well Don, the thinking goes like this...

You shoot the .22 as MUCH as you can to practice all the GOOD habits you can develop, learning to hold that rifle (or pistol or revolver) as still as possible. Use it to develop good sighting techniques, breath and trigger control never having to worry that you're about to be slammed by heavy recoil.

When you HAVE those basics down, then shooting something with some authority to it, you KNOW what you have to do. And when it's a big game animal in front of you, you're never going to think about the recoil, rather just concentrate on the good marksmanship skills that have been ingrained with practice using the lighter caliber rifle.

Shooting a high power rifle off of a bench is the most punishing method it can be shot in. However it's also the best and steadiest method to sight in or verify a rifle's shooting accurately and where you want it to.

Other than that it proves NOTHING (from a hunting standpoint).

Sure practice with whatever firearm you're going to use ensures proficiency WITH that fiream, but not necessarily from a bench.

Practicing from the various positions that you'll shoot from in the field is valuable, but those same positions can be practiced in using a .22 whether a .22LR or even a centerfire .22 like a .223.

I don't care what you shoot, whether it's a .44 Magnum in a revolver or a .300 Win Mag. in a rifle. Practicing with a similar .22 will make you a better shooter. There's nothing beneficial in standing there and being POUNDED by a heavy recoiling firearm.

At least that's what I think.

[Trick]

As some can attest (me being one of them), getting rid of a flinch as a kid can be a tough habit to break.

My father let me shoot his 99 lever action 300 savage when I was about 10 or so. I had no experience with a centerfire rifle and had only shot air rifles and an old lever action 22 prior to that fateful shot.

First shot and I was scoped. Split my brow open and let a fair amount of blood flow down my face.

That single event screwed me up for years. I was always closing my eyes on the squeeze and my groups suffered. I could only wish now that my father would have been half as concerned about preventing that event as all of you are. I'm 1000% convinced that a little more concern, foresight and a warning would have helped me when I was young.

My kids started out with air guns, progressed to a .22, then to a .243 and now my oldest son moved up to a 7mm-08 this year and killed his first buck and my other boy dropped his deer with the .243. Both with one single well placed shot.

I've held off introducing them to elk. My oldest son will elk hunt this year and I'm confident in has ability to take a good shot with his rifle.

Go slow and let them build the confidence that they need to get the job done. Watching my sons shoot with open eyes and no flinch is a pleasure when I think back to my earlier days.

[Jedcraft]

My uncle did not like recoil at all. He shot a .243 for years on deer, elk and moose. He shot his .243 much better than his '06. Pick your shots and angles. Hit 'em where they live.

[ORsouthpaw]

Originally Posted by Trick

As some can attest (me being one of them), getting rid of a flinch as a kid can be a tough habit to break.

My father let me shoot his 99 lever action 300 savage when I was about 10 or so. I had no experience with a center-fire rifle and had only shot air rifles and an old lever action 22 prior to that fateful shot.

First shot and I was scoped. Split my brow open and let a fair amount of blood flow down my face.

That's a brutal introduction to center-fire. I have a friend that went from shooting .22LR to a 338 Win Mag and to this day he still will occasionally jump the trigger and he shoots a .308 now.

billc_sbio - I agree with the theory of not beating yourself up if you don't have to. But being familiar with your hunting rifle is also very important to me. The solution for myself was simple, I have two guns that are set up the same way. Both are Browning A-bolt Medallions with 3x9 scopes same trigger wt, etc. The only difference is one is in .270 and the other is in .300 Win Mag. I primarily shoot the .270 when at the range. The .300 gets 3-6 rounds through it to be sure it's still zeroed, then it gets put away.

I'd love to had another model 700 mountain rifle in a bigger caliber and have it set up the same for my son but the bottom line is that's not going to happen. So... Practice and proficiency with what we have will be focus.

[billc_sbio]

[quote=ORsouthpaw;2329661]

billc_sbio - I agree with the theory of not beating yourself up if you don't have to. But being familiar with your hunting rifle is also very important to me. The solution for myself was simple, I have two guns that are set up the same way. Both are Browning A-bolt Medallions with 3x9 scopes same trigger wt, etc. The only difference is one is in .270 and the other is in .300 Win Mag. I primarily shoot the .270 when at the range. The .300 gets 3-6 rounds through it to be sure it's still zeroed, then it gets put away.
quote]

Yep, almost ALL of my "Big Boomers" (with the exception of the Sharps, which with its BP Cartridges that only "push", don't snap) spend almost their entire lives sitting as Safe Queens.

My fav "shooting" rifles are all .17s-> Centerfire .22s. .22 Hornets, .222s & .223s. THOSE are what get shot the most!

[Chesapeake]

I've shot several deer with a 243.

My !

#1: A 243 is too small for deer.

#2: You had to ask, so I'm guessing you also know in the back of your mind that its too small for elk.

[WSU]

Originally Posted by billc_sbio

I've seen several "well placed" (mortal) shots on Elk where they were able to run 50-150 yd.s before they piled up. Most of those shots were with more impressive (ballistically) cartridges than a .243.

In dense woods that's enough for an Elk to disappear! (I once shot an Elk ~30 yd.s away from me and watched it run ~40 yards into the edge of some timber and fall over a big fallen tree, landing legs UP leaning against it. I told some friends right WHERE it was and they walked over and couldn't find it until I told them to look BEHIND that big log!)

This is very true. I shot a cow once at about 50 yards with my 300 wm and she didn't hardly miss a step. She was taking off out of a pond at the time. The shot had double lunged her perfectly. I was shooting 180 accubonds. There was no exit wound and I never found the bullet. She stumbled a little and proceeded to run 100 yards and pile up. I was sure I had made a poor shot until I found her.

Elk are very tough critters and are hard to knock down. That said, you shoot an elk through the lungs with almost any rifle at it will die. But, there is a lot to be said for some extra energy to knock them down quicker.

[OB1]

.243 is way too light for Elk, yes a perfect shot can happen but not every time.
I shoot a .338 for Elk and never have to go looking for them after their hit.

[okie man]

i say if the child can't shoot a sensible elk cartridge they don't need to be shooting at elk. we all want our kids to go out and hunt at a young age but how responsible are we for letting them use a marginal rounds and teaching them bad ethics from the start. are you going to be beside them at all time? are we sure that if we don't stay right beside them at all time they will only take responsible shots? i know adults that i couldn't count on to do the right thing. let alone kids.the 243 win is not nor ever has been a elk round period! it is and always has been a heavy varmint/light deer gun and thats all it is.a 260 rem would be a better choice because it will shoot a 140 grain bullet but it is still on the small size.

[Northwest Pest]

Range and shot placement are the only keys to this whole thread. I have shot 11 elk with a .243 and the furthest one of them made it was 50 yards. You should not attempt long shots with this caliber but it will easily penetrate and do serious damage at up to 150 yards on elk. If you can shoot larger, than you probably should, but if you are a better shot with a 243 than a 300 plus type weapon than use the 243 for sure. Bullet placement and range should be your only concerns.

[okie man]

i know several experienced anglers that have caught many big fish on very light tackle but i wouldn't give my 10 year old a ultralight to catch tuna with! use the right tool for the job!

[4th_Point]

Originally Posted by DogZilla15

All the velocity, energy, penetration in the world is no good if the wound channel isn't big enough. Some of those extra tough, larger caliber bullets will not make a wound channel any bigger than a .243 with a good bullet.

I think that was one of the best statements made in this thread.

Energy doesn't kill, tissue disruption does. There's more to terminal ballistics than energy. If there wasn't, bow hunters would have a hard time killing anything. Sectional density, bullet construction, bullet expansion, velocity at impact, etc. must all be factored in.

I don't own a .243 but know several people that do. These are good hunters and they are now using the .243 instead of magnums. With the latest bonded bullets they say the tissue damage is devastating.

I was looking to build a .243 for target shooting and out of curiosity did some research regarding its performance for hunting at various forums. Many people said its an "experts" cartridge, but I saw numerous posts at several forums with people claiming that the .243 was producing greater tissue damage in deer and elk than any other cartridge in their hunting camps versus 30-06, 270, 7mm mag, etc. With newer bonded bullets, not the old soft points or varmint bullets. These were not scientific tests, but these guys, like the hunters I know, were absolutely shocked by the amount of damage done.

I think a magnum gives extra insurance in case your shot is off and the bullet hits a shoulder, but nothing is guaranteed. As others said, shot placement trumps everything.

That said, I took a 300WSM elk hunting this year Unfortunately I didn't take any shots. I was concerned about bullet expansion however since a lightly constructed ballistic tip bullet can expand really well at extended ranges, but blow up at close range. A tough bonded bullet will hold up and expand at close range, but may not expand much at extended ranges. I think this is why some people have animals run off even with good shot placement even using a magnum.

One of the best attributes of the 6.5x55 is the high sectional density and high ballistic coefficent of the 140gr bullets. Most spitzer bullets have decent expansion at 2000fps and above (often 1800fps is the minimum velocity for expansion). But, the Swede and 260 are not pushing magnum velocities so close range shots seem to have bullets with better retained weight and the high sectional density still provides good penetration. The high ballistic coefficient provides high retained velocity at extended range with good penetration. Some magnums shoot low BC bullets with low sectional density and loose velocity quickly. Here large diameter bullets are an asset since there is less expansion.

But what do I know, I'm a bow hunter?!

[leadeyedbugger]

AHHH YES......the eternal arguement in all its beauty. Here is how i see it and i think i am pretty accurate in my assessment......

IF your son puts his 100grain bullet from his 243 through the heart,lungs or brain of a elk inside of 100 yds then the elk is dead. It may not fall over immediantly, it might run a ways....but its dead...toast, harvested, etc.

If he misses the vital areas then the elk is not dead, it then has the possibility of escaping.

If your son was packing a 375 and shot a elk through the heart,lungs or brain the elk is dead. It may not fall over immediantly, it might run a ways....but its dead....toast,harvested etc.

If he misses the vital areas then the elk is not dead, it then has the possibility of escaping.


Now if you want to talk about about penetration, energy, power, how big of nuts you have etc then great. But there are only 2 scenarios that you can count on for sure. You put the bullet through the breadbasket and its dead, you miss and its not. Having said that i would shoot the biggest calibre that your son is completely comfortable with. Putting the bullet in the bread basket is the MOST important part of the equation. If that is a .243 right now then as long as he knows his limits and is accurate with the weapon then so be it. I would like to shoot a bit bigger at least but i will not say that a .243 can't do the job just fine because it can.

BTW....a large magnum is not even close to needed.....nothing wrong with them just not needed.

[Ol' KL]

I'd have no trouble hunting Elk with a .243. When used with a little good judgement it's a fine gun. My nephew killed a very nice 5pt. with one this year. He's thirteen.

I wouldn't pass on an elk season because I wasn't ready for a larger rifle. A .243 will do the job.