Low recoil deer rifle/cartridge?

243 or 6.5 Swede

Garandimal said:

A 125 gr. NP at ~ 2800 fps would make a dandy deer load.

Or even the 140 gr. Core-Lokt at ~ 2550 fps..




GR

Click to expand...

My experience has been with the 100 Max and 123a Max. The 123 leaves about a 1 in exit wound with minimal tissue damage. The 100 stops just inside the hide on the offside.
Edit to change 180 to 100

If you do go with 243, the 100 gr. loads can be loaded below the level of recoil I start to notice or you can load them up to "buck" a little bit.

mshootnit said:

If you do go with 243, the 100 gr. loads can be loaded below the level of recoil I start to notice or you can load them up to "buck" a little bit.

Click to expand...

I'd say find the accuracy node, just down from factory load, where you don't notice so much recoil.

Quantify low recoil? .....to me it depends on the weight of the rifle and how it fits!

I have some pretty large caliber rifles that I feel don't recoil that bad at all-

Take a good look at the good old 7x57 or nothing wrong with a 243 win....

Okay, this is just me... my main deer rifle, a Savage .243, doesn't recoil much if any with factory-loaded 100gr Winchester PowerPoints. I have examined and shot another .243 that was built on a military Mauser action in an older pattern stock... really, I think that one should've had a nice set of iron sights, but anyhow that particular custom rifle kicked harder than my Savage with the same load. I'd say the respective stocks- design and fit- have plenty to do with that.

Just because a factory load is advertised as a 100gr SP cranking out 3000+fps doesn't mean that bullet isn't just as effective at ~2700fps with better accuracy if you can find the node. Accurate aimed fire is just that. The more easily placed, the more effective the bullet is.

I recently helped my petite sis-n-law acquire a .243. Found a Savage "Lady Hunter" in a Cabela's Gun Library, had it shipped to my FFL and put a great scope on it and she loves it. The annoying thing is, it is a smidge more accurate than my two .243s I've killed several deer in the last 4-5 years, all with the .243 and prefer it to my .270 because of the recoil. I reload for all my centerfire rifles and her's too. The .243 is easy to reload and factory ammo is abundant if you don't reload.

I'd actually look at a Henry single shot if you want simple and lightweight. They have a nice variety of cartridges available including the venerable 30-30. Makes casting and reloading look a whole lot easier doesn't it?

I used a 243 Win in Texas for many years & shot a good number of deer quite dead out to well over 200 yard ranges. Accuracy is extremely good & recoil is minimal for a rifle that packs so much power. I never lost a shot animal however unlike bigger calibers bullet choice & bullet placement are very important. I always used Remington Corelokt 100 grains & shot deer that were far in the heart/lung cavity & whenever possible & close I went for the neck . If you use bullets lighter than 90 grains & try to "break them down" by shooting them in the shoulders you may have problems.

oh how I love my ruger m77 in 250savage.

Very fond of my sons 243 savage axis 2

Would love a 3030 encore barrel

Had a custom 6.5x55 built for my dad

So many amazing options for when you dont wanna feel any recoil. Big fan of reduced remington loads for my 270 to btw

Well...

If you want to talk Low Recoiling AND Light weight...?

With .357 Mag./ 158 gr. XTP, it's a 5.5# deer pop-gun.

All you have to do is know how to Bow hunt.






GR

6.5 Grendel. You can buy a new upper and a 6.5 magazine and use your existing AR15 lower.

If you want an AR upper to fit your requirements, take some time to look at the .277 wolverine. It has been my go-to when introducing my kids to deer hunting. It shines out to 150 yards (and can do 200) is very mild in recoil, and has a track record with deer sized game.

brewer12345 said:

tubeshooter, I already have levers in 357, 35 rem, 44 mag and 22. I like levers, but I am looking for a modestly priced option that is as simple and low recoil as possible. I figure an inexpensive 243 bolt gun is the default option, but thought I would toss out the idea of an upper simply for ergonomics.

Click to expand...

Seems like you already have 3 good options with the .357 for super low recoil, the .44 mag for moderate recoil out to 125-150 yards, and the .35 rem for longer shots.

The 7mm BR is my favorite low recoil round I have taken deer with. I have killed lots of hogs with a model seven in 7-08 loaded down to BR velocity’s using Nosler partitions. Has worked better than 243 with less recoil for killing at least.

I'm late to the party. I like the .243 Win and have a couple, as well as a .243 Ackley Improved. All my kids who hunt took their first whitetail with a Model Seven in .243. I don't think you can go wrong with a .243.

However, if I wasn't already invested in the .243 specifically, I'd probably opt for a 6mm Creedmoor. It is a superior cartridge design that is growing in popularity.

And for maximum versatility as a hand loader, I'll second @jmorris' idea of a 7mm-08 loaded down. That way you have a low-recoil deer cartridge with the capacity to upload to full power should the need/opportunity present itself.

Lots of options, and you won't go wrong with a .243.

Another vote for the 6.5 Grendel,

comparing the deer's reaction to being hit with a 100 gr 243 and the 125 gr from the 762X39 i'll take the 762X39

misser said:

comparing the deer's reaction to being hit with a 100 gr 243 and the 125 gr from the 762X39 i'll take the 762X39

Click to expand...

I would have to agree, based on the deer I've seen hit with both, inside of 200 yards. Beyond that, I'd want the .243, but how many kids are taking shots past 200 yards? Or even adults for that matter.

The 123 SST out of the 7.62x39 is an incredibly effective bullet on deer and pigs.

AR upper? 6.8spc. Great deer round.

I would like to try a 6.5 grendel or 6.8 spc on deer but havn't yet. When my two girls get old enough to start hunting (assuming they have any interest) I will probably either be buying one of those for them, or just doing a reduced recoil loading in something like a 6.5 creedmoor. A 120 grain bonded bullet at 2600 fps sounds about right to me. I already have that in my 7.62x39 upper which shoots a 125 grain nosler accubond at 2600, but I havn't shot enough deer with that to have a really solid opinion.

There are plenty of calibers that will fit the bill, but you need to think about ammo and/or components availability. Many of your oddball rounds only get brass made once a year if that. When it is gone you are at the mercy of the manufactures. When we had an ammo shortage during the Obama years I got rid of all of my oddball calibers. Every gun that I own now has ammo available in any mom and pop shop. No regrets.

Hands down no further debate needed get the 243 all day long.

243 is an outstanding deer cartridge out to at least 300 yards.

Recoil is virtually non-existent my ten-year-old daughter took her first deer with it no problem with one shot. 243 does a lot of damage and is much more powerful then 556.

Accurate ammo is cheap and readily available.
Rifles are cheap get yourself a TC compass or even better a Ruger American

Huntolive said:

Hands down no further debate needed get the 243 all day long.

243 is an outstanding deer cartridge out to at least 300 yards.

Recoil is virtually non-existent my ten-year-old daughter took her first deer with it no problem with one shot. 243 does a lot of damage and is much more powerful then 556.

Accurate ammo is cheap and readily available.
Rifles are cheap get yourself a TC compass or even better a Ruger American

Click to expand...

Meh, I'll continue to debate with you. My daughter took her first two deer at 10 and 11 with a single shot .243. Why? Because I grew up during the period when the .243 was the default "women and kids" deer cartridge. One shot kills with textbook shots. So what's the problem you ask? Well the problem is she weighed about 90 lbs. at the time, and the recoil from that little .243 was enough to keep her from wanting to shoot any more than the bare minimum that dad insisted she shoots for practice. In other words it was NO FUN for her to shoot her .243, and eventually she stopped hunting with her dad because she just didn't want to practice with her deer rifle.

I really grow tired of grown men who weigh 200-250 lbs. insisting that the .243 has "no kick at all" when I see the heads of 90 lb. kids getting snapped back on each shot.

"just get them a heavier rifle then..." some guys will say. Really? You want a 90 lb. kid to heft a 9 lb. rifle to prevent the recoil from snapping their heads back? wow.

Look, the .243 is a great round. I'm not against it at all. But just blindly recommending it because that's what pa paw recommended for "women and kids" in the 60's, without taking into consideration modern alternatives (like lightweight bolt actions in 7.62x39, .300 BO and 6.5 Grendel and other low-recoil calibers) is just falling behind the times.

"yea but they can grow into the .243..." Sure. They can grow into a .308 too, when the time comes.

Go ahead and tell me I'm crazy, but I did the same thing and I saw the result - a daughter that learned to avoid shooting her .243 hunting rifle because it was more gun than a 90 lb. kid could handle.

"yea but my kid is tough..." okay whatever man.

Look at the options. Find something that is effective on game at 100-150 yards and won't give your 90 lb. kid a concussion. They will practice more, enjoy themselves more, probably want to hunt and shoot more, and their deer will be just as dead.

I vote for 7.62x39 myself. And even then, recoil, while light, won’t be nonexistent. Get your kid accustomed to those lever guns with lighter loads and then an x39 won’t seem too bad.