.243 as a "do it all" caliber?

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Short of charging bears, if care is taken for proper shot placement, is there really anything one couldn't hunt ethically with a .243 in the lower 48?

No. The Inuits to this day hunt caribou and such with .223 rem, .243 win, and even .22 magnum. It's a little on the light side, and wouldn't be my choice, but with proper bullet selection and proper shot selection, .243 win can absolutely do it all in North America for hunting use, IMO. Now, please note that this means that for certain species, you'd really have to choose head/brain shots, and use heavy bullets (95-107 gr), and possibly bonded and/or partitioned bullets, but even the largest animal's skull cannot defeat a 100 grain .243 travelling at 2000-2800 fps. It's not ideal - something along the lines of .260 rem is a closer ideal to me, for a one-light-round-to-do-it-all-with-head-shots rifle, but .243 will definitely work. Just don't go thinking you're going to consisently punch into the vitals of a quartering toward or away elk, Yukon moose, bison, or coastal brownie and actually find be able to find it dead later. So it's not a standard, go-for-the-vitals-round. But with shots to the base of the ear, straight into the brain, you betcha - just one man's opinion. Mind you, to make this precise shot, you're gonna have to get fairly close, so this rules out long range hunting and even most "mid-range" hunting under certain field conditions.

 

[Gryffydd]

Here's a tip, your post count does not equal your experience or knowledge level. All it signifies is your willingness to ask or answer questions on a specific message board.

Geez, he was just commenting on the fact that your post count was 243, just a funny coincidence. Your response proved him right when he said

Ok, your post count was at 243 and now I think you want to argue more than you want to gain any insight.

...and you still failed to get it.

 

[W L Johnson]

I believe some states require a biggerm soug then you can get into a 243 when hunting elk

Kentucky law says nothing smaller than 270 for elk

In fact here it is copied off the Ky website

A person shall not use or possess while elk hunting:

• A modern firearm of less than .270 caliber

• A muzzle-loading firearm of less than .50 caliber

• A shotgun of less than 20-gauge

• A shotgun shell containing more than one (1) projectile

• Any arrow without a broadhead point

• A handgun with a barrel length of less than six (6) inches, a bore diameter less than .270 inches, and when fired, the bullet shall produce at least 550 ft/lbs of energy at 100 yards.

 

[HoosierQ]

I think the .243 has a "do it all" reputation not because of the high end (elk) but because of the low end (varmints). The .243 is very popular with people who want to hunt all manner of varmints (prairie dogs, ground hogs) and coyotes from long range up to white tail deer.

So for white tail deer on down, you have a pretty decent multi-purpose caliber. Plus there are AR-15 style rifles in .243 which is kind of cool.

In terms of all around Lower-48 caliber with one rifle, your're probably looking at 30-06. I mean you could still shoot coyotes with that and you'd be good all the way up to bison (even though 30-06 might still not be one's optimum bison round).

Plus with 30-06, you have almost universal availability of a wide variety of ammo.

To really cover the entire Lower 48, completely, I think (22lr notwithstanding) you are going to need two calibers. Probably something like a .223 or 22-250 for the varmints and predators, and then skipping up a few notches to a 300 Win Mag or a 7mm Rem Mag or something like that for the big stuff.

 

[wickedsprint]

Here's a tip, your post count does not equal your experience or knowledge level. All it signifies is your willingness to ask or answer questions on a specific message board.
Geez, he was just commenting on the fact that your post count was 243, just a funny coincidence. Your response proved him right when he said
Quote:
Ok, your post count was at 243 and now I think you want to argue more than you want to gain any insight.
...and you still failed to get it.

Oh My, you are absolutely correct. An apology is definitely in order on my part. I took it as condescending not as him pointing out a coincidence. Sometimes I miss the obvious. My response was absolutely uncalled for. I'm going to remove the comment.

Thanks for pointing it out.

 

[HoosierQ]

There are wild elk in Kentucky?

 

[wickedsprint]

Kentucky law says nothing smaller than 270 for elk

In fact here it is copied off the Ky website

That's interesting. In Colo and WY where we are in Elk country min caliber is .24.

 

[Gryffydd]

Thanks for pointing it out.

Hey, it happens to all of us

 

[W L Johnson]

There are wild elk in Kentucky?

Yep, check out this link

http://www.rmefnky.org/kyelkherd.HTML

From the link

By July 2000, Kentucky had the largest free ranging, wild elk herd east of Montana.

 

[22-rimfire]

Yeah, there are Elk in KY. There is a growing herd in TN too. TN is considering a limited hunting season for elk.

Short of charging bears, if care is taken for proper shot placement, is there really anything one couldn't hunt ethically with a .243 in the lower 48?

Back to your original post.... I would not hunt elk, moose, or black bear with a 243 no matter what bullet was chosen. I don't care if some Indian tribe uses 22LR for Polar Bears. Yes, you could kill every one of them with a 243, but it would not be with absolute certainity with a traditional hit and hence would not be ethical in my opinion. I feel the 243 is marginal for whitetail deer except of course small deer such as you see in the Hill Country of Texas. Don't even ask about my opinion using the .223 for deer. Some do it, especially in Texas.

I would consider it an ethical round for whitetail deer and antelope and smaller game animals in North America.

The 243 win is a very flexible caliber. It is a little large for small varmints such as wood chucks and does a real number on Coyotes. My first deer rifle was a 243. It is why I don't recommend them for that purpose. Go slightly larger for a better "all around" caliber for North American game animals short of charging grizzly bears.

 

[Ky Larry]

Ethics is a personal matter. If you can legally use a caliber and feel secure in your ablities, then Yes, you can use the .243 to hunt elk and larger species. Personally,I would prefer a .30-06. The bullet selection, from 110gr to 220gr, would seem to be a better all-around choice. YMMV.

 

[saturno_v]

Ethics is a personal matter. If you can legally use a caliber and feel secure in your ablities, then Yes, you can use the .243 to hunt elk and larger species. Personally,I would prefer a .30-06. The bullet selection, from 110gr to 220gr, would seem to be a better all-around choice. YMMV.

In theory with a 30-06 you can go up to 250 gr, as stated by many reloading data...in practice, at the moment, I only know of the 240 gr. Woodleigh bullets which offer amazing penetration capabilities in a 30-06 package.

 

[diggler1833]

Throw an 85gr Barnes TSX in it and all it takes from there is being able to place your shot.

 

[22-rimfire]

Generally if a caliber is allowable by the state for that game, it is considered an ethical caliber choice.

 

[Runningman]

.243 as a "do it all" caliber?

Owned a 243 for many years and have killed varmints thru Black tail deer with it. While I think it an decent versatile round within its limits. I just don't see it as a do it all caliber even in the lower 48. Especially if Bear or Elk are on the menu and even more so if they are Roosevelt Elk. I just think there are many better choices if you are going through the trouble and spending the money to go after larger game animals.

 

[wrs840]

I'm no expert, but my plans to buy a .243 were ended a while back by a friend who opined that ammo availability may be limited if the SHTF, so it may be smarter to go with NATO calibers and own a .223 for varmints (I do) and go with a .308 for bigger stuff..."

Food for thought.

Les

 

[Redneck with a 40]

.243 is actually the legal minimum in Colorado for Elk, but its certainly not ideal. Inside of 300 yards, the .308 will drop any animal that resides in Colorado and it does it with tolerable recoil.

 

[06]

My buddies wife had rotator cuff surgery and traded her 270 for a 243. She has dropped many deer with it since. I saw pics of poachers dropping bull elephants with guess what----M-16s. I am an avid fan of 30-06s(who would have ever guessed that) and have quite a few. I also have a 220 Swift but it is a "safe queen". I deer hunt with '06s and have for nearly 30 yrs. I use 150 grain original "silver tips" and am very happy with their performance. People seem to forget that the Japaneese used a "25" caliber in their military for generations. There is nothing wrong with a 243 but I just prefer something with a bit more punch. I would not be concerned about using an '06 on any creature on earth. Remember, old 30-30s used to be the king of center fires and dropped everything on the continent. You don't have to have a cannon to stop a heart, sever arteries/spines, or explode a brain. A buddy from Charleston, SC used to hunt deer with a 22 LR. Another hunted black bear in the NC mountains with a single shot 22 LR.
Hunt with what you want as most anything will kill an animal if the round is properly placed. Bad placement will get you killed whether shooting man or beast. Remember last year when a hunter put six 44 Magnums into a bear and the bear ran off. Shot placement shot placement is the key--lol, plus a few extra grains of weight and a bit more velocity always helps. wc

 

[NCsmitty]

Although the 243 Win is a great dual purpose round, I would feel more confident using something like the 7-08 Rem for larger game.
Same basic case but more appropriate bullet weight and sectional density coupled with an outstanding BC will provide a much better "do it all" caliber.


NCsmitty

 

[Floppy_D]

I wish Shawnee was still here, he lived for these threads.

 

[woof]

Ethics are relative. Is a .243 ethical for elk? IMO no way. Some will say yes. They might say they are better shooter. I might say I have better ethics. It's all opinion. But if you hunt elk with a .30-06 or .308, and you do it within reasonable ranges at which you are truly competent (another matter of opinion) then few people would call that unethical.

By the way I think there is more unethical behavior in terms of poor shots taken at too long a range than in the caliber used. Most hunters are probably over-gunned.

PS where is Shawnee?

 

[Big_E]

.30-06 is my choice. .260 Remington is probably one of the best rounds IMO. Except I don't think I would use it against moose.

 

[benzy2]

I'm no expert, but my plans to buy a .243 were ended a while back by a friend who opined that ammo availability may be limited if the SHTF, so it may be smarter to go with NATO calibers and own a .223 for varmints (I do) and go with a .308 for bigger stuff...

Isn't the .243 a necked down .308? A good set of dies will form any of that ever so common (yet currently unavailable) .308 down to the .243. If it is SHTF and you are counting on factory ammo good luck.

 

[wrs840]

You make a good point.

Les

 

[Gunther]

Good for Deer, Antelope (both with the correctly constructed bullets) and varmints. Anything bigger get a bigger gun, you owe it to the animal. If SHTF/Hunting double duty go 308/06