younganddumb
Member
Can you tell me more such as the effective range of it
Thanks
Zach
Thanks
Zach
.243 winchester
- Thread starter younganddumb
- Start date
- Status
SimpleIsGood229
Member
It depends on the target. What are we talking about, here? Deer?
Ridgerunner665
Member
On deer...350 yards with proper bullet selection.
On varmints...a VERY long ways.
On varmints...a VERY long ways.
Shawnee
member
The .243 is a varmint/deer caliber - one of the all-time best, if not THE best.
It's effective range on those targets is beyond the effective range of 95% of the shooters in the country.
The longest one-shot kill with a .243 that I know of personally has been an antelope dropped at 530yds. according to a rangefinder.
The farthest I, personally, have hit a woodchuck with a .243 has been between 460 and 475yds. (Haven't tried any at longer ranges.) My best guess (and it's pretty close but I didn't have a rangefinder) at the farthest I've personally made a one-shot kill on a deer is (approx.) 435yds.
Some target shooters do well with the .243 Winchester (and 6mm Rem.) at 1000yds. - but that's paper instead of flesh and blood.
HTH
It's effective range on those targets is beyond the effective range of 95% of the shooters in the country.
The longest one-shot kill with a .243 that I know of personally has been an antelope dropped at 530yds. according to a rangefinder.
The farthest I, personally, have hit a woodchuck with a .243 has been between 460 and 475yds. (Haven't tried any at longer ranges.) My best guess (and it's pretty close but I didn't have a rangefinder) at the farthest I've personally made a one-shot kill on a deer is (approx.) 435yds.
Some target shooters do well with the .243 Winchester (and 6mm Rem.) at 1000yds. - but that's paper instead of flesh and blood.
HTH
gvnwst
Member
calling Shawnee!!!
now really, on varmits, with a accurate enough rifle, i have heard of hits at 600yd. deer, i wouldn't go past 300yd, and only that if you have good bullets.
now really, on varmits, with a accurate enough rifle, i have heard of hits at 600yd. deer, i wouldn't go past 300yd, and only that if you have good bullets.
younganddumb
Member
it is in a remington 700 sps it would be at deer so what is the best round weight wise 100 gr. or what
Shawnee
member
Hi gvnwst...
.243 Hornady 95gr. SST - rifle sighted to "zero" at 275yds.
100yds. 3" high
200yds. 3.2" high
300yds. 1.8" low
400yds. 13.1" low
.243 Hornady 95gr. SST - rifle sighted to "zero" at 275yds.
100yds. 3" high
200yds. 3.2" high
300yds. 1.8" low
400yds. 13.1" low
Ridgerunner665
Member
I like heavy bullets...90 to 100 grains.
Some are going to say 85 grains...and they are not wrong either.
Some are going to say 85 grains...and they are not wrong either.
younganddumb
Member
what would be a good scope recticle and power for this then maybe a MIL-DOT? IDK
gvnwst
Member
Shawnee, i was meaning I wouldn't go past 300yd, as i am not that skilled in hunting conditions. i am as big a fan of the .243 as you are
Ridgerunner665
Member
3x9 power...duplex or any of the game ranging reticles.
Nothing wrong with the Mil-Dot either...but some are a bit thick.
Nothing wrong with the Mil-Dot either...but some are a bit thick.
younganddumb
Member
Thanks Guys that be all
Zach
Zach
Shawnee
member
Hi gvnwst...
Not saying what range you should shoot at - that's your call. I just put the numbers up there for reference. After shooting a trainload of deer I, personally, feel no need to shoot them at more than 300yds. and, in fact, I try to keep the rifle shots under 250yds so I can go for head/neck shots with confidence.
Come to think of it - the last four deer I dropped cropping this Summer were with handguns and the farthest was about 165yds with a Contender 30/30.
Not saying what range you should shoot at - that's your call. I just put the numbers up there for reference. After shooting a trainload of deer I, personally, feel no need to shoot them at more than 300yds. and, in fact, I try to keep the rifle shots under 250yds so I can go for head/neck shots with confidence.
Come to think of it - the last four deer I dropped cropping this Summer were with handguns and the farthest was about 165yds with a Contender 30/30.
I saw a deer killed with a .243 loaded with Rem 100gr Core Lokt factory ammo. We checked the range with a Leopold laser range finder and it was 467 yrds. Personally, I would't take a shot at a deer over 150 yrds with any rifle/ammo combo. My eye sight ain't what it used to be. I'd take a potshot at a varmint at any range I could see it.
woof
Member
The .243 is such a magical round that many grizzlies are killed with it at over 1200 yds, and that's uphill!
younganddumb
Member
so its one of the best out there?
Sunray
Member
The effective range of a .243 with a 90 plus grain bullet(deer bullet) is about 300 yards. Shooting past there requires you to have intimate knowledge of your rifle and the cartridge's ballistics. Plus the load you're using.
Remington factory 100 grain Premier® Core-Lokt® Ultra ammo is not suitable for shots on deer sized game past 300. There's not enough energy left for a clean kill(you can get lucky, but it's not a good idea to bank on). That bullet only has 1120 ft-lbs left at 300. And with a 200 yard zero, drops 7.3" out at 300. Between 300 and 400 it drops 14.3". That'd be a clean miss, unless the wind blows the bullet onto the deer's leg. Then you have some tracking to do. Not tracking and wasting the deer is illegal in most places.
Remington factory 100 grain Premier® Core-Lokt® Ultra ammo is not suitable for shots on deer sized game past 300. There's not enough energy left for a clean kill(you can get lucky, but it's not a good idea to bank on). That bullet only has 1120 ft-lbs left at 300. And with a 200 yard zero, drops 7.3" out at 300. Between 300 and 400 it drops 14.3". That'd be a clean miss, unless the wind blows the bullet onto the deer's leg. Then you have some tracking to do. Not tracking and wasting the deer is illegal in most places.
Shawnee
member
"There's not enough energy left for a clean kill(you can get lucky, but it's not a good idea to bank on). That bullet only has 1120 ft-lbs left at 300"
Psst... Sunray... 1120ft/lbs. is more energy than a .44magnum pistol has at the muzzle... and I'm real sure a deer leaning against the muzzle of my .44 is in serious trouble.
Psst... Sunray... 1120ft/lbs. is more energy than a .44magnum pistol has at the muzzle... and I'm real sure a deer leaning against the muzzle of my .44 is in serious trouble.
woof
Member
As was said on THR a week or so ago - the .260 Rem is the .243 with all the suck out.
rangerruck
Member
now that's funny... albeit, if you handloaded , say some 105 or 110's, with say a 26 inch bbl, a 400 yd shot, after zeroing at 100yds, would come pretty fast, and easy. I would say with enough practice, 1000yd target shots could be taken.
a 600 yd shot on game, if you were really knowledgeable about your rifle, is doable. I am pretty fair with my remmy in 788 , and with my 6x24 mildot scope, I would take that shot.
a 600 yd shot on game, if you were really knowledgeable about your rifle, is doable. I am pretty fair with my remmy in 788 , and with my 6x24 mildot scope, I would take that shot.
rangerruck
Member
"... with all the suck out..." so funny!
IndianaBoy
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,551
The 243 is a great multipurpose cartridge. For deer, it isn't any better than 250 savage, 260, 270, 280, or the myriad of 30 caliber cartridges. Only experience can tell you the proper combination of trajectory, energy, sectional density and recoil.
My opinion of the 243 is that it is a little light for deer and lacking sectional density. I practice with my rifles so I make the decision to use a little more gun.
That being said, lots of people every year kill their deer with a 223. So of course there is some capability.
You will doubtless be well served by a 243. I prefer 8mm for hunting in heavy cover (iron sights) and 30-silly (I believe it is now known as) with a scope for open field hunting.
But you see... I am a mindless old fuddy duddy. (26). And I don't have girly shoulders.
My opinion of the 243 is that it is a little light for deer and lacking sectional density. I practice with my rifles so I make the decision to use a little more gun.
That being said, lots of people every year kill their deer with a 223. So of course there is some capability.
You will doubtless be well served by a 243. I prefer 8mm for hunting in heavy cover (iron sights) and 30-silly (I believe it is now known as) with a scope for open field hunting.
But you see... I am a mindless old fuddy duddy. (26). And I don't have girly shoulders.
IndianaBoy
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,551
Sorry shawnee I couldn't resist.
The 243 is like the 9mm. It is plenty good,,, especially with modern bullets. I carry a 9mm. So I am not always a 'bigger hammer' guy.
The 243 is like the 9mm. It is plenty good,,, especially with modern bullets. I carry a 9mm. So I am not always a 'bigger hammer' guy.
Shawnee
member
ROTFLMAO !!
- Status