.243 - Just Enough, Not Enough or Perfect

For most of the cartridges I shoot, cup and core bullets do just fine, however, with the 243Win, I have seen a couple of spectacular wounds result from a cup and core. In both cases, the shot placement was questionable. However, it one, a curious deflection off the front shoulder scapula, I'm sure a heavier bullet would have gone through. Both deer ended up dead, but required second shots. The second horrid wound was also a deflection, but off the hip. That deer was finished off by another member of our group.

I think if I were shooting 243 now, it would be with a premium bullet of 100gr or more.

Properly placed, I've seen the 243 drop deer quickly and effectively.
 
1899 said:
I’ve had both. My son used a 7-08 for his first mule deer. The pictures I posted are of his first whitetail. The 7-08 was loaded with 120gr Nosler Ballistic Tips. Both deer died very quickly from 1 well placed shot. I’m not convinced there is any practical difference between the two in the circumstances presented by the OP.

And, I should tell a story from years ago. Barnes used to sell 75gr X bullets in 6mm. My friend was a game ranger in Serbia and asked me to bring him a couple of boxes as he absolutely loved their performance on boar. He was given a box by a client and couldn’t buy any more. I took two boxes and he used them with great success. I’d be lying if I said how many he shot with those 100 bullets, but I can tell you he shot lots.

Good shooting, as always, is the key. Know where to shoot and have the skills to put your shot there from field positions. The rest of the conversation is for entertainment around the campfire - or internet!
Click to expand...
I built a 6mm Mach IV because of an article I read written by Ross Seyfried, just to use those bullets. Killed white tails and antelope like lightning. It was a hard combo on barrels though. - dan
 
1899 said:
Good shooting, as always, is the key. Know where to shoot and have the skills to put your shot there from field positions. The rest of the conversation is for entertainment around the campfire - or internet!
Click to expand...
Absolutely. To that end, those that are sensitive to recoil need a low recoil rifle in order to place their shot consistently. The issue seems to be that those that are sensitive to recoil can’t fathom that there are others that are NOT sensitive to recoil and can shoot just as good (sometimes better) with a heavy hitter as they can with their light recoil rifles.
 
Beeron said:
You misunderstand me,

Yes. Many people who shoot big guns are capable of shooting them better than some other people shoot smaller calibres. That’s a given.

Im saying the evidence is clear that anyone who shoots any gun will shoot smaller calibres better.

So your friend who shoots the big guns well will shoot smaller guns even better.

is it Universal. Might not be, nothing is.
But the data is very strong.

Maybe your friend shoots huge calibres well but couldn’t hit a barn door with a 243. But I doubt that’s the case
Click to expand...
This is hogwash.... I agree that those with a mental block regarding recoil will shoot a lighter recoiling rifle better, less fear = less bad habits = better technical form = cleaner more precise performance. However, you said those that shoot the .300 Mag cartridges WELL will shoot the .243 better, when in fact, if they shoot the heavier cartridge well, they do NOT have a mental block regarding recoil and will shoot all cartridges equally well, all else being equal. You don't see many snipers around the world scaling down and griping about recoil. Nor do the many shooters in distance disciplines using .300 mags of one sort or another. Once the recoil phobia has been conquered, it comes down to form and mechanics, recoil happens for the most part after the bullet is gone, therefore it's effects on POI are largely between the ears.

I know this sounds crazy to anyone fearful of recoil, or, shall we say, "recoil shy," but to those who are ambivalent to the "push" or actual enjoy the "thump," it is clearly the case.

Not looking for.an argument, just stating an opinion, that also has lots of data in the shooting disciplines to back it up.
 
I think many people judge whether they shoot 'well' for groups from a bench or similar, which is a bad position to take and judge recoil, especially for a beginner.

Standing my 375 Ruger wasn't any more difficult to shoot than my 30-06. Recoil is math. Absorbing recoil is just practice.
 
hoytcanon said:
This is hogwash.... I agree that those with a mental block regarding recoil will shoot a lighter recoiling rifle better, less fear = less bad habits = better technical form = cleaner more precise performance. However, you said those that shoot the .300 Mag cartridges WELL will shoot the .243 better, when in fact, if they shoot the heavier cartridge well, they do NOT have a mental block regarding recoil and will shoot all cartridges equally well, all else being equal. You don't see many snipers around the world scaling down and griping about recoil. Nor do the many shooters in distance disciplines using .300 mags of one sort or another. Once the recoil phobia has been conquered, it comes down to form and mechanics, recoil happens for the most part after the bullet is gone, therefore it's effects on POI are largely between the ears.

I know this sounds crazy to anyone fearful of recoil, or, shall we say, "recoil shy," but to those who are ambivalent to the "push" or actual enjoy the "thump," it is clearly the case.

Not looking for.an argument, just stating an opinion, that also has lots of data in the shooting disciplines to back it up.
Click to expand...
Appreciate the opinion, especially since it as identified as such. The issue is that you have identified an extremely small percentage of who would be considered professional/elite shooters as the example.
If a sniper griped about recoil, then he very simply wouldn’t be a sniper, nor even be given the opportunity. The same with any other shooting discipline.
To argue that any one can block recoil is futile. In order to do so, the ability to suppress a reflex, or to not have reflex at all needs to exist. That would be a very rare trait indeed. Hogwash perhaps.
For the audience that reads this forum, it is very likely that 9 in 10 would shoot better groups with a 243 than with a 300WM.

R.
 
A typical 338 Lapua sniper rifle will have ~30 ft-lbs of recoil and a big honking muzzle brake. Obviously recoil matters.
 
Ya
Licensed to kill said:
Yes, I understood you perfectly and my comments still stand. The reason I included the coyote example is to show that, he hit a coyote through the lungs at 300 yards off hand with his .375HH. How much better could that shot have been made with a smaller calibre?? Some people just are not recoil sensitive. Granted those type of shooters are in the minority.
Click to expand...
Ya, nevermind.
 
hoytcanon said:
This is hogwash.... I agree that those with a mental block regarding recoil will shoot a lighter recoiling rifle better, less fear = less bad habits = better technical form = cleaner more precise performance. However, you said those that shoot the .300 Mag cartridges WELL will shoot the .243 better, when in fact, if they shoot the heavier cartridge well, they do NOT have a mental block regarding recoil and will shoot all cartridges equally well, all else being equal. You don't see many snipers around the world scaling down and griping about recoil. Nor do the many shooters in distance disciplines using .300 mags of one sort or another. Once the recoil phobia has been conquered, it comes down to form and mechanics, recoil happens for the most part after the bullet is gone, therefore it's effects on POI are largely between the ears.

I know this sounds crazy to anyone fearful of recoil, or, shall we say, "recoil shy," but to those who are ambivalent to the "push" or actual enjoy the "thump," it is clearly the case.

Not looking for.an argument, just stating an opinion, that also has lots of data in the shooting disciplines to back it up.
Click to expand...
Its not hogwash.
Its science.

But nevermind. You do you.
 
Beeron said:
Haha.
Ya.
Or like gravity. Medicine, optometry, physics, cell phones, computers.
You know, hogwash.

You can have your own beliefs. More power to you. You cant have your own facts.
Click to expand...

Ok, Dr. Fauci... you have a great Christmas holiday with family and a prosperous and happy 2025.
 
The reason high power silhouette winners have gone to 6mm over the years is recoil. Even though the 6mm bullets leave a significant amount of rams standing. People shoot better with less recoil
 
porpoise said:
The reason high power silhouette winners have gone to 6mm over the years is recoil. Even though the 6mm bullets leave a significant amount of rams standing. People shoot better with less recoil
Click to expand...
You have to extend that thought to see the fallacy... if that were really the case, everyone would be shooting .22 Cals or a hybrid .17 cal or maybe .14 cal... no, recoil is not an accuracy issue, it is a mental issue, with some obvious exceptions. Nobody is shooting 6mm better than 6.5mm solely due to the recoil, just as nobody is shooting 6.5mm better than 7mm due to recoil, same for 7mm over .30 cal and so on and so on. Either recoil is an issue for you personally or it is not... but it is not solely responsible for your given accuracy... you are responsible for your accuracy, and your gear is responsible for your accuracy. Recoil is however, a convenient scapegoat... particularly for those afraid of it.
 
hoytcanon said:
You have to extend that thought to see the fallacy... if that were really the case, everyone would be shooting .22 Cals or a hybrid .17 cal or maybe .14 cal... no, recoil is not an accuracy issue, it is a mental issue, with some obvious exceptions. Nobody is shooting 6mm better than 6.5mm solely due to the recoil, just as nobody is shooting 6.5mm better than 7mm due to recoil, same for 7mm over .30 cal and so on and so on. Either recoil is an issue for you personally or it is not... but it is not solely responsible for your given accuracy... you are responsible for your accuracy, and your gear is responsible for your accuracy. Recoil is however, a convenient scapegoat... particularly for those afraid of it.
Click to expand...
That is, unfortunately, hogwash.
Recoil is the the physical effect the rifle imparts on the shooter. It is physics. Specifically Newtons Law.
Recoil is measurable, calculated, and predictable.
What is not, is the shooters reaction to that recoil, via reflex. Reflex is an involuntary reaction. That is to say, a flinch. An eye blink. Or many other involuntary reactions to the rifle and its physical recoil, plus muzzle blast.
Everyone flinches. Everyone. Unless they do posses reflex.
As mentioned, flinches can be controlled, tamed, dealt with, etc. What they can’t be, is eliminated.
So recoil is far from a mental issue. It’s the cause of an involuntary reaction to the imparted stimulus.
The logic is extremely flawed in your posts, and certainly reflects a lack of knowledge of how shooting disciplines and shooting itself actually works.
Again, most will find that they will indeed shoot a lower recoiling rifle better than a higher one due to the physics involved.
Recoil, and the reflex reaction it causes, is a problem for most that pull a trigger.

R.
 
In my experience, fierce muzzle blast is more of a flinch maker than recoil. A braked AR with that old hot Norc ammo comes to mind, or my lone 243. The more overbore the more ignorant in that regard, to me.

ETA: this would be for inexperienced shooters. I have no doubt that silhouette champs have a different experience...
 
Rman said:
That is, unfortunately, hogwash.
Recoil is the the physical effect the rifle imparts on the shooter. It is physics. Specifically Newtons Law.
Recoil is measurable, calculated, and predictable.
What is not, is the shooters reaction to that recoil, via reflex. Reflex is an involuntary reaction. That is to say, a flinch. An eye blink. Or many other involuntary reactions to the rifle and its physical recoil, plus muzzle blast.
Everyone flinches. Everyone. Unless they do posses reflex.
As mentioned, flinches can be controlled, tamed, dealt with, etc. What they can’t be, is eliminated.
So recoil is far from a mental issue. It’s the cause of an involuntary reaction to the imparted stimulus.
The logic is extremely flawed in your posts, and certainly reflects a lack of knowledge of how shooting disciplines and shooting itself actually works.
Again, most will find that they will indeed shoot a lower recoiling rifle better than a higher one due to the physics involved.
Recoil, and the reflex reaction it causes, is a problem for most that pull a trigger.

R.
Click to expand...
I agree with you... you apparently are not comprehending what I am posting. I am not saying that recoil does not exist, or that it imparts no effect on the shooter, I am also not saying that 9 out of 10 will not shoot better with a lighter recoiling rifle, because 9 out of 10 "DO" have a mental block when it comes to recoil. We have all seen some guy jolt and jerk at the range on a misfire, that is a purely "mental" issue... there was NO recoil. I am referring to the fact that some shooters (say 1 in 20 or 1 in 100, whatever) do not allow recoil to affect their accuracy, they can send the bullet without physically or mentally flinching or spazzing-out in some way and affecting the shot before the bullet leaves the barrel. My point is, that it is NOT true that ALL shooters immediately shoot better with a lighter recoil rifle. If 1 in 20 can learn to send the bullet without any accuracy degrading "flinch," then so can some of the others... it will never be conquered by all or even most, but there are those who can and do shoot a .338 as accurately as a .243.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom