243 bullet trajectory

[dylan201d]

Hey i own a remington 243 model 700 with a 3*9-40 scope. I use remington core lokt 100 grain. I have in sighted for 100 yards and i was wandering if somone could tell me what the bullet does at distances when shooting at deer. thxs again

[Wild_Bill_Hiccup]

Howdy, Dylan,

I'm assuming that you're firing Remington factory ammo at around 2,960 fps, and if so, the trajectory would be approximately as follows:

100 = x
200 = -2"
250 = -5.4"
300 = -10.4"

To be honest, I'd never sight my .243 Winchester to be 'dead on' at 100 yards. To make full use of this cartridge's flat trajectory, I'd sight it in to be dead on at more like 200 or 250 yards.

I'm not 100% sure about exactly what else you're asking... it seems more like a bullet performance query - as well, but if you could be more specific with any additional questions, I'd be happy to respond in kind. The .243 was my first centerfire rifle and I used that shiny little Weatherby Vanguard to kill a number of vermin, whitetail, mule deer, pronghorn and one elk....... years ago...

[Crockettnj]

You may find the following link useful to mess around and come up with your own answers on this one. Its pretty straightforward to use, except that you need to know some raw data, such as MV and ballistic coeffcient.

http://www.realguns.com/calc/exteriorballistics

if you need to look up the BC of your bullet, they should be online somwhere or you can use this to estimate it within 20% or so.

http://www.uslink.com/~tom1/calcbc/calcbc.htm#casts

Hope this helps

[Alan R McDaniel Jr]

Hey i own a remington 243 model 700 with a 3*9-40 scope. I use remington core lokt 100 grain. I have in sighted for 100 yards and i was wandering if somone could tell me what the bullet does at distances when shooting at deer. thxs again

The trajectory is as WBH told you (I have found most high powered centerfire trajectories to be very close to the zeroed at 25 yards, 1.5" - 2.5" high at a 100 yards and zeroed at 200 yards. The path of the projectile in o way depends on the target chosen be it paper of flesh.

The performance of Core Lokt bullets is - "Reliable". They will do the same thing on deer flesh as they will on elk, moose, or elephant flesh. They will just do more or less of it in varying degrees depending on range and velocity.

Personally, The honorable WBH's opinion and experience not withstanding, I would not use a 243 on deer beyond 100 yards if I was forced to use a 243 on deer at all. Many have used it with great success and I have been exposed to and have had to clean up after many an utter failure. Granted, most of these failures have been due to using the wrong bullets on the wrong animals or taking shots that were stretching the limits of the cartridge's capabilities.

I hope it serves you well. It probably will. At your first opportunity look into acquiring a 270 or a 30-06.

Alan

[ncboman]

.243s shoot flatter toward the west than toward east.

the bullet shoots so flat the earth's rotation comes into play.

[Alan R McDaniel Jr]

Now don't go bringing Scientific Facts into this discussion! I once knew a feller who shot a flat-shootin 243 for a while but he stopped cause he was afraid he'd miss one day and shoot himself in the back!

Alan

[Altjaeger]

:wink:Anyone can tell a good lie...it takes a Texan to make it a better lie!!!:biggrin:

[Alan R McDaniel Jr]

There's been so many lies told about the 243 that it's really hard to come up with new ones!

Alan

[Wild_Bill_Hiccup]

...The honorable WBH's opinion and experience not withstanding, I would not use a 243 on deer beyond 100 yards if I was forced to use a 243 on deer at all. Many have used it with great success and I have been exposed to and have had to clean up after many an utter failure. Granted, most of these failures have been due to using the wrong bullets on the wrong animals or taking shots that were stretching the limits of the cartridge's capabilities....
Alan

In fact, the primary reason that I killed but one elk with the .243 was that I experienced my first (and last) actual bullet failure upon killing that elk. The elk died quickly... it was on a dead run through open but brushy timber on the north side of Weird Tom Mountain - up in the Sapphires... approx 50 yards away... I smacked 2 shots directly behind the shoulder (less than 1 inch apart)... it ran about 25 yards and piled up. Upon gutting, it seemed very odd that there seemed to be no internal damage to any of the organs. After fully skinning the elk, it was obvious that those 100 grain Speer soft point boat-tails had actually exploded upon impact. If any part of the bullets actually hit the vitals, I could not find proof of it. Of course, I was all of 14, 15 or so... thusly I was not at the time any kind of expert on such things, but the utter lack of any serious internal damage really made an influence on me. Anyway... that very winter, the .243 was traded for a .300 Weatherby and not so long after, my first .338... my love affair with the medium bores had begun!

I still believe, however, that with the correct bullets and if used on target species that it was meant for (vermin, deer and pronghorns), the little .243 is just fine in the hands of somebody who can shoot. It is perhaps a better expert's weapon than a first-timer's weapon, in my opinion. Although I've not seen too many deer killed with the .243, except for my own handful, I've never seen a failure on deer. My longest shot with the little gun was about 300 yards and it was a 'bang-flop'... the heavy-bodied (corn-fed) 150"-class, 5x5 Minnesota whitetail never moved.

I do think that the light recoil of the .243 helped me to become a very accurate shooter at a very young age (I was pretty darn good by 12) but in my opinion, something like a 260, 7mm-08, 270 or the like perhaps makes a better weapon to cut your teeth on. That said, the little .243 Winchester worked for me... for 3 or 4 years anyway...

[Sabre]

I still believe, however, that with the correct bullets and if used on target species that it was meant for (vermin, deer and pronghorns), the little .243 is just fine in the hands of somebody who can shoot.

I bought my first .243 in 1985 and haven't been without one since. I've lost track of how many deer I've killed over the years with mine but it's been quite a few and it's never let me down from 20 yards to 400.

[Herne]

Well I personally hate the 243, but Sabre is dead right, and its got better with really good bullets for it like the TSX - at last.

I also don't think you have to shoot it better than any other calibre - I'm sure that many other calibres are misused because of the extra power. My hate is based on frangible US ammunition which made it a carcass smasher, and prone to poor penetration. Used with better bullets its a little winner. (But I still wouldn't want to own one - pure prejudice)

Truthfully Ii can say i've never seen any deer properly hit with one get away - but then I have hardly ever seen any deer properly hit with ANY calibre get away. And the 270 is obviously best. Its just so spiteful in the target.

As for zero. I'd suggest setting 1.5" high at 100. You'll then be on at 200 and need about 8" at 300. (Set 2" and have done)

If you use 1" at 100, you'll need about 6-8" at 200, and 13" at 300 which puts your holdover over the top of the deer and in fresh air.

Those who wish to be more exact can be so, and argue over the odd 1/2MOA and 1/2" of trajectory. But those figures will put you on target, give the normal range of bullets and the standard height of scope mount (Better to be approximately right than ...).

I prefer 1.5" at 100, because all you have to remember is 8" at 3 and you are still holding on the animal.

Thats not an apparent 8" BTW. That's from point A the point you want to hit, up 8 physical inches on the beast. So if you want to shoot high heart at 300, you are going to put the horizontal cross on or just below the lower edge of the saddle (backstraps?) - just a couple of inches under spine.

On at a hundred is if I might suggest it, not a great idea. It limits the performance of the gun, and 100 yards is not as far as most people think, so a lot of deer get their forelegs shot off with that zero.

[MOGC]

The .243 is only a crippler in the hands of hairy He-Men and gunwriters! Women and kids kill tons of big game yearly with little trouble using .243 rifles.

[GF.]

And I'll bet the ones who choose good bullets have less trouble than those who buy the cheap stuff...

I don't think cheap or highly frangible bullets are only a bad idea in the .243, by the way...I don't like the way they work in my 7-08, either....

[swamp]

good reading http://www.chuckhawks.com/243Win.htm

[ncboman]

One of the most pleasant shooting rifles I've ever enjoyed was a Win Model 70 in .243.

[Hi Ball]

Dylan, my wife shoots a .243 Winchester during deer season, using a 100 grain Nosler Partition bullet! The 100 grain bullet is far better suited for deer and penetrates deeper delivering more energy as well. I once shot through 9 inches of wood with a 100 grain partition bullet in back of the house. Also the .243 Winchester caliber is just as deadly on deer as a .270 caliber under 200 yards and that is a true fact. However, I would NOT be trying to shoot deer further than 200 yards using your .243 caliber rifle. A hunter can not take a TEXAS HEART shot with this caliber and expect the bullet to reach the vitals of the heart lungs!!!

Now that 100 grn Remington Core - Lokt bullet, that you shoot from your rifle at a velocity of 2900fps and is sighted dead on at 100 yards, will be 3.5 inches low at 200 yards and 13 inches low at 300 yards. Muzzle energy will be 1870-lbs, now at 100 yards it is 1555-lbs and 200 yards is 1290-lbs of kinetic energy, at 300 yards it will be 1060 - lbs of energy, which is plenty energy for coyotes but not for deer in my humble opinion. I hope this gives you the information you need Dylan!

[MOGC]

Most authorities have agreed for years that a reliable safe minimum amount of energy for consistent humane kills of deer size critters is 1,000 ft. lbs. at impact. Many recognize that number as being on the high side but stay with it as “safe is better than sorry.” The .243 with proper loads is easily a 300 yard cartridge on deer class game. The idea that the .243 is only suitable for sub 200 yard deer is laughable. I will agree that it is not a cartridge to slam into the rear hams and expect it to exit the chest under the neck. But who really needs or wants to take shots like that anyway? Even then something like a TSX makes the 6mm class cartridges penetrate deeply, though I still wouldn’t want to ruin my backstraps. Sub 100 or 200 yards… Oh boy, the stuff you read on the Internet… geezzz.

[Herne]

There is no such thing as ANY calibre suitable for slamming into the hams of anything. Even if penetration is good enough, the chances of a tumble off bone etc are such that it has to be in the class of one for the halfwitted.

I've never quite understood the so called lethality of a THs which has apparently killed deer stone dead - all due to the shock of a strike on the spinal cord.

Funny how it doesn't do that to a deer hit halfway along. Must be something to do with arseholes?

Its a crippling shot, and it does not IMO belong in the hunters repertoire.

[GF.]

Dylan – do yourself a favor and ignore the ‘kinetic energy’ numbers game… The .45/70 looks like a wimp on paper, but it’ll kill damn near anything you point it at. And for that matter, look at the ‘energy’ figures for compound bows. They’re pathetic – well under 100 pounds. But you put a good, sharp broadhead on ‘em and again, you can kill just about anything that walks.

You didn’t mention where you’re from, but for most of us, 100 yards is an unusually long shot, and 200 is bragging distance. Of course, the actual 200-yards usually gets converted on the Braggart Scale to something closer to a quarter mile, but you see my point – long shots are just not commonly necessary, so your rifle is plenty powerful enough for deer hunting if you use a reasonably good bullet and hit the deer in a useful spot.

Rule of thumb: especially for rifles of 7mm on down, the smart money is to get the heaviest bullet that is commonly loaded for that cartridge, so in your case, the 100-grainers. At least unless you’re shelling out big money for super-premium bullets, and even those have a shortcoming in a .243; most don’t expand very much. That ensures plenty of penetration, but you may not get a very big exit hole - and that’s what can make tracking a lot easier when the deer stays on its feet for 10-15 seconds and piles up 100+ yards away.

Anyway, you started off asking about trajectory…. For that round, take Herne’s advice and go with 100-grain bullets, then set it & forget it – 2” high at 100 and always put the crosshairs exactly where you want to hit. Don’t give it another thought unless the shot is so long that you should really be thinking twice about shooting in the first place. Especially when you’re starting out, it’s far better to blow a shot opportunity by getting caught trying to sneak closer than it is to blow a shot that you shouldn’t have taken.

[JustaNobody]

but for most of us, 100 yards is an unusually long shot, and 200 is bragging distance. Of course, the actual 200-yards usually gets converted on the Braggart Scale to something closer to a quarter mile

100 yards an unusually long shot? I"m just wondering where you hunt? Where I usually hunt, you can get close shots in the brush and woods very often......... usually under 50 yards........... but then you get an equal number of shots at much further range, with an average of more like 200 yards, I would say. But i hunt in the West mostly. on a recent antelope hunt in Wyoming, you could not get within 250 yards of anything..... belly crawl in cactus............ or whatever you tried....... between the six of us, the closest shot was rangefindered at 289 yards and furthest at 360. This has proven very typical of my hunting experiences in the more open areas of dakota, wyoming and montana.

One of the kids in my hunt party shoots a 243 and he's killed seven deer and two antelope that i know of........ no problems at all and 3 of those animals i witnessed the shooting/killing of........ about 225-250 yards on all 3 and one shot each. I think any bad rap the 243 gets is because of people using varmint bullets or just being pisspoor shooters. Just my opinion, but i can't imagine a 100 grain nolser partition put in the heart and lungs not killing things really dead, even at 400 yards.

[Alan R McDaniel Jr]

That is exactly the problem with a 243. Bullets. I've known people who literally stop at WalMart on the way to the lease and buy "Whatever they had" and then sight their rifle in to "Minute of Paper Plate" in the dark and go hunting with it the next day. I hear the "Boom -------- whop!" the next morning and it's not till then that I find out what they've done. No amount of cussing, yelling and threatened head banging can undo the stupidity of their actions. I tell them that if they are going to be stupid then be stupid with a bigger friggin gun with bigger friggin bullets. At least then MAYBE I will have some blood, rumen or fecal matter to aide trailing.

People buy a 243 because it's a good "Kid's gun". I've shot my son's M7 in 243 and I would feel real bad doing that to a little kid. I would rather have them shoot one of my 9# Springfield or 98 sporters. They'll kick but not like the "Devil Gun".

Now a 243 in good capable hands is a real killer. I loaded up a couple 100 rounds of 100 gr Sierras for #1 son when he was guiding and he killed many of his management does with them. I don't know that he lost any either. I have know lots of people who have lost deer shot with 243 bullets of the wrong type or shooting the wrong deer in the wrong place with the wrong bullet.

I have killed several truckloads of deer with my 222 but I don't try to make it do what a 150 gr Sierra can do from 30-06 at 200 yards or what a 180 gr Sierra can do from a 308 Morma Mag at 350 yards. I only ask it to do what it can do with a 55 gr bullet at <100 yards form a solid rest on a standing deer with an absolutely positive neck shot (does and spikes only)

Are there better rifles to use for deer than a 222. Of course there are, and there's better rifles to use for deer than a 243 too.

Alan

[MOGC]

That is exactly the problem with a 243. Bullets. I've known people who literally stop at WalMart on the way to the lease and buy "Whatever they had" and then sight their rifle in to "Minute of Paper Plate" in the dark and go hunting with it the next day. I hear the "Boom -------- whop!" the next morning and it's not till then that I find out what they've done. No amount of cussing, yelling and threatened head banging can undo the stupidity of their actions...

Alan

Alan,

Truthfully people like that are going to have a problem with any cartridge they hunt with. It ain't the "arrow", it's the "Indian"!

[Alan R McDaniel Jr]

You are right. I quit trying to educate the dumbasses of the world a long time ago. Now I just run damage control. A bigger gun with a bigger bullet makes a bigger hole (I'm using language they can understand) and spills more insides to the outside and makes it easier for me to find their deer and keeps them from going off and wounding some more while they are waiting for the one they didn't "miss". I've been fighting this battle a long time and there's no end to it in sight without undue family Drama. Little by little they are going to larger more powerful rounds and maybe by the time I die ........................ oh well.

Alan

[Herne]

But, and this is the problem, start getting long with these lower powered cartridges and there are 2 factors to be considered.

The first is wind - its one of the few areas where the bigger heavier bullet does actually score. Simply because judging wind is so difficult, assuming its consistent.

The other is an exit - though that is solved on the medium sized deer with the monolithic solid. Its not enough just to kill it, you do actually have to find it, though I accept that for some reason most long shot animals hit right seem to go down fairly quickly.

So while the 243 will do it at long range, its suitability is questionable, when there are other much better calibres about - depending too on whats being shot at.

Personally if someone gave me a 243 and said go shoot a big red stag, I wouldn't feel undergunned, but i'd far prefer to take a 270.

Mind you a 243 round in the right place is worth a hundred bigger in the wrong.

[southtexas]

I quit trying to educate the dumbasses of the world a long time ago.
Alan

But, Alan, I thoght you were and educator by profession?? How can you avoid the DA's? :-)

[kenjs1]

Altjaeger, this might help -especially if you have ever owned a 270Win. My first rifle was a 6mm Rem. My second was a 270 Win. Reason for this is simplicity. The trajectory of a 100 grain 6mm is all but identical to a 130 grain 270 out to 300 yards. Since the 6mm is just a touch faster than a 243 I would be ok assuming a 90 grain 243 would have what I would call, the "same" out to 250+. I use both my rifles with equal confidence as I have only ever needed to shoot one deer over 200 yards. Oh, and that was with the 6mm.

[Altjaeger]

Altjaeger, this might help -especially if you have ever owned a 270Win. My first rifle was a 6mm Rem. My second was a 270 Win. Reason for this is simplicity. The trajectory of a 100 grain 6mm is all but identical to a 130 grain 270 out to 300 yards. Since the 6mm is just a touch faster than a 243 I would be ok assuming a 90 grain 243 would have what I would call, the "same" out to 250+. I use both my rifles with equal confidence as I have only ever needed to shoot one deer over 200 yards. Oh, and that was with the 6mm.

Even a blind hog finds an acorn once in a while. :biggrin:

In many cases i have no doubt the .243 will kill just fine. It has been proved thousands of times. I had a great little Savage 99 bulit in 1921 in .250-3000 Savage. Both small Texas whitetails I shot with it dies quickly and close, but I was never confident it would do so consistently. It is close in performance to the .243 with its 100 grain core-lokt. My son has it now and I may trade him back for it, but I doubt it will be used much or any fior deer hunting if I do.

I wish I had the same rifle in either a .303 Savage or .300 Savage.

[Altjaeger]

Altjaeger, this might help -especially if you have ever owned a 270Win. My first rifle was a 6mm Rem. My second was a 270 Win. Reason for this is simplicity. The trajectory of a 100 grain 6mm is all but identical to a 130 grain 270 out to 300 yards. Since the 6mm is just a touch faster than a 243 I would be ok assuming a 90 grain 243 would have what I would call, the "same" out to 250+. I use both my rifles with equal confidence as I have only ever needed to shoot one deer over 200 yards. Oh, and that was with the 6mm.

Even a blind hog finds an acorn once in a while. :biggrin:

In many cases I have no doubt the .243 will kill just fine. It has been proved thousands of times.

I had a great little Savage 99 built in 1921 in .250-3000 Savage. Both small Texas whitetails shot with it died quickly and near. Close in performance to the .243 with its 100 grain core-lokt I was never confident it would do so consistently. My son has it now and I may trade him back for it, but doubt it will be used much or any for deer hunting if I do.

I wish I had the same rifle in either a .303 Savage or .300 Savage.

[Bushman]

Alt, good luck finding .303 Savage ammo. I haven't seen it on the shelf in years and there are quite a few .303 M99's up here on the used racks because of that. A .300 Savage not so much as ammo for that is at least available. There is a M99F in the safe in .300 Savage that has never seen a deer season outside of a trial run with my son who has decided that he doesn't like deer hunting. Too many guns and too short a season. That .250-3000 in a M99 is a rare bird up here and plenty of guys would likely trade you for a .300 Savage and for sure a .303 Savage. The only .243 that ever tempted me was a Winchester M88 carbine in the collector room of one of the big sport shops. Having had a 6mm Remington earlier, I just couldn't see the need.

[Alan R McDaniel Jr]

But, Alan, I thoght you were and educator by profession?? How can you avoid the DA's? :-)

There are dunbasses and there are dumbasses in training. I concentrate my efforts on the DAITs and run damage control on the rest.

Alan

[Sabre]

The first is wind - its one of the few areas where the bigger heavier bullet does actually score. Simply because judging wind is so difficult, assuming its consistent. Bigger and heavier has nothing to do with it. Ballistic coefficient and velocity do. A .30 caliber 180 grain round nose drifts considerably more in a wind than a .24 caliber 100 grain spitzer. Since most pointed hunting bullets between .24 and .30 caliber have BC's in the .300-.400 range and can be launched at similar velocity, it's a wash. In other words, a 100 grain 6mm and a 150 grain .270 bullet with BC's of .400 will have vitually identical wind drift figures so long as both are launched at the same velocity.


The other is an exit - though that is solved on the medium sized deer with the monolithic solid. Its not enough just to kill it, you do actually have to find it, though I accept that for some reason most long shot animals hit right seem to go down fairly quickly. Technically bullets of equal construction, {TSX vs TSX or Partition vs Partition etc.} velocity and sectional density should penetrate equally. Since the SD's of a 100 grain 6mm and a 130 grain .270 bullet are virtually equal, penetration should be the same given equal velocity { and they are very close} and bullet construction.

[swamp]

i think the 243 is a great cartridge especially for long range coyotes and for deer say up to 300 yds... Elk no way...

130 gr .277 and 100 gr .243 have a sectional density of .242 and 180 gr .308 bullet has a SD of .271

http://www.beartoothbullets.com/rescources/calculators/php/density.htm

[dave-t.]

Up in the wide open farm country, folks seem to like the 80-85grn bullets for the 6mm's. Shots can be long, and trajectory is a big deal in that part of the world. Blood trails don't always mean much when you can watch the deer for 300+yds after the shot, and the bedding/security cover is small and well defined. I have seen those smaller 80-85 grn bullets drop the heck out of fairly big deer, but I consider that combo in the same league as using the fast .22 centerfires, they are killers, but you are living on the edge regarding blood trails, shot angles and penetration.

For the 2 yrs that I owned a .243, it was fed 100grn bullets, and my buddy who borrowed and then bought it from me killed every deer he shot with it.

[DUGABOY1]

Hey i own a remington 243 model 700 with a 3*9-40 scope. I use remington core lokt 100 grain. I have in sighted for 100 yards and i was wandering if somone could tell me what the bullet does at distances when shooting at deer. thxs again

I realize I'm very late in posting on this thread, but I just re-regestered for the new website last week after 7 or 8 yrs not visiting here!

The 243 Win is one of my all time favorite cartridges, and have been hunting with that cartridge long before it was a factory round. It was first called the "240 Page Pooper" invented by Warren Page.

My favorite rifle chambered for 243 Win is a 1961 MCA Mannlicher Shoenauer rifle, with both factory iron sights, and a 3-9X40mm Lupe scope. I zero my rifle exactly 2" high at 100 yds, with a 100 gr bullet, at around 2900-3000 fps in my handloads. 2" high at 100 yds give a trejectory of +3/4" at 50 yds, +2" at 100 yds, +2 1/4" at 150 yds, + 1 3/4" at 200 yds, - 1/2" at 250 yds-4" at 300 yds, and -9 3/4" at 350 yds . Set up this way you can hold dead on the high center of muledeers chest from muzzle to 350 yds. That make this rifle a tack driver the with a good rest dead on is a given!