Thread: Why the 243 is ideal for the elderly

Now let get one thing straight, I am deliberately trying to start an arguement here

The 22 250 is know as a barrel burner, but not much is said of the 243.
The 243 is an over bore cartridge that has a barrel life ,maybe 1500-2000 rds, same as the 22 250.
People who buy a 243 usually expect it to last forever, it won't.
The 243 , in my opinion, should have been strangled at birth, it should have never taken off.
The only reason it did was because Remington never pushed the 6mm enough.

It's fucken hopeless, A 100 gr bullet in the real world barely makes 2800.
To make it accurate out to 500yrds plus,you have rebarrel.
To make it accurate at 200 you have to use lighter bullets.
It doesn't do anything a decent Varmint rifle won't do and it doesn't do anything a decent Rifle will do.


I will add other things as I think about them.

They have great 'wounding' ability on deer and pig

There was a chap over at the other place shooting Tahr with one at quite long ranges, and didn't Gimp do ok with one too?

Originally Posted by Tahr

There was a chap over at the other place shooting Tahr with one at quite long ranges, and didn't Gimp do ok with one too?

Gimp shot goats at range with the 243, not so sure about Tahr.

Originally Posted by jakewire

Now let get one thing straight, I am deliberately trying to start an arguement here

The 22 250 is know as a barrel burner, but not much is said of the 243.
The 243 is an over bore cartridge that has a barrel life ,maybe 1500-2000 rds, same as the 22 250.
People who buy a 243 usually expect it to last forever, it won't.
The 243 , in my opinion, should have been strangled at birth, it should have never taken off.
The only reason it did was because Remington never pushed the 6mm enough.

It's fucken hopeless, A 100 gr bullet in the real world barely makes 2800.
To make it accurate out to 500yrds plus,you have rebarrel.
To make it accurate at 200 you have to use lighter bullets.
It doesn't do anything a decent Varmint rifle won't do and it doesn't do anything a decent Rifle will do.


I will add other things as I think about them.

my 18" still gets 2900 fps with a 105gr an shoots sub moa to 1000m, was 3085fps when was 24"

i wont rebarrel 243 again but its good as any other in my opinion, i have lost few pigs with it but they where to big for it an shot placement wasnt that flash.


you have bad run?

Originally Posted by tui_man2

i wont rebarrel 243 again but its good as any other in my opinion, i have lost few pigs with it but they where to big for it an shot placement wasnt that flash.


you have bad run?

Well there you go, and you spook.
243 sucks.

Originally Posted by jakewire

Now let get one thing straight, I am deliberately trying to start an arguement here

The 22 250 is know as a barrel burner, but not much is said of the 243.
The 243 is an over bore cartridge that has a barrel life ,maybe 1500-2000 rds, same as the 22 250.
People who buy a 243 usually expect it to last forever, it won't.
The 243 , in my opinion, should have been strangled at birth, it should have never taken off.
The only reason it did was because Remington never pushed the 6mm enough.

It's fucken hopeless, A 100 gr bullet in the real world barely makes 2800.
To make it accurate out to 500yrds plus,you have rebarrel.
To make it accurate at 200 you have to use lighter bullets.
It doesn't do anything a decent Varmint rifle won't do and it doesn't do anything a decent Rifle will do.


I will add other things as I think about them.

I concur, after using one for years & being wiser now, apparently, you are right on the money

Plenty of deer, pig and goats have been shot "at" with 243

Originally Posted by Spook

Plenty of deer, pig and goats have been shot "at" with 243

I've lost count of how many animals I've taken with a .243over the last 30 years, including all the animals listed above that Spook has shot "At"

IMO the .243 is superbly accurate in the hands of a competent marksman and is well suited to hunting conditions in New Zealand.

I rate it highly.

Cheers
Pete

What do the letters in EBERG stand for? Something-a-rather about been a Rat Gun

I got all excited when I saw the title of this thread! 243 its almost as bad as 7mm08 (ducking for cover)

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

I got all excited when I saw the title of this thread! 243 its almost as bad as 7mm08 (ducking for cover)

Just to change the subject slightly I had a 7mm08 when they started coming into the country it lasted about 3 weeks and I traded it in on another 270 they are S--T imo

Originally Posted by P38

I've lost count of how many animals I've taken with a .243over the last 30 years, including all the animals listed above that Spook has shot "At"

IMO the .243 is superbly accurate in the hands of a competent marksman and is well suited to hunting conditions in New Zealand.

I once read about the 243 that "...only gunwriters have trouble killing deer with a 243..."

I had a original Sako Forester 243. Superbly accurate with a few bullets, dropped most of my deer on the spot.
It was however a little sensitive to windcalls for the very long shots and 6mm bullets are 2-3x the price of 6,5mm here.

243 is a very good cartridge, but if you're going to kill deer and want little recoil you might as well get a 6,5 and shoot 120-130gr bullets. On the average a much better bloodtrail when the deer walks.

Originally Posted by Norway

I once read about the 243 that "...only gunwriters have trouble killing deer with a 243..."

That about sums up most of the people you meet on NZ hunting forums...

As the locals say, 'too much hui, not enough doo-ey'

Originally Posted by P38

I've lost count of how many animals I've taken with a .243over the last 30 years, including all the animals listed above that Spook has shot "At"

IMO the .243 is superbly accurate in the hands of a competent marksman

HAHAHAHAHAHA

It may say nzhuntingandshooting but its all fishnhunt underneath

Chris