Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 243 on Elk

With good bullets, a 24 gives as much penetration as most any other typical round.

The only question to answer is whether one thinks the terminal damage from the bullet will be enough to quickly kill the animal. From my experience, I answer yes.

There is always going to be the human factor in killing animals quickly and humanely with small pieces of metal (and 250 grains is still a relatively small bit of anything.) That said, can does not equate to will. It takes some human application to take a combination of things : cartridge, bullet, rifle; to will. The 243 requires more of the human factor IMO.

I've used both the 6mm and 7mm-08 to put a lot of caribou on the ground (and at least one moose each). Though both were unquestionably lethal, the 7 seemed to hold a noticeable edge in putting them there quicker.

Too little. I think that the the .243 is too little for big KS whitetails, but what do I know. A WSSM is akin to a .240WBY. An antelope/varmint deluxe.

It is hard for me to understand how any healthy adult could leave a good larger caliber rifle in the safe and take any .24 on an expensive elk hunt that had the chance for a lifetime bull.

Klik - guess it depends how fast you want to eat

I bet the Moose showed longer times to drop then the 'bou' but that said, seen alot of video footage of Moose taking 300 Mag hits, and looked like they had time to say 3 Hail Mary's before falling!

croldfort, thinking is cured by knowing. Just saying, any properly hit KS deer is not going to survive a 95 Ballistic tip, Barnes 80-85gr, or other decent bullet, thru vitals.

Re: 243 Win vs. WSSM -

85 Barnes at 3334 in a 243 Win (Barnes 2010 load data), vs. the author's WSSM above claiming 3500 on his elk shot at 132 yds (a std. 243 WIN would have killed that elk - DEAD).

The author mentions another elk at 272 yds w/80 at 3360. Here again a 243 Win and 80s...Barnes own data 2010 shows a load for 3467 fps. FASTER than the above WSSM load that killed the elk.

As I mentioned, with lighter bullets, the cases produce speeds more similar, than not.

Never was recommending the 243 on elk, but sharing it's effectiveness above and beyond what many who have either NOT used 24 bores on large game, or not used them with good bullets and shot placement.

Bad shot placement and/or the wrong bullet = wounded/unrecovered game regardless of headstamp.

I haven't killed enough moose with either to form an opinion there- and as you noted, they rarely just fall down anyway. But caribou have shown a significant difference in how quickly they go down.

I've become a big fan of the .243 - enough that I was willing to wait 2 1/2 years for the recent build I just got.

For me the biggest reason I like the .243 is - I enjoy shooting that caliber so I shoot more, which I suppose will make me a better shooter:)

I Like the 243 and have one myself. I do however consider it a deer cartridge and don't think it would be my first choice for larger game. I am sure it would kill an elk but it is sort of like using a 223 for deer. It will work fine most of the time but leaves a larger margin of error than I want to take since I have better alternatives.

65BR - elk are big and give me a great excuse to own and hunt with a bigger rifle! For goodness sake, don't tell my wife all I need is the little 6mm Remington we've had around the house since the 1970's! How in the heck am I going to justify the .30-06 and my other big rifles?

These discussions are fun, and so is shooting a small-bore like a 6mm, .243 or a .25-06 hunting rifle. I think that for elk, I personally prefer a little bigger rifle, but will readily concede that the small bores will work. Early last month I was carrying my .25-06 with bear and elk tags in pocket. Sadly, didn't get a chance to shoot either. Just yesterday my son and I were practicing with the 6mm Rem at the range, and I instantly remembered why it's such a favorite. So very easy to shoot it well.

Regards, Guy

The .243 was designed to be a combination varmint/deer cartridge, why any reasonable hunter would choose it for larger game is beyond me. My choice for elk is .338 Winchester Magnum with 275gr. handloads, a well placed shot has never failed to make a wapiti into elk steaks and a trophy on my wall. I have also used my .35 Whelen loaded with 225gr. Trophy Bonded Bearclaw bullets, it too is very effective on elk.

First choice? That depends on parameters for the selection. Can it reliably kill elk? yes. My 243AI has several elk on it.

Classic...

Read this again, lest you missed Klikitariks point..


If there is a advantage to using the .243 as your main elk or moose rifle over another, larger caliber, then lets hear it..

Recoil??

Well then a well placed shot with a .22 Hornet will flatten a moose and it will be dead before you get to it even if you are only 25' away from the animal when you take the shot..
Lets all go elk hunting with Hornets and get within bow range..
That'll will work won't it..

I agree with Nrut . Why use a .243 when a Hornet will do ! Everybody knows that the .243 Win. is overkill on Elk . You know , it's real easy to tell if a guy is a true sportsman by the questions they ask .

with the right bullet and shot placement it will kill an elk. would i use it ,hell no. i don't even like it for deer. i know a guy that has deer hunted for years with a 243 using 85grn hp bullets. he kills deer but he will never tell how many he's lost.

you guys that live in elk country and get to hunt them every year may do it,but i can't hunt them often. i wanta make sure he dies if i shoot him.

Everybody knows that the problem you run into with those TSX and TTSX bullets is "way over-penetration!" Their performance tends to embarass those who want to lob two pound cannon balls.

Jim

Thanks Klik - I figured a 'bou' was quicker about jumping into the pot and they'd drop about as fast as any well hit deer, despite their size.

Moose, well, they just have alot bigger 'Heart' ...

Re: deer vs. this vs. that...

Wiki shows a Whitetail or Mulie usually tops around 300lbs though a few large WT will go 375 or more, and one 511 lbs was killed in 1926 in MN. Caribou go to 460 lbs it says for bulls.

Elk - also found in KS per game regs - wiki shows average 700 lbs where as the Roosevelt elk in Alaska, etc. can top 1,300.

So Jordan, not sure which 'deer' Croldfort was referring to, WT/Mulie/even Elk, but none the less, if you take out vitals, everything around them dies as life stops was my point (varying size of a species not so relevant IMO).

Not meant to ridicule anyone here as outside a little ribbing we all occasionally do, I try respecting all, regardless of our different experiences and opinions. That said, I do believe actual results matter, and I strongly believe ALL deer of any size will die the same w/a good bullet thru vitals.

Thanks guys.

Losing animals rarely has anything to do with cartrige choice.

As for primary elk rifle? Where's the fun in that? I shoot a critter with a given rifle/load, and then try something else. It's no fun to keep shooting them with the same thing. On the down side, it's kinda exspensive sticking to this habit; but with many different species of game animals, each needing at least one animal to be killed with each of my rifles, the combinations are vast. Then you toss in load changes and other weapons, different bows that I own, handguns..., it's good to know I will never run out of new things to try.

Amen to that.

This thread reminds me of a native Alaskan I met a few hunting seasons ago. He was visiting friends and trying some whitetail hunting.

I asked him what he had along to hunt with and he told me ".223 Rem. I use it for everything but moose."

"what do you use for moose?" "Oh, we use big guns for moose. Marlin 30-30"

Spencer,

Agreed.

Cartridge choice has more to do w/emotion and confidence - IMO.

Killing - has more to do w/bullet choice and shot placement - IME.

Tzone - likely the indian was 'over-penetrating' w/223s on Moose - Or he had not tried 63 Tsx's....