ORIGINAL: skeeter170
I know I will get slammed for this but my son and another kid on our lease uses a .243. I wish I would have went the 7mm-08 route now. Reason being both deer that these two shot last year had no blood trail and yes both shots were put where they needed to be. Both deer one a 9 point 130 class and the other a good doe both ran about fifty yards with no blood trail. My son shoots the remington core lok 90 grain. Not to say the .243 is not a good gun but looking back I wish I would have gotten the 7mm-08. Again just my opinion after what I have seen from both of these deer.
I'm curious... How much do deer weigh in your area? Did they get complete penetration? If not, you might want to switch to the 100 gr. core lokt or one of the more sturdily built premium rounds in the lighter weight load. If you did get complete penetration, do you think that the extra 41/1000ths of an inch diameter of the 7mm would leave a significantly bigger blood trail?
If it were me, I'd get him the .243. That's what I got for my son when he turned 12, and I liked his so much, I got one for myself. At that age and size, the difference between the 8.8 ft lbs of recoil from the .243, and 12.6 ft lbs of recoil from the 7mm-08 is likely to be significant. I sighted my 7 Mag in a couple weeks ago, using the Remington Managed Recoil ammo, which closely duplicates the 7mm-08 ballistics, and the difference in recoil between the .243 and the 7mm is quite noticeable. I started shooting a .30-06 when I was too young and too small for it, and developed a flinch that I still struggle with 35 years later. But, I have no problem at all with the .243, and, based on my limited experience, it has dropped deer just as quickly as my '06 did.