Big Game Hunting Moose, elk, mulies, caribou, bear, goats, and sheep are all covered here.

.243 Win perfect for elk

Old 06-28-2014, 06:18 AM
  #121  
Giant Nontypical
 
Gm54-120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,605
Default

Yep. ive got no less than 3 modern inlines that are easily capable of a 200 yard shot at an elk. One or two can easily exceed 3500fpe at the muzzle with a 300gr bullet and keep near MOA. At 200 yards that would leave roughly 1800fpe depending on the bullet's BC.
Gm54-120 is offline  
Old 06-28-2014, 06:25 AM
  #122  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WY
Posts: 2,056
Default

Originally Posted by Muley Hunter
Yes, it is the hunter that makes the difference. That's why I wouldn't recommend a cartridge that takes good marksmanship. If someone has to ask if a .243 is enough for elk. I have little faith in their shooting ability, or their hunting skills.

I don't have a problem with someone using a .243 for elk if they've never lost an elk to one. I think some hunters who claim to use a .243 for everything have lost game, but never talk about it.

Experienced hunters who have shooting skills don't ask questions on hunting forums. They answer them.
So just what do you advocate here? If you lose game with a .243 you should stop using it? But what if you lose game with something bigger? Should you stop using it as well? Should you be required to get something bigger? I would contend that if you can't perform with whatever you're carrying - you just can't perform. Fix that first.

In my 38 years hunting big game, I've only lost two animals. I hit a doe at the elbow joint my very first hunting season with a .243. I lost the cow elk, but recovered the bloody arrow that went through her 17 years ago. There are probably almost three dozen pronghorns, whitetails, mulies, elk (including three I shot with a .243), and a couple of caribou I've brought home otherwise. And yes, there are years that I came home empty or wasn't able to hunt at all.

Someone else said it already. You have to be willing to pass on questionable shots. That point is absolutely fundamental. No rifle will make up for a shot that you shouldn't have taken in the first place. Period.
homers brother is offline  
Old 06-28-2014, 06:39 AM
  #123  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,143
Default

Originally Posted by homers brother
No rifle will make up for a shot that you shouldn't have taken in the first place. Period.
Smartest sentence in the entire thread!! Some people think because it doesn't work for them it doesn't work for anyone.
jerry d is offline  
Old 06-28-2014, 08:01 AM
  #124  
Giant Nontypical
 
Muley Hunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
Default

Originally Posted by homers brother
So just what do you advocate here? If you lose game with a .243 you should stop using it? But what if you lose game with something bigger? Should you stop using it as well? Should you be required to get something bigger? I would contend that if you can't perform with whatever you're carrying - you just can't perform. Fix that first.

In my 38 years hunting big game, I've only lost two animals. I hit a doe at the elbow joint my very first hunting season with a .243. I lost the cow elk, but recovered the bloody arrow that went through her 17 years ago. There are probably almost three dozen pronghorns, whitetails, mulies, elk (including three I shot with a .243), and a couple of caribou I've brought home otherwise. And yes, there are years that I came home empty or wasn't able to hunt at all.

Someone else said it already. You have to be willing to pass on questionable shots. That point is absolutely fundamental. No rifle will make up for a shot that you shouldn't have taken in the first place. Period.
I think i've expressed my opinion pretty well in this thread. I see no need to repeat it for you. Nobody asked you to agree with it. That's why it's my opinion.

It's what we do on forums. We express our opinions. I base my opinion on what i've observed over the years. Which by the way are considerably more than yours.
Muley Hunter is offline  
Old 06-28-2014, 08:03 AM
  #125  
Giant Nontypical
 
Muley Hunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
Default

Originally Posted by jerry d
Smartest sentence in the entire thread!! Some people think because it doesn't work for them it doesn't work for anyone.
Some think because it works for someone else, it will work for them. Lots of ways to look at it.
Muley Hunter is offline  
Old 06-28-2014, 08:20 AM
  #126  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,230
Default

I've either taken or been in on the taking of around 100 elk. Of that number, I've seen 2 that were shot with a 243. Both of those elk, rag horn bulls, ended up on the game pole. But, and this is a big but, neither of the bulls were really large elk and both were perfectly shot while standing broadside in the open by people that knew how to shoot and could put the bullets where they needed to be placed. Additionally, the bullets used were Noslers so they were able to hold together and penetrate. That last part is very important because any bullet that doesn't make it to the vitals results in a wounded elk and it doesn't matter what the caliber in question is. As always, where the hole is placed is more important that how big the hole is. A gut shot with a 375 H&H is not as effective as a lung shot with a 243. Never has been and never will be.

So, will a 243 kill an elk. Yes it will as my experience listed above proves. But is it a good choice for elk? In my opinion, no. There is a world of difference between a yearling elk and a big bull in terms of both size and toughness. Additionally, not every shooting situation on elk will be on an animal standing still and broadside. Quartering to or away and moving shots are a completely different ball game so there are better cartridges readily available.

If all I had was a 243, I'd probably hunt elk with it. But I would use quality bullets and I would be very, very careful as to the shot I'd take with it and I'd get a bigger rifle as soon as I could afford it! As always, feel free to disagree.

Last edited by flags; 06-28-2014 at 02:18 PM.
flags is offline  
Old 06-28-2014, 10:03 AM
  #127  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Allegan, MI
Posts: 8,019
Default

Originally Posted by jerry d
LOL!!!!!!!!!!! How old are you?

Like I said ,if the post was inappropriate let the mods decided NOT you!!!!
Old enough, unlike yourself, that I can read and comprehend simple English in that rule and the Mods took your illegal post/link down after the Alert was hit, LOL!
Topgun 3006 is offline  
Old 06-28-2014, 10:25 AM
  #128  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Allegan, MI
Posts: 8,019
Default

Flags: "As always, where the hole is placed is more important that how big the home is."

As I stated before, I think that is an oversimplification if a person just makes that kind of a statement without an explanation such as yours. If it's just by itself, a newbie to the sport could take it to mean anything properly placed into the vitals will kill the animal and one member did mention use of a 22-250 on elk!!! A 22LR certainly will if you're talking about shooting a squirrel or rabbit, but not when you start upping the size of the game. Therefore, I think anyone making a statement like that really needs to qualify it and maybe include a reference to energy and size of the hole left at POI, etc. If we're talking about elk, a shot to the shoulder or vitals behind the shoulder with a .338 and a good bullet will certainly flatten a big bull quickly, but that will not happen with a .243 most of the time. It's doubtful that the .243 with the best bullet made will get through an elk's shoulder and even when put thorugh the vitals on a quartering away or broadside shot it's probably not going to have the same IMMEDIATE effect as the bigger calibers that are intended for big game. That's why, with so many newbies reading various hunting forums, that I cringe at a statement similar to yours without a followup like I just mentioned.

Last edited by Topgun 3006; 06-28-2014 at 06:34 PM.
Topgun 3006 is offline  
Old 06-28-2014, 12:55 PM
  #129  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,143
Default

Originally Posted by Topgun 3006
Old enough, unlike yourself, that I can read and comprehend simple English in that rule and the Mods took your illegal post/link down after the Alert was hit, LOL!
WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
jerry d is offline  
Old 06-28-2014, 12:58 PM
  #130  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Allegan, MI
Posts: 8,019
Default

Originally Posted by jerry d
WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
Yep, that post just confirmed what I said about your age question, LOL! AGAIN!!!
Topgun 3006 is offline  

Quick Reply: .243 Win perfect for elk


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.