Pavomesa

What you say is true Rem...but keep in mind these are pretty much for carefully placed shots in optimum situations. But for the guy just hiking down a forest trail singing a happy tune and coming round a corner to meet a sow grizzly with cubs......such rifles are not a happy scenario. Chances are if you get out of this alive, there will be some body parts missing at least.

skeeter 7MM

.243 win (I have to include it)
7mm rem mag ( deer to moose)
375 H&H (critters that bite back mainly though fine for moose/elk and africa ready is a plus)

Sniper151

6mm, 7mm Rem Mag., 375 H&H

rem250

pavomesa
This post is for hunting all north american game, Not them hunting you. LOL...

In a situation like that if you can't back awayand your scared there might not
be a good outcome even if you have m60auto or .50 BMGor if she is already
on the attack,
The average SCARED personisjust giong topoint and shoot not paying attention
towherethey are aiming (kill zone)hope and pray

srwshooter

ditch the 243

22mag
270win
7mm mag

Pavomesa

Rem, there's a difference between being scared and understanding and respecting your quary.

harter66

I don't care for the 243 however a 22LR and a 45-70 w/ a 243should do nicely .

Pavomesa

The insistance on a .243 really sort of messes up this 3 gun equation IMHO. The .338 Mag or several other biggerrifles will do a good job on the elk upwards animals in this hemisphere. The 45/70 will kill the larger stuff but it's pretty seriously limitedbyrange. The problem is the .243 is too much gun for the small stuff and not the ideal rifle for the middleclass of critters like big mule deer, sheep, etc. I think of a .243 as a whitetail on down rifle. Although I know a Texas game warden who says the .243 has been responsible for more lost and wounded deer than any cartridge he's ever seen. (Personally I think this is more due to the fact a lot of 243s are fobbed off on women and kids as their first rifle. I can't believe the cartridge is really to blame at all.) Anyway, I'd much rather see a .308, 270, 7mm, or a more traditional "middle cartridge" in the mix and then we can grab a good 22LR or whatever for the little stuff.

Sheridan

Boy.....
Someof you guys are beating me up for including my 243 as one of the three.
And this cartridge is probable the most versitile of the three.
This ismy long range, varmint/small game to medium size game gun.
I guess I could have opted for a 22 or 223 or 22-250, but I would besomewhat restricted to mostly the small stuff(other than for the oneguy who hunts polar bears with a 22 and says it's not the cartridge but it's all aboutshot placement - What am I going to say to that....????)
#2) I amgoing with a7MM and it's my understanding that this gun should be able to handle all the "normal" big game plus itstill does well on the bench at 1,000 yards.
I saw quite a few of you like this7MM as well(I know this is where you find the 270 and 30-06 lovers).
#3)Lastly, for the stuff that bites back I like the 338 (and so do a lot of the Alaskian guides and outfitters and that's good enough for me).
Why not the 243 ????

Pavomesa

Sheridan, don't worry about the anti .243 remarks. This rifle has become one of those love it or hate it cartridges. I remember when it came out and the hype was over the moon. Everyone expected to be able to walk on water if they carried this rifle...and it didn't work that way. Also a lot of the early bullets were crap. So the gun got a bad reputation. The poor .244 Remington got worse than that. The truth is the .243 is a dandy at what it does. It's a very capable rifle for anyone who is a good shot and considers which bullet he is using for which task. If this is your baby...power to you. It's a good rifle.