I have killed deer with a .243, but to me it' s the absolute minimum. I' d rather use something in the .270, .308, 30-06 class for whitetail.

As said, the .243 is a fine caliber. My personal opinion, I' d go with a .260 over a .243 if you' re looking at smaller calibers.

.243win is a great deer round, 250yrds is getting out there a ways, but in a pinch, the .243 would do just fine, just try not to make a habit of it as your margin of error for placement never changes, but at long ranges, your natural error and human error becomes magnified. If you can put the bullet where it needs to go, and you know it (i.e. actually go out and shoot at 250yrds), and you get good groups, any range you' d feel confident in making a good shot is feasible, most people shouldn' t take shots over 200yrds, some shouldn' t take a shot over P-B range, while others of us can shoot confidently and rightfully so at 600yrds, it' s all in your hands. The .243 will do it just fine for the range you' ve set for yourself, just know where your bullet is going.

I wouldn' t hesitate to use a .243 on anything in my neck of the woods. When I was 12, I actually used one to put down a 200 lb wild hog. I don' t know if you know anything about those, but if I (and more importantly at the time, my dad) trust it for those things, a deer is a walk in the park. Like it' s been said above, the nice thing about the .243 is it' s a light, easy gun to shoot with very little recoil. It' s a good shooter to begin with, and it' s so easy on the shooter that you' ll practice more and get better with it than you would a heavier cartridge. Get a good bullet and a good scope, and it' ll be a rifle you take everywhere with you.

If you' re still doubting it, ask yourself if you' d have any qualms using a 6mm on deer. Then remember that a 6mm is the .244. Not that big a difference.

I bought a Rem. 788 in .243 for my kids to use on deer and pronghorn. So far I' ve seen it kill three deer and one antelope but was not overly impressed with it. My kids will continue to use it within their limitations and I will probably shoot some coyotes with it.

I have shot deer with a couple diffrent rounds but mostly with a .264 win. mag. Many of the deer I' ve killed with it could have been taken just as well with a .243 or a 30/30. But a few of them were a long way off or at not the best angle and I would not have shot them if I had not been carrying my " magnum cannon" .

I guess what I' m saying is the same as many above, " the .243 is an good round for deer if you know the limits of it and you." But if you want to go beyond those limits you can do so if you upgrade to a more powerful round.

Where I hunt deer I often have a moose, elk and bear tag in my pocket as well. My .264 or my .35 whelen is a little handier for those critters.

Robin

You know I used one since I was 12. I think we all forget that speed kills more than anything. On average, I would say the deer I shoot with 243 drops far faster and with much greater internal damage to the lungs than my shotgun slugs.

I haven' t used my 243 for over a decade. Might break her out this year to take a few crop damage doe. Last year, when butchering I studied the wounds and internal damage very closely. I always thought a saboted slug would do much more damage internally than a standard >2000fps but less than 2600fps rifle. But actually, I noticed a friends doe that was taken with a 22-250, that the lungs were melted. Extensive trama to the splene, kidneys other organs. but my sluggun left a great big exit hole but the lungs were in tact, no major damage to the other organs.

So can a 243 kill deer? You bet ya.

This is not pointed at anybody who has posted here, this is just my feelings for every time this topic comes up.

I have always been amuzed when people tout the low recoiling nature of the .243 as a good reason to use it. Unless you are a very small shooter (ie youth or female) or have some kind of chronic injury - cartridges like the 7mm/08, .308 Win, or .270 Winchester really are light recoiling. I can shoot 100 rounds of anything up to .30-06 class without a sore shoulder or flinching. If you are recoil sensitive, buy a past recoil shield and head to the range. It will make a .30-06 kick about like a .223 Rem. I am also amuzed when I read comments about picking a .243 allows more accurate shot placement? Why? Chances are if you cannot shoot a .308 accurately, you won' t be able to shoot a .243 accurately either.

Step up to a .338 Winchester or .45-70 in a Guide Gun, and then you will see recoil from a .308 Win really is a *****cat.

I have not been impressed with what I have seen of the .243 used on deer. All deer were recovered, but they tended to run farther than what I am used to and leave a very poor blood trail compared to the larger calibers. I suppose if a .243 Winchester was all I had, sure I would use it; however, I think there are many better choices out there.

GTBuzz,

I' ll agree with you that the 7-08, .308, or .270 are light recoiling rifles, as well (the 7-08 moreso than the .270). However, I' m just saying that in the spectrum of rifles, the .243 has the lightest of the bunch. The bullets aren' t much smaller than the 7-08, and it' s an effective rifle. Yes, you can shoot an ' 06 plenty of times with no soreness, but shooting the .243 in comparison is like a vacation.

Not that big a difference, but one nonetheless.

there' s a cal. out there for every one on the planet.

the 243 is and has been my cal of chose for many,many, years.I have tried 270,308,and did' t like them much.

I lost only one deer in my 40 some odd years of deer hunting shot with the 243.my folt.(took a shot I shouldn' t have).

just my 2 cents,there are 98 more.

Across the Hear of Dixie (AL) the .243 is a very very popular deer gun.