243 and 270 - justified?

karlbird

Well-Known Member
Having searched the historical threads, I cannot find something that answers my specifics. Apologies if this has been done and I don't want to start another 'best calibre' thread.

I have a 243 and use it for roe, munty and foxes. Occasionally I'll take vermin with it, because I can, and I'd rather take the CF if out foxing during the day in case a munty/roe presents.

I might soon have the option of hunting larger species, and am keen to take a day or 2 on boar this year. Whilst I could use the estate rifle, its always nice taking your own.

I like the 270 - but wonder if its too close in performance to the 243?

If thats the case then maybe I will look for something bigger, I'll take the 270 or larger if primarily after larger animals and keep the 243 for the smaller stuff.

I am keen to stay at 243 and not go smaller (granted a 22 cal CF for foxes and a 270 for everything else would work) as I would always like to have the opportunity to shoot deer if one is seen.

Anyone run a couple of bigger calibres and add reasoned comment please or anyone ditched the 243 for 270 and likewise tell me their thoughts?
 
I had .22-250, .243 and .270, now have .22-250, .243 and .308, reasons given mirror your own
 
Akeld,

Thanks for the reply. I wasn't thinking so much as justifying it to the FEO, that shouldn't be a problem - more justifying it to myself!

How come you swapped from 270 to 308 out of interest?
 
I was granted a 270 for the reasons you described, boar and bigger species, and keeping my 243 for everything else.
I've recently been granted another 270 with no problem.
2 270's for boar and deer,243 open & 17hmr open.
 
I have a .243 and .270, I prefer the .270 though mostly used for deer. It's a good combo, long and short actions
 
I've 22/250 ,6.5x55,270,308 in order reasons are fox,smaller deer ,light weight unmodded ,larger deer .
FEO was fine with those reasons
 
I have a 243 and went 270 but they are very different beasts and do their jobs well.

In the end I wanted 1 rifle to know love and understand. A 270 is no use for roe and a 243 is fine but frowned upon for reds. So I now have a 6.5x55 which knocks down reds fine but leaves some meat on the roe.

243 was my first rifle though so it's going nowhere...

Would now advocate newbies ask for 6.5 apparently a Fox round so ok for first CF
 
Anyone run a couple of bigger calibres and add reasoned comment please or anyone ditched the 243 for 270 and likewise tell me their thoughts?

I started with a .243, just for roe. Then started doing a lot of foxing and roe shooting at close range in woodland, so got a .222. The .222 became a more or less dedicated night use rifle, with a mod.

Then got access to ground with fallow, so got a .308. Thought I'd eventually get rid of the .243 because it was redundant. But in the end decided that I liked too much as a dedicated longer range roe and fallow doe rifle - so kept it. I know there's no real reason to have both, but like them both far too much to get rid of either. The .308 is very handy to have when it's very windy, I think I'll have to shoot at much longer range, or I think I'll run into bigger beasts. I use them about equally.

And I have now put in a variation to add a .270...

However, if forced to rationalise, I would go to just the .308.
 
I might soon have the option of hunting larger species, and am keen to take a day or 2 on boar this year. Whilst I could use the estate rifle, its always nice taking your own.

I like the 270 - but wonder if its too close in performance to the 243?


there is no overlap
sure you can shoot 100gr in .270 but only if you like mince on location

you have provided the only good reason necessary
be sure to mention the words "humane" and "ethical" when you discuss the merits of the fine .270 cartridge

it is IMO the perfect combination covering bullet weights from 50-60gr up to 180gr (although in practice 130-150gr is the optimum)
short action vs long action
both flexible, fast and flat
both can be fed on the same powder
both LR primers
both readily available in a myriad of factory loads

no brainer
 
Plenty 'think' the 270 is too big for the smaller deer.....answer..... NO!!!!! You can shoot all deer and boar and foxes (if your feo is sensible). Factory ammo starts at 100grain (Remington) and goes up, and if you homeload you can start at 90grain (a good fox round if pushed quick or an excellent small deer round if a tad slower..(110grain rounds are my favourite, the factory Norma vmax are awesome deer killers!).
Assuming your rifle will be moderated the 270,30-06 or 308 will be a good choice for a larger calibre. The most important thing is that you find a rifle that 'fits' you regardless of caliber or make.
 
I hope so , as I've got both!

Can run the 243 down to 58 grain for fox and the 270 up to 150 grain for larger deer and boar. Seems to cover most eventualities that I'll currently come across.

Although, following recent threads I'm starting to hanker after a moderated 222 for after dark. Anyone got something in left hand available?!?

Novice
 
Having searched the historical threads, I cannot find something that answers my specifics. .........

I like the 270 - but wonder if its too close in performance to the 243?


Anyone run a couple of bigger calibres and add reasoned comment please or anyone ditched the 243 for 270 and likewise tell me their thoughts?

This is a selective extract from your post. It's a valid question. :D

At first I thought you were kidding, but maybe not. These calibres aren't close, and have nothing in common. Maybe that's because most start with the .243, then see it's limitations.

Have both of them, then fill in the gap with a .260 or 6.5x55 to get the all-rounder you need. :rolleyes:

This doesn't help your own situation, but the problem is that almost everyone chooses a .243 as their initial calibre so is stuck with it. If I had my time again, the 6.5mm calibre would be the one I'd first start with .... and I'd probably not need any other calibre.

It just wasn't available to me off the shelf when beginning. Knowing what I know now, my choices would be different as this makes a .243, .270, and IMO the .308 redundant. :lol::cool:
 
Last edited:
These calibres aren't close, and have nothing in common.

+1

I have both calibres and, co-incidentally, took a pic recently upon receipt of the .270.
I often hear them being mentioned in the same breath but they are significantly different:

243v270.jpg
 
A 270 is no use for roe

I can assure you it most certainly is! :D

I have 22-250 and .270 and have absolutely no need to even consider changing them. Sure, some may see typical 100gr, 130gr and 150gr bullet weights as 'limited', but I can't for the life of me see why unless they have a fetish for the reloading bench and wasting half their life confusing themselves :lol:
 
I would have said they might be a bit close.
The .243 will do fast and flat for you very comfortably. If you want to go larger deer and boar I’d say go for something a little bigger and more of a “thumper” .30-’06 might be a better option. Nice heavy 180-220gr bullets for boar or you can shoot relatively light projectiles say the 123gr-150gr pretty fast and flat a la the .270 if you want to go and do maybe some hill / alpine stuff where longer ranges might be encountered.

Also, specifically for boar: The .270 is the minimum HO guidelines for boar and some places on the continent and in the UK like either a 7mm or .30” cal minimum to be used. (And a lot of places on the continent define .270W as 6.8x64 so you might find yourself under calibred)
Or if you really feel like pushing the boat out .300WM, 9.3x62 (my choice of boar chambering) or even .338WM.
So to sum up, I’d go .243W and a .30” Cal or bigger rather than the .270.

Whatever you choose, enjoy your shooting.

Scrummy
 
For the two gun hunter you really cannot beat the combination of 223 and 308. Especially if you reload.

270 is a fine cartridge but again if you reload there are a great many more bullet options available for a 7mm.

SS
 
Back
Top