.243 or .308?!

[Norfolk Horn]

I thought it was settled 7 years ago. .243 is rubbish. They're only good for shooting clothes pegs off the washing line in the back garden and even then if you don't hit them right they won't drop. That's what I use mine for and frankly £1000 was wildly extravagant for the purpose. Should've bought a catapult.

You been on the two stroke again

 

[Heym SR20]

Simple answer.

If you mostly shooting small deer then 243.

Mostly shooting larger then 308.

And any major difference can be made up by choice of bullet and load used.

 

[User00035]

If I was marooned/had the good fortune to spend the rest of my days on an island on my own and I could only have one CF rifle (a .22 lr obviously goes without saying) it would be a .308. It's a reliable killer of almost anything. It's easy to shoot well - it's "loopy" trajectory, annoying to some, is an asset making it stable and predictable, resistant to wind deflection with excellent energy retention. It's a chambering that is slow to wear out and it wouldn't be difficult to amass a lifetime's stock of ammunition.

Got the rifles, just need the island..

 

[Odders]

Simple answer.

If you mostly shooting small deer then 243.

Mostly shooting larger then 308.

And any major difference can be made up by choice of bullet and load used.

Or do like I did & use the small/large thing as good reason to have two deer rifles (.243 & .270 in my case).

 

[Doggone]

Hi @Doggone , first post and you're already an absolute legend mate!
As Miki has already pointed out the thread is 8 years old, (it's a common thing with new site members not to notice the posting dates). Also just to make you aware you managed to jump straight in with what has been a bit of a controversial subject on the site namely head shooting. Have a look at previous posts on the subject and you will see that it past debates have soon degenerated into squabbles between members who have strong opposing views on the subject.

I'm most intrigued by your statement that your local rifle club will not allow .308 on the range because it's a military cartridge. Let's have a bit more detail on that because I think you must be mistaken or misinformed on that one. The .308 is not a military cartridge the 7.62x51 is a military cartridge. I can't think of any full-bore rifle club in the U.K. that wouldn't allow it other than those that only shoot on pistol calibre ranges. In fact 7.62x51 and it's equivalent civilian cartridge the .308win is by far the most popular centrefire rifle cartridge used for target shooting in the U.K. and the NRA sell hundreds of thousands of these rounds to clubs and individuals each year.

How about having another stab at joining the forum and posting an introduction.

Hi 8x57,

Thanks for the advice I have introduced now. The range is only 50 yards and was mainly a pistol range but they have always shot rifle and shotgun too. So maybe that is the reason. I like practising at the range so I needed to get a calibre to suit, but I never regretted it as the .243 is quiet compared to many other calibres. So if I take a few shots I do not disturb the ground for others. Saves an awful lot of walking after distant spooked deer. I have a friend who goes out with me with a .270 or 7mm Rem Magnum, but the noise means he always scares everything for miles and gets far fewer chances as a result. I have to say that the heavy 7mm plus bipod is remarkably easy to shoot straight, but few want to carry it, and as I said you normally only get one chance with a boomer.

 

[Johno2486]

Currently have in my cabinet (along with other calibres) PH Safari Deluxe in 270, Sako 85S Varmint in 308, Tikka T3x in 243, and I've grassed more Reds with the 243 than I have with the others, reason being if on my syndicate (woodland) ground Red/Roe the Tikka is my go to rifle of choice which easily covers both species, as I also find the 308/270 too heavy a round for Roe, grassed a lovely 16 pointer with 243, dropped like a stone on the spot - 220yds, had umpteen 12 pointers same scenario with 243, never ever had one run on.

Correct shot placement is everything, 243 more than enough for Reds, when I'm on open Hill stalk it will normally be the 308, but when out and chance of Red/Roe 243 more than capable of doing the job.

 

[Doggone]

I think that is the point about a .243. it is versatile. Excellent for foxes, roe, fallow, red etc. I hear it is OK for culling wild boar from a hide, although maybe not driven boar (Although maybe with Barnes X bullets? Anyone tried it?) but I have never done either. I have taken a number of wild Scottish mountain goat with it and they are remarkably tough awesome animals, solid muscle and bone from all that bouncing around on the cliffs, but a well placed heart shot and they drop fine just like everything else. The flat shooting of the .243 really helps for this as there is seldom time or spare hands for range finding etc. Having a light rifle also really helps when clambering over cliffs as it does not pull you off the cliff if it shifts on your shoulder. I would not take a heavy rifle up there. So with one rifle I can afford to have the best scope and silencer which helps even more. Also, no room left in my gun cabinet for another rifle.

 

[Tikkat3xl]

I know this has been talked about but my questions are slightly different...

The .243 appears to have a better BC than the .308 when comparing a 100gn .243 to a 150gn .308 (which seems to be the norm for each respective calibre) - this said, then why do so many people recommend upping to a .308 if your after larger deer species?

As far as I can make out, the .243 is travelling faster than the .308 at 200yds, and is LESS prone to wind drift not more (working off ballistics software here) in the same way that a .17HMR is less prone to wind drift than a .22lr...?!!

I'm probably only thinking of getting a .308 as I know I'm more likely to be invited to red shoots if I have one, as the perception is the .243 lacks knock-down power - is that really true though?

I appreciate the .308 round is half again as heavy as the .243 but does anyone know the actual difference in ft/lbs at 200yds?

Do I really need a .308? Is it really that much better? Are the rounds any cheaper than a .243?

If I get a .308 I'll probably have to do a 1-for-1 and lose my .243 (my FLO can be tough)... so want to be sure!

Have you thought about the 6.5 calibres?

 

[DCG]

What I am about to say might be a bit controversial and at the risk of being shot down in flames, I’m going to put it in a slightly different way.
As the intended purpose appears to be for deer shooting and you’ve mentioned Reds, Perhaps the question you should be asking is how well will the .243 stabilise and perform with non lead bullets compared to the .308.
My opinion is that the time is very quickly approaching when we’ll not be allowed to shoot lead bullets at deer of any species in the UK, let alone Reds in Scotland.
So, purely on that basis, I’d say go with the .308 ( not that I particularly like the chambering).

 

[Doggone]

Have you thought about the 6.5 calibres?

What I am about to say might be a bit controversial and at the risk of being shot down in flames, I’m going to put it in a slightly different way.
As the intended purpose appears to be for deer shooting and you’ve mentioned Reds, Perhaps the question you should be asking is how well will the .243 stabilise and perform with non lead bullets compared to the .308.
My opinion is that the time is very quickly approaching when we’ll not be allowed to shoot lead bullets at deer of any species in the UK, let alone Reds in Scotland.
So, purely on that basis, I’d say go with the .308 ( not that I particularly like the chambering).

If you already have a .243 that you like and know how to shoot well, then I see no reason to change it. Far better to spend the saved money on a superb scope instead. An ability to shoot confidently with a gun is more important than the round. A .243 x 100 grain ballistic tip bullet travelling at over 2600fps drops reds as well as any other calibre if hit in the heart, head or neck. Bigger calibres just go through the deer thus wasting much of the energy. I always like to see the bullet expired on the inside of the far hide with perfect expansion. These animals dropped like a stone. Heart mushed. Speed is key, getting over 2,600fps makes a huge difference to the bullet expansion. You will still get this speed up to 200 yards with a .243. At the muzzle it is travelling at 3,100fps. In my opinion, this is the problem with slower, heavier rounds on deer. The chest area by the heart is actually quite narrow and heavier bullets just go straight through and waste their energy on the ground behind. Being quieter, especially with a silencer, you should get more chances with a .243 than a louder round such as a .308 or bigger. Just my experience, but you will be just fine with either calibre on the biggest reds if you shoot it straight. Of course the .243 is easier to shoot straight with less recoil, flatter trajectory, quicker recovery, better sight of the animals for a second target. I would not swap my .243 for a .308 for deer. If I was wanting to go after many long range deer then I would probably go for the .270 or 7mm Rem Magnum, rather than a .308. But there are very few long range shots that cannot be made shorter range by stalking a bit more, which in my opinion is most of the fun. In my experience, in a days stalking, for every long range deer you may occasionally pass up due to not having the long reach of a noisy .270, you will quite likely gain two or three much better chances from the low noise of a silenced .234 not disturbing the ground. With silenced .243 you can shoot a red on one side of a rocky hillock, then peek around the rock and see more deer 100 yards away unaware of anything. That never happens with a louder calibre. They have all gone miles and you have hours of hoofing to catch them.

 

[kernowshooting]

Hi Taff! Hope you're well mate? Yeah had only used a 6.5x55 when I met you, since then have shot deer with the .243 and seems very effective on Roe... early days with this calibre though and am planning a few trips to scotland this summer. Still not that impressed with the xbolt so am going to get a new gun regardless (either as a 1 for 1, or in addition to the .243).
As my FLO won't let me use the .243 for fox (?!!?) and the majority of the land I shoot is cleared for .308 it seems like a good idea to get this calibre - I hear what you say about shot placement, but I see more target shooters at bisley using .308 than faster/flatter rounds, and I've read a lot of comments about retained energy at longer distances with the .308... also they're both relatively flat in the grand scheme of things aren't they?

What planet is your FLO on not letting you shoot fox with a .243? What is his excuse? What does he want you to use? Is he saying it’s too much? .17/223 is recommended so can’t understand his problem.

 

[kernowshooting]

Just bear in mind that with some rifles there can be issues when using 7.62x51 in a .308. there are slight differences in cartridge case as well as loading pressures.

I only use 7.62x51 in rifles chambered for it like my two target rifles. In the .308's I tend to load FMJ or target orientated "non expanding" bullets.

Just to clarify, 7.62/51 is generally ok in a .308 but NOT a .308 in a 7.61 as the pressure is much higher, unlike .223 which is less than 5.56 so a .223 can not handle a 5.56 as the pressure is a lot more. Sorry if i’m teach you all to suck eggs

 

[Overlay]

Having had both I would go with the 308 using 123 sako factory rounds or homeloading 125 nosler bts.
‘
ATB steve

100% sako 123grn is all I use in my .308 knocks fallow over very nicely and very very accurate round.

.243 100 grn SP knocks em over as well as

Had one or two trot off a few yds with both calibres, they both work very well

 

[kernowshooting]

Not according to my FLO - I'm limited to deer only on my .243?!!? Though they conditioned my .17HMR as a fox and vermin rifle!! - This was because the land I applied on was in Surrey though... apparently if I applied in sussex I could have a .243 for Fox/Deer, or a .308 for Fox/Deer/Boar!

Like the chap says - it's all "guidelines" open for each forces interpretation!

If you hit a fox with a 308 I doubt he will be putting in a complaint and say you over killed him ..

 

[6.5-06 TIKKA]

Sako 123gr Gamehead for the 308 does everything you will ever need.
Flat shooting and knock down power.

 

[Tazz]

I know this has been talked about but my questions are slightly different...

The .243 appears to have a better BC than the .308 when comparing a 100gn .243 to a 150gn .308 (which seems to be the norm for each respective calibre) - this said, then why do so many people recommend upping to a .308 if your after larger deer species?

As far as I can make out, the .243 is travelling faster than the .308 at 200yds, and is LESS prone to wind drift not more (working off ballistics software here) in the same way that a .17HMR is less prone to wind drift than a .22lr...?!!

I'm probably only thinking of getting a .308 as I know I'm more likely to be invited to red shoots if I have one, as the perception is the .243 lacks knock-down power - is that really true though?

I appreciate the .308 round is half again as heavy as the .243 but does anyone know the actual difference in ft/lbs at 200yds?

Do I really need a .308? Is it really that much better? Are the rounds any cheaper than a .243?

If I get a .308 I'll probably have to do a 1-for-1 and lose my .243 (my FLO can be tough)... so want to be sure!

Or just get a 270, end of

 

[Bowland blades]

I know this has been talked about but my questions are slightly different...

The .243 appears to have a better BC than the .308 when comparing a 100gn .243 to a 150gn .308 (which seems to be the norm for each respective calibre) - this said, then why do so many people recommend upping to a .308 if your after larger deer species?

As far as I can make out, the .243 is travelling faster than the .308 at 200yds, and is LESS prone to wind drift not more (working off ballistics software here) in the same way that a .17HMR is less prone to wind drift than a .22lr...?!!

I'm probably only thinking of getting a .308 as I know I'm more likely to be invited to red shoots if I have one, as the perception is the .243 lacks knock-down power - is that really true though?

I appreciate the .308 round is half again as heavy as the .243 but does anyone know the actual difference in ft/lbs at 200yds?

Do I really need a .308? Is it really that much better? Are the rounds any cheaper than a .243?

If I get a .308 I'll probably have to do a 1-for-1 and lose my .243 (my FLO can be tough)... so want to be sure!

A lot of the ballistics are thrown in the air now we are going copper and to be honest the average deer stalker shooting to say 300 yards? need not unduly bother over such things too much AS ITS MORE KNOWING YOUR ABILITIES HONESTLY than which cartridge .
After a while with both those mentioned I Can say if someone offered me both those options it would not concern me much. Copper needs higher impact speeds and the 243 shooting a new legal sub 100 bullet would really be my choice . I shoot with a 260 with a 100 grain Barnes TTSX copper in that and i expect exit wounds to 400 with high confidence and i get a well expanded bullet
The 308 is likely better for Boar and Africa and the 243 better for foxing sessions . You will have others decry the 243 but most will not have extensive personal use of one and are experiences are biased to lead experiance

 

[nick.308]

with the move away from lead ammo why make life difficult with a .243?
.308 covers all bases and generally are easier to reload for and buy ammo.
Most important aspect is having a rifle you enjoy and trust to shoot

 

[oldhamstocks]

Sako 123gr Gamehead for the 308 does everything you will ever need.
Flat shooting and knock down power.

Fantastic round in .308. Was teethed on .270 and have huge respect for it, but the 123g Sako Gamehead in .308 is just the job for me in a calibre I've always liked.

 

[Edinburgh Rifles]

I know this has been talked about but my questions are slightly different...

The .243 appears to have a better BC than the .308 when comparing a 100gn .243 to a 150gn .308 (which seems to be the norm for each respective calibre) - this said, then why do so many people recommend upping to a .308 if your after larger deer species?

As far as I can make out, the .243 is travelling faster than the .308 at 200yds, and is LESS prone to wind drift not more (working off ballistics software here) in the same way that a .17HMR is less prone to wind drift than a .22lr...?!!

I'm probably only thinking of getting a .308 as I know I'm more likely to be invited to red shoots if I have one, as the perception is the .243 lacks knock-down power - is that really true though?

I appreciate the .308 round is half again as heavy as the .243 but does anyone know the actual difference in ft/lbs at 200yds?

Do I really need a .308? Is it really that much better? Are the rounds any cheaper than a .243?

If I get a .308 I'll probably have to do a 1-for-1 and lose my .243 (my FLO can be tough)... so want to be sure!

Get closer
Shoot more
Then when you have personal experience buy the gun you want in whatever calibre you can reliably feed from the resources local to you

None of it matters