.243 realistic effective max range

[Heym SR20]

@1894's point is the classic "meat saver" concern. And it goes without saying that is a totally valid viewpoint.

Two aspects to consider here. The aimpoint of the hilar zone would not affect the backstrap fillets unless the bullet struck high. The aimpoint for the high shoulder shot has a 50/50 chance of interaction with the front most portion of the fillets, in my experience, typically the offside fillet from bullet fragments or bruising.

Hilar and high shoulder are two different points of aim, and two different mechanisms of CNS paralysis. Just thought I'd emphasise that again.

View attachment 125075

With the assumption that I can control point of impact (wind conditions, rest, animal position, animal movement) I back myself to put a 100gr 6mm bullet into either of those very quick killing shot positions from anything up to around 300m, sometimes a bit further.

The emphasis on drops earlier in the thread is a critical component of any longer shot, this we know as simple common sense. However I am reminded that too often, guys shooting factory ammunition on an occasional basis might not test their drops or longer range accuracy as much as hand loaders. Sometimes not at all. A 100m range zero check isn't good enough, you have to validate your trajectory at the ranges you expect to shoot, or might shoot in an unexpected situation.

I say this because this is exactly the mistake I made the other day. Except it was with hand loads!

I shot a red stag at 245m with my .308 and a new 165gr Speer BTSP load. It instantly collapsed. When I reached it, I saw I had hit it high, straight through the high shoulder. But that wasn't where I was aiming, I was aiming at the hilar point of impact. Reason it was so high is that my chrono must have had a bad day when I did load development, and been reading well low. Plus I hadn't corrected for altitude. And plus I had used a lower BC number for the bullet as I didn't believe the published number. So after sorting out the animal, I went that afternoon and did a 300m drop test - which I should have done before I went hunting - I got a surprise when the trajectory validation corrected velocity by over 150fps. Wow. Subsequently, with the corrected ballistics, I used that rifle on goats out to 400m with no issues.

Now imagine if that was the other way round. Which is often the case with factory ammunition - published numbers are usually quite a bit higher than what shooters actually get.

So hitting low with factory ammo happens a fair bit at longer ranges, when drop tests haven't confirmed trajectory. And low hits (brisket typically, or foreleg) means lost deer.

I would always shoot a little to the left of the Hilar - same height but directly above the forelegs - come up the forelegs and squeeze. If it goes a bit high, bit low, a bit left or a bit right then its still dead very quickly.

Re: maximum range of a 243 - well it's the same as the 7x57, 308, 270, 30-06, 223 - a touch over 200m for the average hunter, with the average hunting rifle, with a bit of wind, trying to shoot from a field position. Actually its probably more like 150. Yes a a rifle you know well, a good range finder and good knowledge of the ballistics etc you can shoot further. But at 300 or 400 there is plenty of time for a deer to take a step forward as you squeeze the trigger and for the bullet to then impact the guts.

 

[User00033]

Re: maximum range of a 243 - well it's the same as the 7x57, 308, 270, 30-06, 223 - a touch over 200m for the average hunter, with the average hunting rifle, with a bit of wind, trying to shoot from a field position. Actually its probably more like 150. Yes a a rifle you know well, a good range finder and good knowledge of the ballistics etc you can shoot further. But at 300 or 400 there is plenty of time for a deer to take a step forward as you squeeze the trigger and for the bullet to then impact the guts.

Hmmm. Know what you're saying, but that's super conservative in my book. No point arguing it though.

Regarding time of flight, a 300m shot is about 0.35 seconds for a 2900fps bullet. A typical single step of a slow moving browsing (red) deer is around 0.8-1.0 seconds. They typically move about 400-500mm, probably less, more of a shuffle than a step and a lot less than when they are properly on the move. If the grazing deer steps as you break the trigger, at 300m the deer will have likely moved a max of ~150-200mm, or 6-8". Which means, if the hunter's point of aim is in the middle of the shoulder proper, the bullet will hit in the rear lungs, well in front of the liver. Not the rumen or the guts. The likely worst case scenario is a rear lung shot runner rather than a gut shot deer.

Observation is the key, the experienced hunter will set himself to break the trigger the moment the deer completes a step, and not excessively pause after the step is completed. At longer ranges, this is pretty straightforward.

 

[Heym SR20]

Hmmm. Know what you're saying, but that's super conservative in my book. No point arguing it though.

Regarding time of flight, a 300m shot is about 0.35 seconds for a 2900fps bullet. A typical single step of a slow moving browsing (red) deer is around 0.8-1.0 seconds. They typically move about 400-500mm, probably less, more of a shuffle than a step and a lot less than when they are properly on the move. If the grazing deer steps as you break the trigger, at 300m the deer will have likely moved a max of ~150-200mm, or 6-8". Which means, if the hunter's point of aim is in the middle of the shoulder proper, the bullet will hit in the rear lungs, well in front of the liver. Not the rumen or the guts. The likely worst case scenario is a rear lung shot runner rather than a gut shot deer.

Observation is the key, the experienced hunter will set himself to break the trigger the moment the deer completes a step, and not excessively pause after the step is completed. At longer ranges, this is pretty straightforward.

Would n't disagree either - would love to hunt in New Zealand sometime and appreciate you are in much more mountainous country - a bit like parts of Scotland (put give it some steroids) and often if you cannot take a shot at 300+ you are coming home with an empty bag. But in the UK there is also a big big variation in the size of deer. World of difference between a CWD or young muntjac to large forest Red Stag. And in terms of toughness from Roe, to Sika and Muntjac. 6 to 8" on one of the smaller deer is well into Guts. And with Roe they will stand like a coiled spring looking at you - and have had them jump just as the trigger breaks.

 

[NullMac]

We do spend an awful lot of time circling around this key issue. We dress it up as a calibre debate when in fact its primarily a shot placement debate.

Bankable, short runner heart shots require absolute precision and very specific bullet performance.

I suggest to Mike that if he were to spend some time researching different shot placement options in relation to anatomy, he would likely conclude that his success rates with any calibre at various ranges would improve if he elected to prioritise CNS over blood supply. Perfect the hilar shot, and you get two for one.

Agreed, which is an argument against MPBR.

Shot placement first, impact velocity (and I suppose bullet construction) second. (Not energy per se.)

The question was about effective range which is more than getting a shot into the theoretical kill zone in theoretical circumstances. Effective, for me at least, has to mean that I still achieve rapid collapse even in those circumstances where things go a bit wrong as they do for everybody from time to time. This demands a wide permanent wound channel through a large number of blood vessels. This implies enough impact velocity to ensure the bullet expands as widely as possible. Yes it needs enough energy to do the job BUT more and more energy is a waste as it just churns up the heather . A personal view would be there is too much emphasis on energy and not enough attention to the actual impact velocity.

I think (suspect?), that this is what is behind the lack of love for the 243 in the highlands. 243 has killed plenty or Red deer, no doubt. Its an accurate calibre, nice and flat, flies in the wind well - so why are some heilan' stalkers total against it? Because when it is not "in the right place", the wound may not be big enough for a rapid kill. Put the bigger 270 or 308 rounds in the same place and its a different result.

30-06 up the hill 300 yard Red Stag MPBR is going to be just fine and its a highly efficient way to shoot with the right calibre on the right target. 243 in the same circumstances, great if in position A, maybe PITA if not.

One thing I did pick up from Nathan Foster was "A commitment to accuracy is a commitment to ethical game killing". So I don't mind if people tell me I "don't need a scope with turrets", I care more about the deer than them. Funnily enough, I happen to get lots of free stalking.

 

[bogtrotter]

I do wonder sometimes about all this ballistics data when an old hill stalker once told me that at one time many Scottish estate stalkers used to shoot all their red hinds with a .22 Hornet.

F

True and many roe were shot with 22LR or worse still shotguns there was no legislation until 1986 if I remember correctly on what they could be shot with.
I'm glad these days are in the past though.

 

[bogtrotter]

Agreed, which is an argument against MPBR.

Shot placement first, impact velocity (and I suppose bullet construction) second. (Not energy per se.)

The question was about effective range which is more than getting a shot into the theoretical kill zone in theoretical circumstances. Effective, for me at least, has to mean that I still achieve rapid collapse even in those circumstances where things go a bit wrong as they do for everybody from time to time. This demands a wide permanent wound channel through a large number of blood vessels. This implies enough impact velocity to ensure the bullet expands as widely as possible. Yes it needs enough energy to do the job BUT more and more energy is a waste as it just churns up the heather . A personal view would be there is too much emphasis on energy and not enough attention to the actual impact velocity.

I think (suspect?), that this is what is behind the lack of love for the 243 in the highlands. 243 has killed plenty or Red deer, no doubt. Its an accurate calibre, nice and flat, flies in the wind well - so why are some heilan' stalkers total against it?

Yet during the 70s and 80s it was the popular choice of calibre for their own rifles by many Highland stalkers, and is still
first choice for quite a few of us.