Lead ban and .243?

[moeggesit]

Mine shoots 105gr lead very well and 85gr copper is equally accurate. I don’t like using copper for various reasons but it does kill. Only consideration I think is whether Scottish 100gr limit is a problem for you?

 

[VSS]

Mine shoots 105gr lead very well and 85gr copper is equally accurate. I don’t like using copper for various reasons but it does kill. Only consideration I think is whether Scottish 100gr limit is a problem for you?

Scottish 100gr limit no longer exists. Been dropped to 80gr. For this very reason, I believe.

 

[smokey]

As above, 243 has always been a bit marginal for bigger deer, this is exacerbated by non-lead and 1:10 twist rates. However as such a popular calibre, choice will improve and shorter fatter bullets help. I have no concerns for smaller deer.

If it was my only rifle, Id maybe hedge my bets and get something bigger, but if not the 243 has lots going for it. Its recoil is nearly 50% of a some of the bigger setups (factory ammo) and low recoil equals accuracy for most people.

ditto there is not a man or woman that has lived on this earth that does not shoot a low recoiling rifle better than a heavy recoil

 

[Smellydog]

Could that be because your 6mm Remington is not a .243 Winchester - the subject of the thread - and is possibly afflicted with the original 1:12 twist barrel that would not stabilize the preferred 100gr deer bullets of the day, which condemned the cartridge to irrelevance?
The later change to 1:9 did little to save it - by then the .243 had eaten its lunch - which was unfortunate because it is a great cartridge.

It was the 244 Remington that failed due to it's 1-12" twist compared to Winchester 243.
The 6mm Remington was the same cartridge and an attempt to correct the issue with a faster twist.
6mm Remington is a much better round but mud sticks!

 

[Steve123]

If using .243 for long range corvids and vermin with 55 or 58 g bullets, is that still banned with lead.
obviously .22 calibres shoot this weigh too.

 

[Greener Jim]

If using .243 for long range corvids and vermin with 55 or 58 g bullets, is that still banned with lead.
obviously .22 calibres shoot this weigh too.

As is currently written quarry isn't really relevant, and the cut off is 6.17mm, anything larger must be copper

 

[Chris Richardson]

Scottish 100gr limit no longer exists. Been dropped to 80gr. For this very reason, I believe.

Odd that they’re happy to move the goalposts…….

 

[farrieral]

Advances in bullet manufacturing and better powders, rifles etc etc

80-90 grains for deer is the sweet spot for the 243 I think ... I've been mighty impressed by 80 grain TTSX hand loads thus far, this evenings job is to load another 100 up

 

[Norfolk Muntjac]

I have a Tikka 243 Been using lead, have now started moving over to Sako 80g Blades and find them better than the Lead I have been using. Better Impact, more damage for a cleaner kill and jus as accurate. Probably wouldn't use them on Sika and Red but I don't have them in my area.

 

[Norfolk Muntjac]

I suppose if the venerable .243 wasn’t able to comply with the minimum energy/bullet weight for all species of deer the police would need to be granting a larger calibre for first time applicants for a deer rifle ?
Wouldn’t be why they dropped the minimum bullet weight would it?
Triggermortis

Excellent point when I went from a rim fire to my first centre I was told I could have a 243 or nothing at all.

 

[HonestJohn]

Odd that they’re happy to move the goalposts…….

They’ll do anything to
A. Ensure deer are killed, whether ethically or not
B. Avoid more applications for new firearms through licensing

 

[Smellydog]

80-90 grains for deer is the sweet spot for the 243

243 Winchester was designed around an 80gn bullet.

 

[nightcrow]

I’ve shot 100g out of PH’s just fine, but the 85g partition was by far the best performer of all bullets I’ve used in .243. I did move on from .243’s of course, as we all do when the pubes start to grow and we are able to handle recoil. Great calibre for youths and young women looking for a soft handling round that get put off by more mature calibres

And for old men.

 

[Brighty3006]

The .243 . Simply just a magnificent calibre that still kills all the UK deer with ease.Just so so easy to shoot

 

[Chris Richardson]

Advances in bullet manufacturing and better powders, rifles etc etc

80-90 grains for deer is the sweet spot for the 243 I think ... I've been mighty impressed by 80 grain TTSX hand loads thus far, this evenings job is to load another 100 up

But I thought the deer act was for deer welfare as regards limits of calibre and bullet weights ,?? But it seems we can change the goalposts to suit inferior ammunition….

 

[farrieral]

But I thought the deer act was for deer welfare as regards limits of calibre and bullet weights ,?? But it seems we can change the goalposts to suit inferior ammunition….

It was also thought the Earth was flat and we commuted via horse and buggy... things advance! Although there'll be plenty of flat earthers lurking in the SD shadows no doubt!

If we can achieve good terminal results with higher velocities, clean kills & cleaner carcasses heading into the food chain, sticking to 1980s-era minimums just for the sake of tradition isn't 'welfare'—it's nostalgia.

The 'goalposts' are moving because modern metallurgy/manufacture/powders/ballistic knowledge allows us to achieve better terminal performance and cleaner kills with lighter, faster, non-toxic projectiles.

Copper works.

All that said, Mr. Fox on my perms will still have lead put his way. I'm sure a more varmint type copper projectile will be dreamt up along the way and likely already is. But £1+ per bullet for a fox/other vermin is excessive... re the BOP argument, I remove the foxes I shoot, its a poor show leaving foxes littered about the countryside in my opinion

 

[Chris Richardson]

It was also thought the Earth was flat and we commuted via horse and buggy... things advance! Although there'll be plenty of flat earthers lurking in the SD shadows no doubt!

If we can achieve good terminal results with higher velocities, clean kills & cleaner carcasses heading into the food chain, sticking to 1980s-era minimums just for the sake of tradition isn't 'welfare'—it's nostalgia.

The 'goalposts' are moving because modern metallurgy/manufacture/powders/ballistic knowledge allows us to achieve better terminal performance and cleaner kills with lighter, faster, non-toxic projectiles.

Copper works.

All that said, Mr. Fox on my perms will still have lead put his way. I'm sure a more varmint type copper projectile will be dreamt up along the way and likely already is. But £1+ per bullet for a fox/other vermin is excessive... re the BOP argument, I remove the foxes I shoot, its a poor show leaving foxes littered about the countryside in my opinion

Why though ? If copper works amazingly well ..( which is not what evidence suggests) would you shoot foxes with it ? Sounds a tad hypocritical to me … unless youre burying them over a metre down or incinerating them ?

 

[farrieral]

Why though ? If copper works amazingly well ..( which is not what evidence suggests) would you shoot foxes with it ? Sounds a tad hypocritical to me … unless youre burying them over a metre down or incinerating them ?

Copper works superbly well, its well proven. You hear little complaint from the forestry commission or contracting lads. And they are accounting for serious numbers. They crack on and shoot deer.

As one said to me recently, he probably had as many issues with lead, but as lead was the "accepted standard" he thought little of it.

I do infact have access to an incinerator and dead bins for the foxes I shoot.

The 'hypocrisy' argument doesn't really hold water when you consider the end use. Whether or not lead affects the wider environment is one debate, but the immediate contamination of food is a simple fact.

It's multifaceted. Especially when looking at a dual purpose calibre like the .243.

 

[turner.jc1]

This discussion is why I bought a 25-06 as a small/medium deer cartridge . 80-100 gr copper bullets work and at high velocity. I think the future will be lathe turned fragmenting bullets, which we are already seeing. But with the USA being the driving force of change slower twist short barrels will be/are in vogue. The .243 will probably fall by the wayside slightly. It won’t disappear. But new hunters will naturally choose other more current and amenable options. Some manufacturers are making the 243 in 8 twist however, which will save it hopefully

 

[Smellydog]

The 'goalposts' are moving because modern metallurgy/manufacture/powders/ballistic knowledge allows us to achieve better terminal performance and cleaner kills with lighter, faster, non-toxic projectiles.

Really?
Metallurgy. It's not really changed for shooting purposes in the last 80 years.
Manufacturing. Doesn't really change anything re terminal performance.
Powders. They aren't really any different than 80 years ago.
Ballistic knowledge. That's no different than about 100 years ago.
Better terminal performance and cleaner kills.
It's no different, we have had clean kills for decades.
As for trading weight for velocity, that is a recipe for disaster. The faster it goes the more stress is on the bullet.
There is no free ticket unless you can change the laws of physics of course.