Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Hunting Forum' started by DavidTurley, Mar 3, 2010.
Which do you think is best for deer
in all reality, i think 243 is near teh minimum for a good sized white tail, but i just gotta take every chance i can to say how great i think the round is.
i vote 243
They both do the same job, just the 270 will do it alittle farther out and the 243 with alittle less recoil.
Ok thanks guys I own a 270win, but my father in law keeps trying to get me to get a 243win. I always thoght the where kind on the small side for deer, but I keep hearing alot of good things about them does anybody have any experince with the 243wssm, If I did go with one Ive thought about that one.
The 243 wssm is not worth the effort unless you are a handloader and have some small niche for it. A standard .243 can do just as well and the cost/availabilty in factory ammunition further setbacks the wssm. I have owned both, got rid of the wssm.... its a good idea, but only seemingly so in larger calibers.
.243 has been my favorite caliber for white tail and moose all my short hunting life. I have taken over 50 NC/SC/VA whitetails with .243 and several moose.
You said the 243win, will do as much as the 243wssm, do you reckin its the same for the 270win and the 270wsm?
Im also looking into buying a magnum rifle just havent made up my mind, what I want yet.
If you have a good 270 Win., you are capable of handling any game in north america, except the big bears in close quarters. The only reason I could see going bigger, is if you want to hunt grizzly bear on up. For that task, the 338Win. mag is an excellent choice. If you want only two rifles to hunt world wide, it would be hard to beat the 270Win. and the 375H&H mag.
That's my two cents, and probably worth a little less.
Between the two you have listed, I would go with the 270.win. The 243wssm isn't worth the extra money you pay when buying bullets. I think a better all around cartridge for you would be 300 wsm ot 30-06
apples and oranges
Inside 300yrds its academic or a matter of personal preference either is and excellent hunting round shot place ment is, as always the key. A heart, lung/ shoulder shot with either will bring down anything on four legs on this continent short of a Griz or a Polar bear and I know both of them have been taken with both rounds.
The .243 win is better than the .270 win in my opinion.. Ive owned plenty of them and the .243 win is superior. So if u are looking to buy a gun for whitetail, moose, fox, wolf or anything like that then go with the .243 win and also i only like the winchester dont go with that piece of crap wssm
I have a 6mmRem (twin of the .243) and a .270. If your shot will, positively, be under 100 yards, either will work fine. If you may have a few shots over 250 yds, the .270 is hands down the best. 100 to 250, I like the extra pi-zaz from the .270.
.243 is more of a varmint gun,bare minimum deer killer,and the choice of women hunters.A .270win is extremely powerful,especially with some of the new loads pushing about 3,000ft lbs of muzzle energy.
i think you me 3000 ft at the muzzle not energy im sorry i miss spoke ninjatoth i did the math you were right.......... Here in western WY many bought 243 for there wives to hunt deer and elk with mainly be cause they wanted another rifle to hunt varnints
Wyoming? .243 for Elk? .270 is a good round, I don't care for it it. .223 is a varmint round. .308, 8x57, 6.5x55, 9.3x57 are whitetail and add 7mmRM for Elk. All within there effective distances.
i shot a 270 for many years and i loved it. the 270 will have alot more knock down power also.
i vote 270!
i dont like the 243 for elk but like i said they bought for there wives so they could have i another gun. Most wives dont hunt much and when they do shoot its at a 100 yards broad side and husband is there with his rifle of choice. my choice is a 338 mag for 25 years be for that i shot a 270 pre 64 Winchester. i have a buddy who has hunted elk his whole life with a 243 he dose not shoot until he know for sure its going to be a good shot, and he is one.
I'd sure like to know how in the world you think the .243 is "superior" to the .270?? You need to think again because the .270 whups the .243 badly in regards to energy and killing power. I've had both too and the .270 is still going strong when the .243 conks out on energy out at about 450-500 yards.
I'm going to state ballistics facts comparing Hornady ammo,the hottest variation of the two calibers they offer and let you decide.Their SST superperformance 95gr .243 is 3,185fps@muzzle for a muzzle energy of 2,139ft lbs energy,and at 300 yards that .243 is going 2,402fps for an energy of 1,217ft lbs energy.Now for the .270,their 140 grn SST superperformance is 3,090 fpsand 2,968ft lbs energy@ muzzle and 2,526fps and 1,983 ft lbs energy at 300 yards..The .270 at 300 yards is darn near what a .243 is at muzzle.
The .270 is much more forgiving of slight errors in aiming. With the .243, you'd better hit dead on or you'll have a tracking job with not much blood trail. Friend of my Dad's used a .243, and he often had to track his, whereas the deer shot with the .270's and the ought-sixes generally dropped within sight.