A deer load for the .243 /field experience only not theory !

[Brithunter]

Hi coyotejoe,

     Ahhh  never got to see a Coyote  never even heard one of the Song Dogs which was strange for Hunting season in Missouri I am told  however we did see signs of their feeding on a BIg Buck found in the Creek. Aslo saw some Bobcat tracks, fresh ones too, but didn't see the cat.
 
     Now over here we only have the Red Fox like this dog I shot with a .303 BSA Model E:-



   As you can see they reach a fair size.

[coyotejoe]

That is a large fox, but tell us more about the rifle, I 've never seen one.  When I think .303 I picture a SMLE but that BSA appears to have a rather unique action.

[Brithunter]

The Red Fox is the onyl species we have in the UK and they do seem to grow quite large.

Ahhh the rifle was built between 1949-1953 by BSA on a P-14. The War office cleared out it's stock of P-14's and P-17's and BSA brought 14,000 of them some of whcih were so poor they had to be scrapped. Five grades A-E were offered with E being the top with  a new barrel sporting sights and a new Walnut sporting stock. This is the Model E. I have fitted a Pecar Berlin 3-7x36 scope in P-H mounts which is in keeping for the period.


The bolt handle has also been altered in the conversion.


They also filled the hol under the rear sight and removed the "ears".


The original marking were removed and BSA applied their own serial numbers, the action was also drilled and tapped for the P-H mounts and on the right reciever bridge two holes to take a P-H6EH sporting aperture sight as shown here on a poor condition model D:-



     Hope that helps answer your question. Of course Remington did something similar with the Model 30.

[coyotejoe]

Indeed that is a fine rifle, not so graceful as some but I'd bet it shoots very well.  Yes, the Remington reworked M-1917 was Remington's first bolt action centerfire and it also was "not so graceful as some". They had the machinery to build 1917s in mass so why not convert it to a sporting rifle. Wars have always been hard on the sporting arms industry. They tool up to produce military rifles and ammo in mass and make lots of money from it but when the war ends the government dumps loads of rifles and ammo on the surplus market at pennies on the dollar and the arms makers find they can't compete with their own products sold as surplus. But I doubt we'll be seeing any surplus "assult rifles" at bargin prices and don't suppose I'd be much interested if M-16s were sold cheap.

[Brithunter]

Thank you 

       However you are right about the new surplus except that the governments do sell it off cheap however it's not to the folks who's taxes paid for it. They now seem to sell it off cheap to some foriegner .

[nomosendero]

Good 243 stuff, keep it coming! 

[coyotejoe]

Well, I think we've about exhausted the subject. What it really comes down to is shot placement. If one can put a bullet in the right place it really doesn't much matter how large or small, light or heavy, long or short, fast or slow the bullet may be, they all kill. That presumes of course, that the bullet has penetration adequate to reach the vitals. It is a fact that some bullets can be driven into the vitals from angles that would be impossible for some other bullets. I've not taken elk with the .243 but I'd not hesitate to do so if the opportunity arose. However, I'd take only broadside chest shots with the .243, whereas a 30/06 would be able to take advantage of some shots I'd have to pass up with the .243.
 The long and short of it is "anything will work if used within the limits of its' capabilities".

[SingleShotShorty]

I handload my 243 Win ammo and shoot Nosler 100 grain Partitions loaded to around 3000 fps. I have taken deer to just over 400 yards with the load and I have always got an exit hole.