Thread: 15 inch 243.

Originally Posted by TimC

I ran a 15" 243 for a while in my 20s. A do it all rifle to shoot bailed pigs and the odd deer. Had gunworks put a big maximus suppressor on it and it was quieter than my mates .223 with longer suppressed barrel. I moved it on after roaring a stag to 20m away and having the 90gr projectile ricochet off its skull between its eyes. Ran off bleeding and made me feel horrible. I tracked it for hours until i could no more. Shot the same stag a couple months later.

Interested to know what the projectile was. Though I guess if the skull is thick enough, and the angle shallow, many projectiles would do the same.

I recall working at the freezing works in my late teens, lucky enough to have a holiday job there, and they had this massive bull come in. Too big to deal with in the normal way, someone shot it with teh captive bolt gun in the head, bounced off the skull, ending in a rather angry bull. One of the guys had 12ga with 00 buckshot in his truck, so tried that. Same result. Ended up dropping it with 2nd shot in back of neck, severed its spine then cut its throat. Dressed out weight was over 700kg. Apparently it has taken the farmer 2 years to get it to the works - kept breaking out of the yards!

but getting off topic now! Must be getting old...

[found it - Google "Chianina" if you think that sounds like bull... ]

I believe that! bulls give me the shits. Experienced a couple bulls fighting last year, going through fences and smashing a gate. They'd been at it for a couple days. Unreal

Here is some real world data.
https://rifleshooter.com/2016/04/243...h-on-velocity/

As far as factory ammo goes, superformance 95gr sst loads are going bloody fast and kill really well.
I reload 95gr loads for one of my 18" .243s and they are doing 2780 fps and kill deer fine out over 500 yards. So if the superformance lost 400fps off advertised muzzle velocity then it would still be going close to what my rounds are.
With that in mind out to you intended distance of 300 yards it will work perfectly fine. It will still be going quicker than many 6mm arcs.

As far as muzzle blast etc goes. It will be fine. People are running magnum "super pigs". .243 isn't burning a ridiculous amount of powder.
If you already have a suppressor with baffles, such as a dpt, you don't even need to worry about a stainless baffle. Occasionally just rotate the baffles and they will all wear the same.

It will be a nice, low recoiling, handy short to mid range rifle.

Have a 14.75" .243, needs to be suppressed or flame thrower. Also needs stainless first baffle. For 90% of NZ hunting it works. Are there better options, yeah for sure. But it's what I had at the time for very tight bush. Would I get rid of it? Fuck no.

Don't use it much now because loving the .223 but it's all good

Originally Posted by Pommy

Eww.

If a 6 ARC will work then there's no reason a case with 15-20gr more powder won't work. Gimp's run the numbers for you and it'll evidently still kill deer fine.

But... I wouldn't want a 243 that short. Enough remaining potential or not, there's more wasted than I'd be willing to accept.

There is going to be a lot of muzzle pressure making it hard on the suppressor. It might not end up as quiet as you want.

I'd try and trade it for a 308, personally.

Yuck

As gimp said. A short 243 can still do it.
My old blr wasn't getting used so much anymore. I had a short 16" 308 and other rifles for whatever.
I found noone wanted a rifle with a couple thousand round thru it so chopped it. 14.5. And in a long twist. Well bugger me it got more accurate.
Still smashes deer(I use 95gr superformance ssts), and awesome to carry.

I'm back using it almost for everything. It's not superlight but it isn't heavy at 6lb. I like a little weight for a more steady bush shot.
Who'd have thought a rifle I bought 34 years ago would be back as number 1 rifle.

I wouldn't do it to a perfectly good .243. But they make new ones every day.

I do get the feeling my .44-40 becomes more and more relevant, with the lack of emphasis on velocity nowadays. Ironically the .243 the .270 became popular because of their high velocity.

For interests sakes ( i dont shoot one) i tried a .243 in quickload. Hornady 87gr loaded to exactly 3000 fps MV in a 20 inch barrel dropped to 2760 in a 15", and gave 3140 in a 24"

There are cartridges designed for short barrels, the family based on the 7.62x39 are probably the best known

Originally Posted by Tararua243

In 243?

Yep

Sent from my SM-G556B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by hunter Al.7mm08

Yep

Sent from my SM-G556B using Tapatalk

do you know if he was shooting factory ammo or reloads? cheers

Originally Posted by Tararua243

do you know if he was shooting factory ammo or reloads? cheers

Factory ammo. Would have to check with him but think was remington corelok. I have to agree with what some others have said. .243 is not the best candidate for a short barrel. But if it's what you have and it makes you happy it will still get the job done. I think sometimes we get a bit hung up with velocity. My 2c

Sent from my SM-G556B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Cowboy

As gimp said. A short 243 can still do it.
My old blr wasn't getting used so much anymore. I had a short 16" 308 and other rifles for whatever.
I found noone wanted a rifle with a couple thousand round thru it so chopped it. 14.5. And in a long twist. Well bugger me it got more accurate.
Still smashes deer(I use 95gr superformance ssts), and awesome to carry.

I'm back using it almost for everything. It's not superlight but it isn't heavy at 6lb. I like a little weight for a more steady bush shot.
Who'd have thought a rifle I bought 34 years ago would be back as number 1 rifle.

I saw a blued blr in one of your recent pics- is that the one?

Yep. It's had a full life.

Did some research on barrel shortening and there are guys in the States who seem to do it as a hobby and record all the data. Here is a link on shortening a .243 barrel with plenty of data using various ammunition
https://rifleshooter.com/2016/04/243...h-on-velocity/