talk me out of a .243

N

NJUSA

New member
Hey all... Looking to purchase a new varmint rifle in the next month. I live in the great state of NJ, and the regulations allow me to use any sub .25 caliber with any grain bullet, whereas anything over .25cal is limited to no larger than 100gr bullets. (for woodchuck hunting)

I've decided on a .243 for my long range varmint gun (500yds tops roughly) as I already have .22 Hornet for close-to-mid range.

I'm currently looking at a Remington 700 SPS-V. I do not currently handload, but may get into it at a later date. Will be dropping an aftermarket free-float stock on it, and most likely a new trigger.

Can anyone talk me out of this decision or give me any advice? I have quite a bit of experience shooting, but this is my first "real" precision varmint rig.

Will be using this for precision target long-range target shooting, varminting, and maybe a deer hunt or two someday in the future.

Thanks.
 
Thanks for the replies, I appreciate it. Any advice/recommendations on the rifle itself? I am biased towards the Remington 700, as I have extensive use with one in the military. Any "real" difference between the 700 SPS and 700 SPS-V other than a longer, heavier barrel? Which would you prefer for a target/varmint rifle?

Thanks all.
 
Originally Posted By: FairChase93I would say the 243 is the most versatile standard factory round offered on the market today, quit thinking and go buy one.

There ya go!!!
 
Cant think of a good reason not to get one.

The only difference should be the barrel length and weight. If it were me, Id take a look at the 700 VLS though. It comes with a better stock and blued metal. Basically its the same rifle as the sps v just a step up in the fit/finish department
 
Three reasons why I'd discourage you from the .243......

(1)
(2)
(3)

That's about it.
wink.gif
 
I have a Rem 700 heavy barrel SPS in .17 Fireball and .243's in an old Savage 110 and a newer 16. All are great shooters. The SPS has a real gritty action and it's VERY barrel heavy...not a fun gun as a working varminter...but it's a great gun. That said, I prefer the Savages for both accuracy and balance...and I'm a big fan of tang safeties. The .243 is great caliber choice and one that I'd wager will be part of your lifetime collection.
 
Originally Posted By: basdjsI have a Rem 700 heavy barrel SPS in .17 Fireball and .243's in an old Savage 110 and a newer 16. All are great shooters. The SPS has a real gritty action and it's VERY barrel heavy...not a fun gun as a working varminter...but it's a great gun. That said, I prefer the Savages for both accuracy and balance...and I'm a big fan of tang safeties. The .243 is great caliber choice and one that I'd wager will be part of your lifetime collection.

Great gun how? Accuracy wise?
 
Are there any other better choices than a 700? I've got to admit, I'm not a savage guy. They feel kind of cheap in my hands.
 

A Remington 700 is hard to beat. Good for a rebarrel too if you ever decide to.

The 243 for your intended purpose seems to be ideal. You made a good choice with both rifle and caliber.
 
I'd get a savage. That way when you decide you want more or different you can just rebarrel it. Decent stock and trigger and your good to go. Yes I run both savage and remington as well as ruger. I live my savages for their simplicity and easy of change
 
Well I guess I will go against the grain and recommend a 204 or even a 223. Although I have a couple 243's I seldom use them. I shoot 200-300 groundhogs a year maybe 20 fox and an occasional coyote. You will get better barrel life less noise and less recoil than with a 243. Why buy a gun knowing that you will need to start replacing parts while it is new? Look at a CZ 527, good trigger, good stock and most shoot very well. Save your money to get into loading. Good luck.
 
+1 why. I just bought a 243 for sika deer and i will probably only shoot 2-3 shots a year. now i am wondering why i just didn't buy another 223 that i know i will shoot 1-2 thousand rounds a year
 
Originally Posted By: whyWell I guess I will go against the grain and recommend a 204 or even a 223. Although I have a couple 243's I seldom use them. I shoot 200-300 groundhogs a year maybe 20 fox and an occasional coyote. You will get better barrel life less noise and less recoil than with a 243. Why buy a gun knowing that you will need to start replacing parts while it is new? Look at a CZ 527, good trigger, good stock and most shoot very well. Save your money to get into loading. Good luck.

I've already got a .22 Hornet that is pretty accurate out to 200 yards. Easily accurate enough for groundhogs at 200yds. I was originally thinking about doing a .223, but then that leaves me without a real long range gun as well. Not that a .223 isn't a good choice, but a .243 is better for long range. I figure with a .22 hornet and a .243, I can shoot just about anything.

 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: reaper4+1 why. I just bought a 243 for sika deer and i will probably only shoot 2-3 shots a year. now i am wondering why i just didn't buy another 223 that i know i will shoot 1-2 thousand rounds a year

If you're talking an AR, I already have one. I put a ton of rounds through it, i just prefer bolt actions for varmint hunting.
 
Back
Top