#-_Tikka T3 Lite in a .223 or a .243??_-#

wdallis · October 3, 2016, 10:56 PM

In the market for a new rifle. Have my heart set on a tikka brand, just can't decide on a .223 or a .243. The gun will be used for deer and varmints. Most shots should be within 300 yards, but would like it to be capable of taking a 400 yard shot if the opportunity arrises. My 10 year old daughter will also be using it for deer.

s3779m · October 4, 2016, 06:31 AM

Personally, if I were to use it on deer I would go with the 243. Great gun by the way.

PatientWolf · October 4, 2016, 06:43 AM

For your purposes, I'd also go for the .243. It is a better option for deer IMHO.

Others will argue that the .223 will also take deer, and it can, but I definitely prefer the .243. I don't think you can go above 75gr bullet in a .223 (and those may be hard to find) and will be looking at a 100gr bullet in .24 and it's available almost anywhere). I believe the .223 may not be legal for deer in some states.

jmr40 · October 4, 2016, 06:51 AM

If you think you'll use it mostly for deer, with the occasional varmint hunt then 243 all the way. If it'll primarily be a varmint gun that gets pressed into service for the rare deer hunt, 223 would be a strong contender.

With the better bullets a 223 kills deer just as well at close to moderate ranges. But even the heaviest 223 bullets start losing energy fast, I wouldn't attempt a shot at deer farther than 200 with a 223 and I'd feel better if it were closer to 100. And I'd not attempt to hunt game larger than deer.

The 243 on the other hand is a legit 300-400 yard deer killer, and while not optimal, is acceptable on larger game such as bear or elk if bullets are chosen carefully and range is limited.

Worc · October 4, 2016, 12:08 PM

Quote:

jmr40 Wrote:
If you think you'll use it mostly for deer, with the occasional varmint hunt then 243 all the way. If it'll primarily be a varmint gun that gets pressed into service for the rare deer hunt, 223 would be a strong contender.

With the better bullets a 223 kills deer just as well at close to moderate ranges. But even the heaviest 223 bullets start losing energy fast, I wouldn't attempt a shot at deer farther than 200 with a 223 and I'd feel better if it were closer to 100. And I'd not attempt to hunt game larger than deer.

The 243 on the other hand is a legit 300-400 yard deer killer, and while not optimal, is acceptable on larger game such as bear or elk if bullets are chosen carefully and range is limited.

I could not have said it better myself, I agree 100%.

Mobuck · October 5, 2016, 07:32 AM

"The 243 on the other hand is a legit 300-400 yard deer killer, and while not optimal, is acceptable on larger game such as bear or elk if bullets are chosen carefully and range is limited."
I've used the 243 off and on for over 40 years and I challenge this comment. Given the right bullet selection AND perfect bullet placement, the 243 is a barely adequate "300-400 yard deer killer" but is great "long range deer wounder" due to the often poor bullet performance and low energy available at those ranges.
I shot a couple of antelope at long(ish) ranges approaching 400 yards BUT there was really no place for them to go that would allow them to get away. This is not often the case when deer hunting. I've seen more deer wounded and lost and been on more difficult follow ups due to poor bullet performance involving the 243 than any other cartridge(over .224 caliber).

AllenJ · October 6, 2016, 04:17 PM

If the gun is going to be used for deer hunting I would choose the 243. While the 223 is fully capable of taking deer it is not in my opinion in the same class as the 243 for that task.

October 3, 2016, 10:56 PM	#1
wdallis Member Join Date: September 26, 2011 Posts: 18	#-_Tikka T3 Lite in a .223 or a .243??_-# In the market for a new rifle. Have my heart set on a tikka brand, just can't decide on a .223 or a .243. The gun will be used for deer and varmints. Most shots should be within 300 yards, but would like it to be capable of taking a 400 yard shot if the opportunity arrises. My 10 year old daughter will also be using it for deer.

October 4, 2016, 06:31 AM	#2
s3779m Senior Member Join Date: November 12, 2012 Location: Lometa, Texas Posts: 384	Personally, if I were to use it on deer I would go with the 243. Great gun by the way.

October 4, 2016, 06:43 AM	#3
PatientWolf Senior Member Join Date: October 20, 2012 Location: NC Posts: 956	For your purposes, I'd also go for the .243. It is a better option for deer IMHO. Others will argue that the .223 will also take deer, and it can, but I definitely prefer the .243. I don't think you can go above 75gr bullet in a .223 (and those may be hard to find) and will be looking at a 100gr bullet in .24 and it's available almost anywhere). I believe the .223 may not be legal for deer in some states.

October 4, 2016, 06:51 AM	#4
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,972	If you think you'll use it mostly for deer, with the occasional varmint hunt then 243 all the way. If it'll primarily be a varmint gun that gets pressed into service for the rare deer hunt, 223 would be a strong contender. With the better bullets a 223 kills deer just as well at close to moderate ranges. But even the heaviest 223 bullets start losing energy fast, I wouldn't attempt a shot at deer farther than 200 with a 223 and I'd feel better if it were closer to 100. And I'd not attempt to hunt game larger than deer. The 243 on the other hand is a legit 300-400 yard deer killer, and while not optimal, is acceptable on larger game such as bear or elk if bullets are chosen carefully and range is limited.

October 5, 2016, 07:32 AM	#6
Mobuck Junior member Join Date: February 2, 2010 Posts: 6,846	"The 243 on the other hand is a legit 300-400 yard deer killer, and while not optimal, is acceptable on larger game such as bear or elk if bullets are chosen carefully and range is limited." I've used the 243 off and on for over 40 years and I challenge this comment. Given the right bullet selection AND perfect bullet placement, the 243 is a barely adequate "300-400 yard deer killer" but is great "long range deer wounder" due to the often poor bullet performance and low energy available at those ranges. I shot a couple of antelope at long(ish) ranges approaching 400 yards BUT there was really no place for them to go that would allow them to get away. This is not often the case when deer hunting. I've seen more deer wounded and lost and been on more difficult follow ups due to poor bullet performance involving the 243 than any other cartridge(over .224 caliber).

October 6, 2016, 04:17 PM	#7
AllenJ Senior Member Join Date: December 11, 2009 Location: Northern California Posts: 1,766	If the gun is going to be used for deer hunting I would choose the 243. While the 223 is fully capable of taking deer it is not in my opinion in the same class as the 243 for that task.