damon619. no smaller than a 6mm cal. 243.thousandths
huntcamp. i have never met a buck that didn't know it wasn't supposed to die when shot with a 243.and i have met plenty of them with mine .

I've used a .243 on several deer. Gets the job done, but tends to leave a minimal blood trail. Absolutely nothing smaller, and I would recommend bigger.

I've shot more deer all bang flops with my 22-250 out to 750 yards than all my rifle combined. It's all about hitting "MOP"!

Once again ken.mcloud said it best!

“So, I think that the superior killing power of larger rounds is largely in our heads.(likely testosterone induced) A flat-shooting round that you can accurately place will produce as many if not more "bang-flop" kills as a heavy caliber round.”

I do not disagree that the .243 is adequate for the task, but I feel very confident in my .250 for whitetail.

I think it depends on your abilities as a shooter/hunter. Sure, sharpshooters are extremely effective with .22 centerfires. Does that mean it's ok for average or sub-average shooters? Should excitable novice hunters use them? I think anything in the 100 grain neighborhood is a much more ethical choice for most hunters.

Make that 2 TONS! In the hands of the average hunter, a .223 centerfire is inadequate when cheap FMJ ammo is around for use by the ninnies. That is why many states have rules that require a .24 / 6mm caliber minimum with expanding bullets.

Big O

I would dispute your statement that .22's have killed more deer than anything. The .30-30, .30-06, and .35 Remington have put more deer on the meat pole than all the .22 centerfires combined.

I'm with 007 for exactly the reasons he stated. In the hands of an experienced hunter/shooter with the right bullet, a .223 or .22-250 is certainly adequate, but not legal in many places. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

WMH

Big O

You are probably correct about the .22 LR being the poacher's best friend. I'm sure many a deer fell to .22's during the Depression and other hard times as well. And there have probably been as many deer "poached" as there have been legally taken over the years. I know as a kid, there were a lot of spotlighters killing deer and rabbits.

A friend of mine in Wyoming once told me that the .22-250 is the antelope and deer poacher's weapon of choice.

I agree with the rest of what you said. I think that someone who is just starting out should consider a .243 Win, .257 Roberts, .250 Savage, 6.5x55 Swede, or .25-06 for a deer rifle that will last a lifetime and is legal everywhere. I would almost always presume that someone asking the question is a beginner.

I was at a gun counter a couple of seasons ago and there was this guy with his kids buying ammo for an elk hunt for his .243 Win. The sales dude was trying to convince the guy that a .243 is a little on the light side for elk and that he should at least consider a premium bullet for that rifle or a bigger caliber. The guy kept insisting on the lightest cheapest ammo that they had. Said he was worried about recoil for the kid. If his kids hadn't been standing there, I would have told him what a dumbass he was, but thought better of belittleing him in front of his kids. He didn't buy anything anyway. Probably went down the street to Walmart and bought some cheap 87 gr softpoints for his elk hunt.

Best regards,
WMH

A framing hammer seems to work well at close range, you have to hit them just right thought.

.223 if you can find a bullet that opens, mushrooms and does not break up at high speeds. Most .223 rounds are not designed for deer, but Hawk bullets or an equivelent bonded bullet would be great. Also, for the heavier .223 bullets, more twist is needed in the barrel compared to the lighter weights. I think the biggest objection to .223 is most of the production ammo is not suited to do the job correctly, and handloads are often needed. And finally the use of surplus military ammo is not a good idea.

220 swift or 22-250. I use a Ruger .243

100 grain broadhead!

What no one likes the best all round rifle made....the 270, go big or go little or reload, anything in N. America !

I really dont see why so many people have a prob with the .243. Myself, my brother, my son and his Uncle have all used the same gun to kill deer, repeatedly! for sure you can put deer down easier with larger cal's, but to put a 30.06 in the hands of a 14yr old boy is just asking for him to have flinch probs for years. If you can use a long bow to fling an arrow, why can't even a .223 be legal. Never made sense to me. I would have to agree with alot of sides to this tho, I absolutely know I could kill a deer with a .22, but why take the chance. Heck I shot a deer with my 44 mag at 45 yards last year and never found him, so anything can happen. Thats why its called hunting, you dont kill every deer you shoot at, and you wont find them all either!
.243,I still stand with this choice.

I've seen a .243 do more damage to their vitals than a 30-30, it's definitely up to the task. This year I'm contemplating going the .223 route, I figure if I go with a 65-70gr expanding bullet and keep the shots under 100 yards it should do a number on them.

I'd balk at letting a beginner use a .223 though, too much of a chance of them getting buck fever and pulling their shot. I figure they're better off going the .243 or up route so they'll have more margin for error in shot placement.

The sure shot smallest is the 223 WSSM.

Depend how far to the deer, and even more important, how far to your property line?

The question is flawed from the start. We all know that caliber should not be a method of compensating for skill sets. I prefer to use a 30/06 cartridge for anything in North America. I have friends that use 22-250 for deer where allowed. I am more likely to be critical of an a-- shot out of a 300 win mag, than a perfectly placed heart shot out of the good old .223 coyote rifle that has spent hours at the range shooting bottlecaps at a 100 yards. Use common sense and spend time at the range instead of ballistic charts and many one shot kills will follow.

I have used a 6mm remington for many deer kills. In the heart/lungs/neck. Only once in over 40 deer taken did I have to use finishing round. Nosler partion 100 gr. hand loads at factory rec. charg.

Bullet quality and placement are most important, my first deer many years ago was with a 243, the buck had been bumped out of a corn field by my buddies and it ran quartering toward me. At the shot it drove it's antlers into the ground and never moved. The rifle was stolen, and I now use a 260, unless it's raining(stainless 7-08)
I do not recommed a 243 for beginners, and it is not versital enough for other larger game. My theory is that 243s and .410s are for experts not beginners or once a year hunters.
I'm also like the other fella,what if the bruiser of all times comes along or you have to protect yourself from some kind of cross critter in a bad mood(bear?)

I have used a 243 for years and have killed alot of deer with it but i would not go any smaller ethically
for my chocie but i no hunter that hunt with 223,and 22-250 and they have good results.as for smaller calibers they are as good as the type bullet you chose.

We all know that a .243 can ethically take a whitetail with a properly placed shot and most likely alot of youngens start out with this. You wont let your child hunt untill they can prove to you that they candle handle the firearm properly and shoot it confidentally so a ethicall shot with a .243 is deadly but I would not go much lower then that.

Up to 100 yards 30-30 period.200 to 300 yards 30-06 or 270 or calibers in that range.300 to 400 yards 22-250, 223, 243,neck shot only, if you miss nothing hurt but your pride.Over 400 yards let him walk.

I would have to agree with most comments, the 243 is the smallest Cal rifle acceptable for deer. I know a lot hunters use a 22-250 but they have lost deer because of the small wound channel and limited blood trail. More important than the Cal is shot placement, if you use a rifle that you are afraid of because of recoil, you might better be shooting Cal you can handle.

Personally the smallest and lightest roud I would even consider using is the .243. After that the ideal round would be based on the area you hunt. 30-30's are great in swamps and low thickets where range is less than 100 yds. Open longer range shots should be in the 30-06, .308, .270 etc. Long brass for long shots. Yes a .22 rimfire can take a deer but it is far from ethical to do so for a hunter.

The correct answer is( or at least should be) What ever rifle/sight/ammo combination that each individule shooter can most effectively place a bullet with. That changes from hunter to hunter and at times from situation to situation.

Not to be left out on the story end of things, my dad killed his first deer in 1950 something with a .22 long rifle. He killed several deer and the occasional coyote over the years with a .30-06. The last two deer he shot was with a .22 hornet. His best quote, "I don't know why people think deer are hard to kill, they aren't much bigger than a sheep."

Now for me. I got my first deer with a .223. Through the years, I have also shot a single deer with a .22 Hornet. Both fell dead. All the other deer I have shot where with a .270. All of the mises, also have occured with a .270. One as close 30 FEET, not yards. It was not the rifle. It was all operator error. Unfortunatly, when buck fever takes hold of me, for all practical purposes, there isn't any caliber that would be ethical in my hands.

I wouldn't go any smaller than .223 or .243.

Ethical is the question. In the hands of many of the seasoned hunters on this site, the .223 is just fine for deer. For someone who will most probably hit a vital area on the deer, a .223 will kill it just as humainly as a .50BMG. For example, last fall, my 14 year old niece (who is an accurate and avid hunter) shot a buck with her .223 at 150 yards. The bullet entered the front of the chest, went through three spine vertebre and out the back in front of the hind quarters... bang flop. Now when you talk about shooting deer at 1,000 yards or through 50 yards of willows, the .223 becomes less ethical because bullet deflection becomes too unpredictable, even for someone who is a seasoned veteran. Just make sure your caliber of choice has enough horse power to penetrate at the range of your target and that it can cut through any brush you anticipate between you and the target. If there is nothing but clean air between you and the 200 yard deer, cartriges from .223 to .375 H&H all do about the same job on a deer heart.

Good shots can use .243s and .223s, but they can also use a .257, .277, .284, or .30 more effectively. What is the deal with using smaller calibers? Am I supposed to be impressed by those who do so? It's not the same as using a .410 for wingshooting. That truly is more difficult. But it's not harder to kill a deer with a .243 than it is with a .30/06.

This is an ethics question not a cartridge selection question. Each State decides which cal/bullet wt.-type is minimum for each species. This does NOT give the green light for the novice or those who refuse to do thier "homework" to use the smallest, lightest, legal, calibers to hunt deer. What is ethical for one hunter, is absurd to another. What is ethical for YOU?
How much margin of error do YOU need? In the 37 years since my first whitetail, I have come full circle on small, lightweight vs. large, heavy. Back in 1972 the.308 Winchester worked well for me, as it still does today.

A .223

.243 or .25-06

Just out of bootcamp 1963, open day NOV,22 upstate new york had my new win,mod 100.cal.243.took my first buck and a doe. by 9am,its gets the job done.and for 25years more I used Rem-80gr and Rem-100gr, its bulit placement that counts. safe hunting.

I would say a 22-250

.223 but a .243 would be better

223. My brother shot his first deer with an AR-15. Dropped it stone dead.

in nebraska it must generate 900 foot pounds of energy at 100 meters. .223 is right there...depends on the weight of the bullet. then it depends on the twist of the barrel to stabilize that bullet. do your research, spend the adequate range time, and trust yourself.

That all depends, where we hunt the woods are so dense, most shots are under 30 yards. Growing up my dad and uncle hunted these woods and killed more deer with a M1 .30 carbine. At 20 yards on a 120# deer ( a monster by our standards) that gun is deadly. They lost more deer after stepping up to "deer guns" like a 30-06. But for now I would say 30-30 is the minimum, but My brother is very productive with a savage .223.

243

.223 but I've heard of some head shots with a .22. not ethical though

.223 is to small if you ask me, but I know for a fact that a .243 in the hands of someone who knows how to use it will be plenty enough to do the job.

.22 head shot