Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Why do you prefer a .243 over a 6MM?

Just based on loading data alone, it looks like the 6mm is a better cartridge, but the .243 is way more popular than the 6mm.

Seems that as much as shooters nit pick over velocity and such things they would chose the 6mm over the .243 because it has a larger case capacity just like the 7X57 has it over the 7mm-08.

So,, what caused you to opt for the .243?

I prefer the 6mm.

John

Seems the .243 has been around a little longer and plus the 6mm is metric. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

" The 6mm is metric....."

what kind of bull s%*t is that !!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />Hell, why don't you grow up and get like the rest of the world. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />Fractions of and something went out a long time ago and it sure isn't a reason for rejecting something unless you have your head in the sand. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />



So you would give a 6.5mm Swede a place in your gun rack. Or a 6PPC or a 7-08? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> :grin



At least metric has a certain logic to it................. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /><img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Both of them came out at about the same time. The 6MM's first name was 244 remmy. The 722 it first came in had a 1 in 12 twist, 26" barrel and the gun writers at that time said that 1 in 12 would not stablize a 100 gr bullet unless it was a R/N, and the 90 gr C/L factory load was a varmint bullet. The 243 had a 1 in 10 twist and was advertized as a varmint/deer ctg. For some reason the factory vels were listed higher in the 243's. All this happened in the early/mid fifties. Many years later, The barrel twist was changed to 1 in 9 and the name changed to 6 mm.

This same history is behind the 280 remmy. At first it was grossly under loaded to be safe in auto's and pumps. Later the name was changed to 7MM express for the bolt guns, and later yet, to 280 rem. I don't recall what it was call first. Some one with a better memory will say. lol dingus

Ditto, on the 6mm

Dingus is right. Remington couldn't decide just what the 244 was. First out of the box it was a varmint round at the same time Winchester was touting the 243 as a combination round.
I remember trying to make the 244 shoot well with the heavier bullets. Ninety grains was about a heavy as you could go without running into problems usually.
When they changed the twist they called it a 6m/m, same cartridge. Some with the 244's tried to shoot the new factory loads. Didn't work very well as handloaders already knew.
IMO the 244/6mm is slightly better than the 243 but they are really peas in a pod. The 243 got the jump because Winchester got it right the first time.

BCR

only have i loading manual on the desk right now....

.243 100 grainer 3120 top speed listed
70 " " 3630 " " " " "

6mm 100 " " 3261 " " " " "
70 " " 3620 " " " " "


that comes from noslers 4th .....

IF we credited the 6mm 100 gr with 3300, and restricted the .243 to 3100, (these are velocity levels listed in the trajectory table in the book) the extra 200 f.p.s. would net you a whopping .9" at 300 yds., assuming a 200 yd. zero.....

with the 70 grain bullet the .243 has the velocity advantage according to the book.....

so, how much better can a 6mm be than a .243, keeping in mind that remington isn't currently chambering for the 6mm???

my brother has always been a 6mm nut, and most of the experience that i have with the cartridge comes from his rifles... the rifle that he uses most today is a .243 that he borrowed from me a few years back... (1986? or thereabouts) the rifle/scope package suited him and he has been reluctant to return it.... john w

Lindsay, Just curious, do you measure distance in miles or kilometers down there? TM

These rounds are just so close in performance that I can not see any difference. I have used both, got deer and varmints with both. The only downfall of the 6mm is that it came out as competition from Remington vs. Winchester, and Remington screwed up on their marketing campaign. Also the availability of factory ammo for the 6mm is so limited. I sold my 6mm 30 years ago, have had several bolt rifles in .243 ever since and have never looked back. I also reload for it...so available loads are not a concern. It does everything I need it to do where I live and hunt. It is now the only centerfire cartridge I use. Pay your dues....and take your chances.

I got a .243 because the factory fiream options are so limited and the rifle I wanted wasn't chambered in 6mm. The 6mm is a great cartridge but a bit long for a short action.

Laughing here <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> -- not AT you BTW.

I actually agree, just enjoying the "emotion" behind your post. Having used the metric system through HS and college, I can't understand why we didn't convert when we had the chance. How many inches in a mile? How many oz in a cup? How many teaspoons in a tablespoon? What is the mass of a cubic inch of water? How much energy to heat that water 1 degree F? Dang!

While I've memorized many of these, I don't know them all. The metric system is a beautiful thing. Everything relates and makes sense and is sooooo easy to convert in comparison. Not to mention damn near everyone else in the world uses it besides the US.

That said, I've always had an affinity for calibers of the non-metric persuasion. I can't tell you why because I don't know. Someday (probably soon) I'll break through that prejudice and grab something in 7mm, but it might hurt to do it (grin).



7mm SAUM, 7mm SAUM, 7mm Shamu -- buy me, buy me

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> You guys hearing voices???? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

If those were the only 6mm's and I could get either in the rifles I wanted then I would opt for the 6mm Rem. However in the real world you can't do that as few chamber for the Remington cartridge. The history given above is correct and many loading manuals go over it as well.

One could dig deep into this and find that better designs offered by Fred Huntington and Warren Page did not get accepted and Winchester jumped on the simple neck down of the military T-65 case (.308 Win.)

There is also some bad mouthing and or undocumented "facts" that the 243 Win has had a lot of blown up rifles. The ones that I have followed thru on seem to be manufacturing problems.

The 243 is also blamed for wearing throats out faster than the 6mm Rem. I am not sure about this either way.

To me the 6mm's are very useful as target rounds. For this the 243 is a little too large in capacity. As a varmint cartridge either will send the lighter weight bullets at high velocities. As game cartridges there is little use as far as I am concerned except as youth rifles. There are much better rounds for game than 6mm's but to each thier own.

I agree that Big Green screwed up when they introduced the 6mm with the rifling twist, but that was 50 years ago.

What about the discriminating "younger" shooters out there today who are in their 20s to 40s who weren't even born or much interested in shooting when Rem made the big mistake.

I find it interesting that we shooters will search for every advantage we can get out of a case (capacity, length of neck for seating bullets, angle of taper on the shoulder, blow'em out to make an AI, etc.) and then have a "smaller" case be more desirable than a larger one. Especially when they both use the same diameter of bullets.

I just bring it up as someting to debate around the campfire.

Oh, yeah,, I prefer to shoot .284 bullets, I find them much better than those 7mm ones!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I bought my first .243 for my oldest son. He needed a deer / varmint round that didn't recoil. The 6mm is a tad faster but the .243 has a much better selection of factory loads.



He may not care to reload when he grows up. With the .243 it won't be an issue.



I've come to have much respect for the .243 over the years. It simply does things that amaze.



PS When my little boy is ready, his will be a 243 also. But he wants a pink swirly McMillan on his. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

I think the 243 is even better than that................

I use a .243 because I got a great deal on a beautiful 70's production Remington 700 ADL. It's the rifle more than the cartridge. Anyone who says the 6mm is better in the field than a .243 is a theorist more than a real world hunter. That sort of logic would conclude that the .300 RUM is better than the .300 Winchester Magnum. Not many guys with a lot of experience with the Winny have any desire to "move up" to the RUM.

If all things were equal, and a wide range of ammo existed and rifles for the 6mm Remington, then I would choose it over the 243. Seems all the reload manuals give the nod to the 6mm Rem, now I wonder why they would do that? This is just another classic case of Remington dropping the marketing ball in the marketplace. Actually, I like them both, the 243 and the 6mm. Think of this, if Remington has lost sales of the 6mm Remington , and the 243 WSSM is out there for Winchester, why not introduce the 244 Remington Magnum, which could be a commericalization of the 6mm-06. In other words, 240 wby mag performance without the belt, in a very common cartridge, for those of us hunters who arent peeing our pants wanting some short, nobby, un-balanced looking round like the 243WSSM. Now that would make for some fun competition, and I would find it real hard to believe a whole bunch of us wouldnt want that puppy....244 Remington Magnum, I like the sound of that, and it even feeds smoothly in your rifle. Now that is a novel idea....LOL

When I was in the market for a light rifle for a rare prairie dog hunt and then something I could use in GA for deer..I chose a .243 because they are off the shelf guns...If I were getting a rifle in that cal built I would get it in 6mm Rem..I don't give much of a hoot about factory fodder, as long as I can get a couple of hundred pieces of brass to start with..I 'll be set..

Mike

Well . . . . .

Everybody already got everything right . . . .

So I will just chime in with the fact that the 243 is based upon the 308 case, so it must be better than the 6mm because that is based on the 7x57 case (if I am correct). That makes the 6mm a double metric cartridge and the 243 a double American cartridge. Therefore, the 243 is better. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I will buy a 243 first, it is just more available (both as ammo and in rifles). Big Green missed the boat in the 50s just like it missed the boat at the beginning of this century when the WSM's beat the Ultras.

BMT