The 243 is more popular, but, Is the 243 better than the 6mmRem.?

04 July 2005, 20:25

Jay Gorski

quote:
Originally posted by Ben589:
Guys ... my brain must have been screwy the last couple posts I made here...

I was talking about (and thinking about in my mind) the 6mm - I have no idea why I kept typing it wrong.

Please pardon my faux pas. If you read my posts and actually replace the 6mm in it's place - then my posts make a lot more sense.

07 July 2005, 08:25

slammer

That is kind of like comparing a 300Win to 300 Wthby, pick which ever one you like and take it hunting because there is really not that much difference.

My dad had a custom 6mm on a 700 action and a Lilja barrel that he had built. If you could hold it good enough it shot one hole groups period, and I think he is still mad for selling it.

Right now he has a rem 700 243win straight from the factory that hasn't had anything done to it, and it will shoot one hole groups all day long to.

08 July 2005, 12:43

buckshot

You know that's twice Remington has done this that I'm aware of, maybe more. Once to the 280, and again to the 244 / 6m/m. How can the same company that civilized the 25-06, 257 Roberts, 22-250, and pioneered "three rings of steel" do that? One has to wonder...

13 July 2005, 19:28

El Deguello

quote:
Originally posted by buckshot:
You know that's twice Remington has done this that I'm aware of, maybe more. Once to the 280, and again to the 244 / 6m/m. How can the same company that civilized the 25-06, 257 Roberts, 22-250, and pioneered "three rings of steel" do that? One has to wonder...

For the same reason that the .300 Win. mag. is not a .30/.338, or that Winchester did not bring out a .270 or 7mm Magnum based on the .338 case before Remington did? They certainly had enough time to do so!

22 July 2005, 18:44

rugeruser

What's the deal with 'short' vs 'long' action?

09 August 2005, 21:15

MikeMichalski

Appreciate the suggestions on what to try in my BDL. Unfortunately I've been busy preparing for the Grand American and the rifles are being temporarily neglected. I'll rectify this is September and post any worthwhile results.

Mike

10 August 2005, 05:49

vapodog

quote:
Originally posted by Savage99:
quote:
At this point in history, many gun writers, but more-so gun magazines, were in Winchester's back pocket.
Therefore, the 6mm has always been looked down upon by the more popular, if inferior 243.

Had this not happened, it is my opinion that the 243 would hardly exist today.

-Spencer

I don't agree. The 243 came out with heavier bullets and a faster twist. The 244 came out with a 90 gr bullet as it's heaviest and a slower 1-12" twist. Thus the 243 had the perception of being more suitable for deer hunting.

Most of all the 243 was available in the fine and handy M 70 Featherweight and the 244 came out in a heavy clunker with a 26" barrel.

There was no contest as each will do the same thing. We did not need two cartridges in 6mm. You can only carry one at a time. So the 244 died.

Sure the current 6mm Rem with a 1-9" twist might be a little better cartridge but it's over. The 243 rules.

This is easily the most accurate account of the differences that caused the .243 to overshadow the .244 (6MM)

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill