My respect out to all who have created the other 243 threads out there. Having read them and probably missing something in transit leaves a couple of questions. I have a Ruger stainless/synthetic M77 Mk2 in 243 and am working up a load with a 85gr TSX. The Barnes tech guy sent me the latest excerpt from their manual regarding said caliber and bullet weight. Hodgdon powders has great load info and I've referenced that as well. My powders available are H4350 and H4831SC (supplies are hard to come by these days here in Oregon). Anybody have a pet load with a similar rifle/bullet/powder available combination? My biggest hang-up is dealing with the "seating off the lands" issue. I can use my friend's method of having and extended soft seated bullet inserted into chamber, shoving bullet in and measuring back from there. I can also buy a tool from Hornandy to measure the distance. My third option would be to do what Barnes recommends and that is to go with the COAL that they used and start from there. I've been told TSX are finicky about their distance off the lands. I'm confident in the Barnes product but am overwhelmed with this "off lands" issue.

Any help here would be appreciated.

M

quote:

Originally posted by Moonshot:
My respect out to all who have created the other 243 threads out there. Having read them and probably missing something in transit leaves a couple of questions. I have a Ruger stainless/synthetic M77 Mk2 in 243 and am working up a load with a 85gr TSX. The Barnes tech guy sent me the latest excerpt from their manual regarding said caliber and bullet weight. Hodgdon powders has great load info and I've referenced that as well. My powders available are H4350 and H4831SC (supplies are hard to come by these days here in Oregon). Anybody have a pet load with a similar rifle/bullet/powder available combination? My biggest hang-up is dealing with the "seating off the lands" issue. I can use my friend's method of having and extended soft seated bullet inserted into chamber, shoving bullet in and measuring back from there. I can also buy a tool from Hornandy to measure the distance. My third option would be to do what Barnes recommends and that is to go with the COAL that they used and start from there. I've been told TSX are finicky about their distance off the lands. I'm confident in the Barnes product but am overwhelmed with this "off lands" issue.

Any help here would be appreciated.

M

Most powders that work well for the 308 works well with the .243. I have used 4064 and varget with good success (sub MOA loads). Of the two powders you mentioned, I would try the 4350 first and see where it takes you.

As for seating off the lands, the TSX is not as sensitive as the old X bullets. Try seating it to COAL first and see where it shoots. Since you are using TSX's I assume your into hunting loads, I seated mine to COAL and they shoot 1/2 MOA, Don't feel the need to improve on it.

John

Powders aren't had to get here In Oregon if you order from Powder Valley...

The 85 grain Barnes is a good bullet and doesn't really need to be rocketed out the muzzle to perform well...

I redlined some out of a 243 with H 414...and they gave great accuracy...

however they perform well with much lower velocity also...

Key is to find some powder your Ruger likes..mine isn't picky at all...run the Barnes out the barrel at say 2800 or so...

you'll have a great accurate load...

I have three .243s. A Sako heavy barrel L579, a Remington 7600 and a Herters(BSA action Douglas barrel). All three shoot into an inch with 38/38.5 grains Varget with the Barnes bullets. Tha Sako likes them .005 off, the Remington likes them ~.050 off and the Herters likes them >.100 off.

My advice: Buy the Stoney Point gauge. Load 'em up with 38 grains of Varget and start at .015 off and keep stepping back .010 until they group. Chances are probably 8 out of ten you'll find it before .075 with a Ruger.

Havent shot the barnes 85gr. The sierra 85gr with 44.5 grns of imr 4831 has shot half inch in 4 of the 6 243s I have owned.The other 2 just under an inch. 4064 is also good.

If you can find it H414 is a fantastic powder for the middelweight bullets in the 243 case including the TSX. I load for several friends rifles and they all shoot that powder well. TSX bullets seem pretty forgiving on seating depth. Just to make it easier on yourself try seating just off the lands and then you only have one direction to go if you need to play with it.

quote:

All three shoot into an inch with 38/38.5 grains Varget with the Barnes bullets.

Can't comment on the Barnes TSX's since I haven't tried them (yet).

Both 38.5 & 39.0 grs of Varget were both extremely accurate with the above mentioned Sierra 85 gr. HPBT's.

I'll be making up some loads this Friday.
I'm thinking of using 1gr increments per load, starting with the max and going down.
I'll make 4 rounds per load for a total of four load groups.

I'll be using H4350 with Barnes 85gr TSX

45.5gr max (from Hodgdon's site)
44.5gr
43.5gr
42.5gr (42gr is min from Hodgdon's site)

with a COAL of 2.645" (Barnes recommended)

Is the 1gr increment/load sufficient or would .5gr/load be better for this caliber?
Will the 4 rounds/load be too few?

Thanks for the help

M

Don't worry about the lands. Load to COAL they suggest and my bet is they'll shoot well. I use TSX's almost exclusively and have trouble getting them to group poorly. I find them very forgiving and effective.

quote:

Originally posted by Moonshot:
I'll be making up some loads this Friday.
I'm thinking of using 1gr increments per load, starting with the max and going down.
I'll make 4 rounds per load for a total of four load groups.

I'll be using H4350 with Barnes 85gr TSX

45.5gr max (from Hodgdon's site)
44.5gr
43.5gr
42.5gr (42gr is min from Hodgdon's site)

with a COAL of 2.645" (Barnes recommended)

Is the 1gr increment/load sufficient or would .5gr/load be better for this caliber?
Will the 4 rounds/load be too few?

Thanks for the help

M

85gr is my favourite bullet weight for 243s. I've loaded for 3x 243s in this bullet weight and used H4350 in all of them. I've tried sierra 85gr BTHP, Speer 85gr BTSP, Hornady 85gr IB, Hornady 87gr BTHP and Hornady 87gr SP. I've not tried the TSX.

The speer 85gr BTSP has higher book max for H4350 than all the other bullets (46gr) which has proved a bit too much in all of my rifles (ejector marks etc) so the max load you quote really is likely to be max unless a TSX really does generate less pressure. It's probably just the way you wrote it but you will shoot the loads in increasing charge weight order?!
Were it me I'd probably fire one round at the start load, go up to 43gr and half grain increments thereafter. I'd also load 6 of each, shoot 3 for accuracy and have 3 in reserve in case I messed up the group or called a flier. Given the price of the bullets I might also be tempted to fire just one each of the lower charge weight series and hold fire on the second and third shots until the higher charge weights proved innacurate (if they did). Id have my kinetic bullet puller ready.

It will likely take a second range session to confirm accuracy and repeatability especially from a barrel that is liable to be fouled to a different extent.

Good luck!

Hey you guys! I tried all of your loads in my 243 and it won't fit. Its a 6TCU but its a 243!!! In Moonshots post and the 11 replys no one ever said "243 Winchester". You guys should get a mind reading jobs as there is maybe 100 different "243s" out there.

barnes always recomends a huge jump. i had heard this before i started using them, and this has always bewen my FIRST reply .. seat them WAY off the lands. i have proven this on many guns, that they all prefer a huge jump

use banres recommended OOAL -- and if you want to improve groups, go SHORTER coal first.

FA with all due respect, 243 is the 243 win, all others must add clarification. like a 270 is a 270 win, etc ... no one, in their right mind, would think '308" loads would mean 3030 or 300 rum, just cause someone posted internet loads for the same bullet size

Update on the 85gr TSX load: Had cases resized, reprimed, powder measured and poured and approx. 4 hrs into it before attempting to seat the first bullet. After careful aligning of the bullet seating die, I was able to crimp the neck (not trying to crimp the neck) and drive the neck all the way into the main body of the case (leaving no shoulder, again not trying to do this). After another 1-2 hrs of trying to figure out if it was me, the bullet, a bad die (does this happen?)...whatever. I discovered something interesting: there wasn't enough length of tool to properly seat a bullet without crimping or ruining the shoulder. The Redding die set that I purchased came with two Full Length resizing dies, one of which had the bullet seating attachment inserted into it. You wouldn't be able to tell this unless you read the little band around the die (having picked up the FL die first, I assumed that since the other had the seating tool, it was correct...READ THE BANDS BEFFORE STARTING). I had purchased this from Wholesale Sports (formerly Sportsman's Warehouse) in Portland, OR. When I took the die set back we discovered that all eight die sets in 243 at the store had the same issue and had to be recalled. All other calibers where properly outfitted with a FL and ST die. Weird...must have been a bad day at the factory. I had to drive to Vancouver, WA to their Wholesale Sports to pick up a correct set. Needless to say this project has met with a considerable delay. Women and children have once again taken control of my time and it might be awhile before I can regain it to further the quest for the 85gr TSX load.

M

quote:

FA with all due respect, 243 is the 243 win, all others must add clarification.

Could you let me no what book that is written in? Its all a matter of "SAFETY" Your the moderator of this area and your coming off with a "good old boy" attitude. You should be the one jumping on this not condoning it.

oh fiddle..
if someone says 308, do you think that load is for a 300rum, 30 carbine, or 7.62x51?

Tell you what, i'll post a poll and ask the reloaders here if they would be confused with a 243 vs a 6TCU.

I am not the moderator of this area. Look at the lead page of the reloading forum. That is actually WRITTEN .. the rest of your response leads from an incorrect premise, and doesn't merit response.

let's see what the reloaders think of someone getting "confused" between a 243 and a 6tcu

here's a link to the poll .. ya'll go answer it
http://forums.accuratereloadin...11/showpollresults/Y

quote:

Originally posted by Fat_Albert:

quote:

FA with all due respect, 243 is the 243 win, all others must add clarification.

Could you let me no what book that is written in? Its all a matter of "SAFETY" Your the moderator of this area and your coming off with a "good old boy" attitude. You should be the one jumping on this not condoning it.

IIRC, Federal is loading 85 TSX.

My 243 Ruger #1 RSI, 20", shot a Hog DRT at 240 yds, 85 X, IMR 4350, 45 gr from recollection...chrony showed 3100 even. Fed brass.

Moonshot,


Considering the foregoing posts,(with all due deference to Fat Albert) when you say "243", do you mean the 243 Winchester chambering of a .243"/6mm centerfire cartridge derived from the necking down of the 308 winchester cartridge.
If so, many individuals loading Barnes Triple shocks use those for hunting, not paper punching.
Many people use this round for shooting small and medium thin skinned game animals.
Also many people use this cartridge (243 winchester) to take game at ranges under 300 yds.
Not making any assumptions (as you know the word assume makes and ass out of you and me), chances are, if you load barnes triple shocks over the powders/densities recommeded by Barnes, using a large rifle std or benchrest primers and SAAMI over all lengths or those published by Barnes for their inidvidual bullet types and your barrel has less than a hundred or so rounds through it since the last time you cleaned it gooooooood, and you have a suitable rest and less than a six pound trigger, you should get three to five shot groups out of a cold barrel around 2" or less. That will kill any deer or hog at a reasonable range should you aim at the vitals. Should you be a "rifle looney" and require 1 hole five shot groups, that may take a little longer, different or upgraded equipment, a lot of range time, and is outside the parameters of this post.
best
GWB

PS.
If you are concerned about off the lands, you may want to invest in what is now Hornady, but used to be Stoney Point overall length gauges and modified cases and do some reading. These instruments provide an easy way to measure the OAL when the bullet contacts the lands (as in lands and grooves of a rifle barrel). I have probably owned over a hundred commercial centerfire rifles during the last 20 years in 40 or so chamberings from 17 ackley hornet to 45-70. Commercial rifle chambers are typically cut to SAAMI specs and as such, many times one runs out of bullet and case before one runs out of chamber. Invest in several current reloading manuals. Load cartridges per manual, (ie., Sierra bullets/Sierra manual, Nosler Bullets/ Nosler manual). Each will give powder/load density/primer/SAAMI or mfg. oal length data. Start low and work up.
more best
GWB

quote:

Originally posted by Fat_Albert:
Hey you guys! I tried all of your loads in my 243 and it won't fit. Its a 6TCU but its a 243!!! In Moonshots post and the 11 replys no one ever said "243 Winchester". You guys should get a mind reading jobs as there is maybe 100 different "243s" out there.

Uh, no. You have 117 posts on this board and still don't know the difference between the 243 and the 6TCU? Don't blame others.

While i can't belive Fat Albert has answered the poll, at this momenent, 100% of the answering people felt that they felt that they would not be confused by the designation "243" somehow meaning 6TCU

that leaves a whopping ZERO persent that failed to understand what a 243 is.

I rest my case

Wow! What a hornet's nest. I will surely include the "Win" after "243" for other further discussion topics. My appologies to those to who are confused, concerned and perhaps even mystified at the lone "243". As it goes...My Bad.

Thanks to all, however, who have responded with meaningful info after trudging through the muck of ambiguity known as "243".

M