Being a British belted .244 H&H Magnum that was created in 1955, it was once considered to be the velocity king for 6mm cartridges, but Roy Weatherby’s .240 Magnum that was launched in 1968 may have prevented the British caliber’s following in the USA, mainly due to no US rifle manufacturers chambering for the round even though it fell short in velocity.

The .240 Weatherby Magnum could send a 100 gr bullet off at 3200 fps.
The .244 H&H could send a 100 gr bullet off at 3500 fps.

Who still has a .244 H&H Magnum in use?

Pieter

Problem with all those super overbore. Plenty of powder muzzle blast only thing missing huge velocity gains. Unless you take all the press at face value.

Never owned a 244.No can't offer anything first hand on it. Had my own version of a 240 even more capacity. Found I could do the same thing with my 6mm and a lot less powder.

But, you should shoot what makes you happy.

I'm sure that no U.S. manufacturers ever chambered the .244 H&H, so the only guns available in that caliber (other than custom) would have been very expensive British rifles. It was also a pretty rare bird in custom rifles. The 6mm/06 had some following and would do about as much velocity with the powders available in the 50's. Hence, the .244 H&H is virtually unknown in the U.S.

A friend had one of the first David Lloyd made rifles in 244 H & H.

After putting SIX (6) shots into a red stag in Scotland before the beast was dropped (all good hits BTW) he sold it and went back to his 303.

It is a useless calibre, the product of a fevered mind (David Lloyd) and offers nothing that the .243 Winchester, 6mm Remington or indeed the .240 Holland and Holland (or the .240 Weatherby which is Roy's direct improved "copy" of the .240 Holland and Holland) doesn't do more efficiently.

And FWIW I'd guess that a good custom 6mm-06 beats the pants of ALL of them for efficiency without fuss and fanfare.

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:
A friend had one of the first David Lloyd made rifles in 244 H & H.

After putting SIX (6) shots into a red stag in Scotland before the beast was dropped (all good hits BTW) he sold it and went back to his 303.

It is a useless calibre, the product of a fevered mind (David Lloyd) and offers nothing that the .243 Winchester, 6mm Remington or indeed the .240 Holland and Holland (or the .240 Weatherby which is Roy's direct improved "copy" of the .240 Holland and Holland) doesn't do more efficiently.

And FWIW I'd guess that a good custom 6mm-06 beats the pants of ALL of them for efficiency without fuss and fanfare.

So you are saying that based on the one example of use of the 244H&H that it and the 243Win, 6mmRem and 240WM are all useless calibres after all they are all firing the same calibre and weight of bullet at the same velocity plus or minus a few hundred fps?

Surely the failure of the 244H&H on the red stag was more likely due to bullet performance and not the cartridge. Put that same bullet in all the 6mm American cartridges with the same bullet placement and the stag would still have taken 6 shots would it not?

I saw a P14 in a gunshop in .244 H&H, but I wasn't intrigued enough to buy it.
Ross Seyfried did an article on a 6mm MK IV, but he also mentioned a 244 used by his father.
He had shot an antelope with a barnes X bullet ( I forget the weight, but fairly light) at less then 100 yds on the point of the shoulder. The recovered bullet had worked perfectly.

IIRC there was an article in 1993 in TAR by Palmisano(PPC designer) on the 244H&H.Couldnt get the"factory" velocities,fouled terribly then spiked pressures unbelievably.So, if you really want to have to use electrolytic copper cleaning machine,0.245 bullets,2X thepowder for 100fps gain over a 244 Rem,buy one.I almost bought a John Lloyd one.

I admit I am addicted to apparently being under-gunned. I love the 243 and 240 Wby. The H&H would probably excite me if it were possible to lay in a good supply of brass, but I do believe the wby/06 case is as far as you can reasonably take the 6mm. With a bullet like the TSX, Scirocco, or Partition that stag would not take 6 well placed shots to drop, it would take one. Red stags like elk or moose have a way of staying on their feet with heart/lung shots until the blood is gone wheather they were hit with a 6mm or .338. Sever arteries near the heart or punch holes in both lungs and animals die pretty quick. On deer size game the 240 does have effects the 243 does not with like bullets at like ranges and I'm sure the H&H would as well.

quote:

Originally posted by Quintus:
... I do believe the wby/06 case is as far as you can reasonably take the 6mm.

For a long time that's what people said about the 7mm Mag - that the 7mm Mag case was as far as you could reasonably go. But the selection of powders we have today has changed and we now have the well respected 7mm STW. Given suitable powders, I believe the .244 H&H can be shown to be just as "reasonable" and useful as the 7mm STW.

For grins I ran a few predictions using Quickload. If you choose a very slow burning powder the pressure curve rises more slowly and you get higher velocities at lower pressures. Several "reasonable" loads for the .244 H&H can be found. For example, a load of 80.0 grains of Reloader 50 (RL-50) behind the Nosler 100gr Semispitzer yields a predicted 3435 fps out of a 26" barrel and 3478 fps out of a 27" barrel. Predicted average pressure is close to, but still under, maximum for the cartridge.

Unfortunately, the shortcoming of the .244 H&H is the bullet diameter. The alternative is a custom .244 H&H magnum proved for and marked for a .243" max diameter bullet.

quote:

So you are saying that based on the one example of use of the 244H&H that it and the 243Win, 6mmRem and 240WM are all useless calibres after all they are all firing the same calibre and weight of bullet at the same velocity plus or minus a few hundred fps?

No you've misread it. Or I haven't expressed it clearly.

The .244 H & H is a useless calibre as it doesn't do anything better than the other calibres I mentioned.

Yes. You are correct as the "one off" of six shots are an indication that the calibre is unsuitable. Why?

Because in all cases the bullets "exploded", as it were, before penetrating.

Because simply the .244 H & H cartridge is not suitable for big deer with the simple cup and core bullets that it (was then) offered in.

Put the same bullet in American calibres firing it at a suitable velocity for it and that bullet will work as intended.

The other example of too high a velocity for the then simple cup and core bullets that it (was then) offered in being the .280 Ross.

Lloyd was a idiot who designed a cartridge that is inefficient for the calibre and didn't work with the bullets then available at sensible stalking distances.

He designed it as a "canyon" rifle...would USA members call it a "beanfield" rifle? In that it was designed for three or four hundred yard shots.

At sensible stalking ranges of one hundred yards the bullet "explodes" and doesn't penetrate.

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:

quote:

So you are saying that based on the one example of use of the 244H&H that it and the 243Win, 6mmRem and 240WM are all useless calibres after all they are all firing the same calibre and weight of bullet at the same velocity plus or minus a few hundred fps?

No you've misread it. Or I haven't expressed it clearly.

The .244 H & H is a useless calibre as it doesn't do anything better than the other calibres I mentioned.

Yes. You are correct as the "one off" of six shots are an indication that the calibre is unsuitable. Why?

Because in all cases the bullets "exploded", as it were, before penetrating.

Because simply the .244 H & H cartridge is not suitable for big deer with the simple cup and core bullets that it (was then) offered in.

Put the same bullet in American calibres firing it at a suitable velocity for it and that bullet will work as intended.

The other example of too high a velocity for the then simple cup and core bullets that it (was then) offered in being the .280 Ross.

Lloyd was a idiot who designed a cartridge that is inefficient for the calibre and didn't work with the bullets then available at sensible stalking distances.

He designed it as a "canyon" rifle...would USA members call it a "beanfield" rifle? In that it was designed for three or four hundred yard shots.

At sensible stalking ranges of one hundred yards the bullet "explodes" and doesn't penetrate.

You got it right the first time...and again the second time.

My home brewed designed 6mm .270 IMP ( 1966 ) when used with the right bullet ( Barnes original 110gr. ) was the hammer of Thor on large mule deer. With another manufacturers 105 grain bullet it was a disaster on mule deer and Elk.
It really is a no brainer that when you are hunting with any super high velocity rifle that bullet design is critical. roger

Grenadier, that is my point. I have achieved 3400 fps with the 100 grain bullet from the 240 Wby and a 26 inch barrel. True you are getting a speculated 30fps more...and true, I could only get 5 or 6 loads out of my cases, but I didn't have sticky bolts or flat primers, just burnt case necks. There comes a point where either your barrel needs to be a yard arm, or your just making more fire. 7mm RUM and 30-378wby come to mind. 338 RUM and 338Wby have found the sweetspot, at least on the overbore scale...in my opinion.

Before anyone continues to poo poo the 6mm-06, here's some real world experience, as I shoot this cartridge regularly. 1st let me say, that all the 6mm's are fantastic. Don't care which you choose, but these comments about the 6-06 producing 100fps more than the 243 is BS.

Here's my platform: 700 Remington action, with a 28" Pac-Nor Super Match Stainless Barrel, in a Remington Sendero pillar and glass bedded stock. I shoot Hornady 87 Grain Hollow Point Bullets @ 3700FPS with IMR 4831. The rifle sports a Bushnell 4200 Elite 6X24 Mil dot scope. My longest kill so far, is a jackrabbit @614 yds.
I view this rifle as a long range chuck/jack rabbit rifle, not for hunting game. For that I use a 243 Winchester, ETC.

I would not mind The H&H, as I believe it would be fun to mess with, if I could find it in the right platform. I wouldn't build one as the 6-06, 6-284, or the Weatherby, IMO would be better choices.

Jerry

Here in UK someone did make a "custom" .244 H & H using a BRNO 602 to which they fitted a barrel bored to take modern .243" diameter bullets but chambered for the .244 H & H case dimensions.

A sort of ".243 H & H" if you like to see it as that. It sometimes surfaces now and again (like the Loch Ness monster) in adverts being for sale in the British shooting press.

But trust me on this. David Lloyd was an A1 arsehole with regard to "his" 6mm and his rifles whilst interesting are an example of hype over substance.

FWIW he had actually started with the .220 Swift for deer use but changes in British Law (well Scotland in fact) were to outlaw any centrefire .22 for the "big" deer we have.

I have used the .243 Winchester and had a 6mm Remington. I did nearly buy a .240 H & H. All are excellent cartridges using a 100 grain "cup and core" at 2700fps up a real world 2900fps.

And I've handled one of the German made with Zeiss Jena 'scope .240 Weatherby rifles. That is in fact Holland's .240 H & H with blown out shoulders.

So even the great Roy realised that what the world didn't need was a .375 H & H Magnum case necked down to take a 6mm bullet!

Some may decry Weatherby...but he did at least live in the real world or what was and was no achievable with the bullets then available in 6mm.

The .244 H & H was a waste of powder and gunsmithing skills on driving a "cup and core" 100 grain bullets beyond velocities that (at short range) it was designed to perform at.

Of them all as I said the 6mm-06 is probably a masterpiece of a functional cartridge that takes the 6mm right up to but not beyond (with 100 grain "cup and core" bullet) it limit of decent humane and killing performance.

If H & H had it SAAMI approved as the 6mm H & H I am certain that it would sell.

quote:

Originally posted by enfieldspares:

quote:

So you are saying that based on the one example of use of the 244H&H that it and the 243Win, 6mmRem and 240WM are all useless calibres after all they are all firing the same calibre and weight of bullet at the same velocity plus or minus a few hundred fps?

No you've misread it. Or I haven't expressed it clearly.

The .244 H & H is a useless calibre as it doesn't do anything better than the other calibres I mentioned.

Yes. You are correct as the "one off" of six shots are an indication that the calibre is unsuitable. Why?

Because in all cases the bullets "exploded", as it were, before penetrating.

Because simply the .244 H & H cartridge is not suitable for big deer with the simple cup and core bullets that it (was then) offered in.

Put the same bullet in American calibres firing it at a suitable velocity for it and that bullet will work as intended.

The other example of too high a velocity for the then simple cup and core bullets that it (was then) offered in being the .280 Ross.

Lloyd was a idiot who designed a cartridge that is inefficient for the calibre and didn't work with the bullets then available at sensible stalking distances.

He designed it as a "canyon" rifle...would USA members call it a "beanfield" rifle? In that it was designed for three or four hundred yard shots.

At sensible stalking ranges of one hundred yards the bullet "explodes" and doesn't penetrate.

No I haven't misread your post. Your original post made no mention at all of bullets not performing, your post if anything focussed on the efficiency or inefficiency issue and the fact that the 244 H&H didn't do anything more than what other 6mms did more efficiently, no mention of unsuitable bullets. The 243W does everything needed of a 6mm very efficiently so by your reckoning all the other 6mms are not needed and could be referred to as "useless calibres".
By the way I only repeated your use of the term calibre for continuity sake in my post but to be correct we should be referring to 'cartridges', the calibre is the bore or bullet size.

Many very good cartridges in use today suffered from bullet failures in the early days and not all of these cartridges were hyper velocity. Coming to mind and often written about by some of the gun writers of old were the 30.06, 270Win, etc.
Quite a few big game cartridges used in Africa also suffered from poor quality bullets but once this was rectified they went on to become legends in that Continent.

Likewise many early cartridges did not realise their full potential and efficiency until the development of better powders but this factor did not make them useless cartridges. After all we could probably get by in the world of hunting and shooting with just 1 cartridge, say a 30.06, a very effiecient cartridge which with the right bullets for the job can make a pretty good fist of dealing to animals from the mouse to the elephant, all other cartridges are useless and not required and all their inventors or developers are in your words "idiots and A1 arseholes".

That's my thought for the day

quote:

By the way I only repeated your use of the term calibre for continuity sake in my post but to be correct we should be referring to 'cartridges', the calibre is the bore or bullet size.

Indeed. Britspeak I fear. But by calibre I meant cartridge. Apologies for the confusion it caused.

So it is a useless (calibre) cartridge. And I haven't even mentioned the totally unecessary belt it carries nor its ridiculously short case neck. Plus one less in the magazine than with a 243 Winchester, 6mm Remington or indeed .240 H & H or .240 Weatherby.


Have you actually seen or handled one of these rifles, or cartridges, in this .244 H & H (calibre) cartridge?

If you want to buy one there is one in Holt's next auction sale.

quote:

The 243W does everything needed of a 6mm very efficiently so by your reckoning all the other 6mms are not needed and could be referred to as "useless calibres".

No. Not what I meant. Nor said.

The 6mm Remington is a better design IMHO with a longer neck and more suitable to an original length Mauser based action.

Now don't get me started on the pros and cons of belted cases or short necked cartridges

I have done most of my shooting over the decades with a 7x61S&H which for all intents and purposes is the 275H&H cartridge loaded with the better powders that Norma produces - a truly magnificent performing and well balanced cartridge if ever there was one, the precursor to the 7mm Rem Mag.
Like many I would agree about cartridges with short necks but then again the 300 Win Mag is one of the most popular 30 cal magnums around and also one of the most popular long range hard hitting cartridges around today and it has a very short neck which doesn't seem to hinder performance at all.

I don't disagree with you that there are many cartridges around that have not come up to the performance levels or done anything better than other more established cartridges and the244H&H is likely one of them but I find it harsh to label it 'useless' and the designer an A1 arsehole. As I said before, many early cartridges, particularly those from England, suffered from poor quality bullets and a poor selection of powder, the cartridge design itself was usually good and many have been the forerunner of some of our best cartridges today.

In terms of large over bore cartridges, are they necessary? probably not but when we look at ones like the 7mmSWT etc, etc, they all have a valid following.

I don't look for them all the time, but I have only seen one in America in my life. It was at Champlins and was a Holland rifle. It had a very skinny barrel, and a very typical British Monte Carlo stock. I can't remember what system the action was. I think Mauser, or maybe a Brno. Wood was perfect, metal was perfect, had a Swarovski scope on it for around $5500. This was about 10 years ago.

a .244H&H pushing a 100gn NP @ 3500 is far from useless for longer range deer or sheep.

similarly , 100gn Nosler @3500 is good part of the reason the .257WBY has following.

I have no doubt that some people have built a 6mm-STW and 6mm-RUM and enjoy using them.

Some people probably even think the fast .17 remington with 25gn @ 4100mv is mostly 'useless'
but I've personally seen it drop small deer and goat size game DRT in their tracks.. with just
one 25gn varmint pill placed through the ribs...the remington pill was the softer bullet,
so one used the noticeably tougher Hornady pill - if taking on larger game than the usual crow,rabbit or fox.

quote:

Originally posted by Trax:
a .244H&H pushing a 100gn NP @ 3500 is far from useless for longer range deer or sheep.

similarly , 100gn Nosler @3500 is good part of the reason the .257WBY has following.

I have no doubt that some people have built a 6mm-STW and 6mm-RUM and enjoy using them.

Some people probably even think the fast .17 remington with 25gn @ 4100mv is mostly 'useless'
but I've personally seen it drop small deer and goat size game DRT in their tracks.. with just
one 25gn varmint pill placed through the ribs...the remington pill was the softer bullet,
so one used the noticeably tougher Hornady pill - if taking on larger game than the usual crow,rabbit or fox.

Agree Trax and even your favourite WDM Bell who you often quote saw the 220 Swift as an excellent deer rifle, mind you any rifle in his hands would have done the job

Remember when the 257 Weatherby was introduced,a 100gr@3720!A friend had one,bbl life was ~800 rds but Weatherby gave him a new bbl.

The 243 Win shooting a 100 gr bullet at 2,960 fps has actually become more popular than any other 6 mm caliber.

The benefit of having a 257 Wby is dubious for various practical reasons. If we ignore barrel life, its performance will be better with monolithic bullets on game, avoiding the disintegration/fragmentation of Softs.

Pieter