I want to build a combination deer/varmint rifle on a 788 action. I was considering the .243 Winchester. I have never loaded for a .243, but I have heard several folks on this forum say that it is a "fussy" cartridge.

What are some of your experiences with this cartridge.

Thanks,
X

I've owned and/or reloaded for better than a half dozen 243s over the years - all (I think) on 700 actions. All but one (a 700 mountain rifle) were amazingly accurate for sporter weight factory rifles, and with NO tweaking, not even a trigger adjustment. I'm talking 0.5 to 0.75 MOA without difficulty.

I've never found the 243 to be fussy, on the contrary I've found it to be very easy to load for - even with cheap factory (WW or Rem) bullets.

I no longer own any 243s, despite all its merits, I eventually realized I just couldn't forgive its unjustified overthrow of the 250-3000. IIWM, I'd look hard at the latter - it's an equally accurate round (in my experience, though I've owned only bolt guns), uses less powder, is easier on barrels, has a rich history, and is a marginally better deer round (though this is still be hotly debated in another thread).

Loading the .243win is pretty straight foward. While I shoot a .243win, If I was starting from scratch I would opt for a 6mm remington instead.
IMO
Terry

Ditto for the above two posts, with one exception.

The 243 is very straight forward. It is a good versatile cartridge. Component options are extensive. It is accurate and any negativity toward the 243 are by guys justifying that the gun that they shoot is better because it is bigger in caliber. overall the 243 does a good job, and you should enjoy the round.

My only disagreement is on the 6mm Remington, not with the cartridge, but putting it on a short actioned 788. I have started working with a 6mm Remington and love it. It is what a 243 wants to be when it grows up. However to make this statement, one has to utilize a long action for it, instead of a short action. It is needed to be able to take advantage of the longer bullets available in 6mm that make the Remington come alike over the 243.

I was looking to rebore one of my 6, 243s to 6mm REM. However all having the short magazines, I just put some of the dummy rounds in the magazine of the 243s and it negated the need for the 6mm as I had to seat the bullet so far into the case to make use of the magazine limitation.

The 30/06 I rebarreled to 6mm does not have this problem at all. Seating a 95 grain partition or ballistic tip out of the case so far, I get a significant increase in velocity, that equals it to a factory 240 Weatherby or better.

Either way it is a good choice.

Thanks for the suggestions guys.

I was in fact wanting to chamber the gun for the 6MM Remington. I spoke with John Lewis of Carolina Precision Rifles (also a member of AR). He suggested that a 788's magazine, if chambered for a 6MM Remington, would be too short to allow the heavier bullets to reach the lands. This gun will primarily be a whitetail rig as there ain't many prairie dogs in Georgia.

This led me to believe that the .243 would be my next best option.

Is the 788 a good platform on which to build?

Thanks for the suggestions guys...keep em coming

X

I own and load for 3 .243's, two sporters and one HB varmint. The cartridge is, in every way, as simple to produce quality ammunition for as any of the two dozen other calibers I load for. I have owned two 6mm/.244 Remingtons and I like that cartridge very much. I have not, however, found any huge advantages, either in velocity or accuracy, to the Remington round. The Remington will add 50 to 75 fps to the velocity of the Winchester, but otherwise is very similar in performance.

I too have a 788 in 6mm. Yes the mags limit COL, but the mags and the floorplate and catch can be easily modified to give you another 0.5" COL, if you don't mind cutting and welding on an expensive mag (I'm going to try one with epoxy just to see how it works out. 788's are great fun to play with, and every one I own is very accurate. I've tried the 243 in a couple of 700's, but I always end up rebarreling them to something else; something I've never done with the 6mm/788 combo. FWIW - Dan

I'm thiiis close to purchasing a Remington Model 700 in .243 WCF. I've been all over the map in regards to what caliber my first bolt-action rifle will be. When I first started saving for it, I sort of gave up on being able to hunt and therefore had a CZ 527 in .222 Remington at the top of the list. The recent 6mm Remington/.243 WCF threads have convinced me that I can have a super paper-puncher and when I do get my chance for deer and coyotes I'll be ready.

What I really want is a 6mm Remington and thats not gonna happen in a BDL. I know Ruger chambers the 77 in 6mm ( the store has one too! ) But I seem to be stuck on the 700.

My question is this: if I rechamber/rebarrel the short-action BDL, will it require a modification to the magazine as was tossed around a bit in previous posts? The COL is the same as the 7mm SAUM.

Stonecreek,

I genuinely respect your opinion in all matters ballistic, but when I look at Speer's #13 and others, I see a heck of a difference between the .243 and the 6mm. Especially for the 100 grain bullets. Almost 300 fps! I have zero experience and you've got a ton of it. What gives?

My next point is only half meant to provoke you. I am one of those "handloaders". I haven't even started using my cheesy Lee kit yet and I know that I'll probably only load for a few calibers. Most likely hunched over a jury rigged bench made from a Black & Decker Workmate. If I can find the space for that. So how about going easy on us "handloaders" eh?

The Speer manual is, like most manuals, a bit biased on certain cartridges. Speer tends to underload the 243, 250-3000, the 35 Whelen, and (in previous editions) the 280 (among others). They also tend to pump up others. This being said, Speer seems to be particularly aware of average pressure limits, and tends to approach them more tentatively for rounds that often appear in lesser strength actions. Personally, I wish more loading manuals reported load pressure.

All that being said, you can expect a 243 to run about 100 fps behind the 6mm, regardless of what Speer is publishing. IMHO, the 243 is a better choice if, for no other reason, it fits a 2.8" mag better. (For the same reason, I prefer the 250-3000 or 25 Souper over Bob.) The 57 mm case is just a wee bit cramped in a short action.

BTW, there are used 700s in 6mm - watch the auction houses. There are also used 6mms (244s) in Remington's model 722 (the father of the 700 SA), which is a great action in its own right.

I got all the way down to "stepchild's" post before I saw the obvious answer!!! Go to the 243 AI!!! Accurate and dependable if you wnat to shoot 6mm bullets! Go another step forward and get yourself a 25-06!!!!! Another great leap as far as I'm concerned! Have shot 243's, 6mm's and 243AI but they are not on the level with the 25-06!!! From the "church of GHD...25-06"! GHD

I would take a look @ the .260rem for a dual purpose rig. I think it would be a bit better on deer size game w/ about the same recoil (JMO). It will easily fit into your 788 w/ little to no mods. on the mag.

Pre64:

While I think the 6 mm Remington is a much superior cartridge to the 243 ( I own both), to let the difference shine, you have to be aware of a batch of things.

First of all, the 6mm is at its best in a Long Action. Like the old 257 Roberts debate, the cartridge came alive when it could be put in a long action and have bullets seated further out.

Remington and Ruger both have their 6mms in a short action. I don't understand why Ruger does this since they put their 257 in a long action.

The 6mm Rem also comes alive being able to take advantage of the longer bullets such as the 105 grain, 107 grain and 115 grain bullets. Granted they are target bullets mostly, but I am still sure you will see some more hunting bullets coming that way as target shooting migrates to hunting. However you can seat the Nosler 95 grain Partitions and Ballistic Tips out farther in the Long Action 6mm and gain a substanial increase in velocity. The 6mm is also rated at a fairly higher pressure than the 243. I don't know if brass manufactured is made stronger than 243 or not.

A Long Action is a 6mm will essentially turn the rifle into an Equal to the factory loaded 240 Weatherby stuff. I don't know how much more handloaders can do on the Weatherby, but the several 243/06 users I know don't get that much more, if at all, than what the 6mm Remington gives me.

Unless it is a financial issue, if this is going to be your main hunting rifle, I would buy a used or new rifle in a long action. One that you like the stock etc on, and send the rifle to ER Shaw or someone else and get a 6mm barrel put on it. I highly recommend the 1 in 8 twist to take full advantage of all the bullets out there.

My last " playing around" with something involved using a 115 grain 6mm Barnes Target bullet. In a 243 I chronographed it at best at 2700 fps. In the long throated 6mm Remington I seated it out touching the rifling as instructed by an email from Walt Berger. Using 46 grains of RL 19, I chronographed velocities at 3250,and with 44.4 grains of H 4831 Sc, I got velocities of 3150.

Accuracy was the goal here, but I still had more potential if velocity was the goal in the 6mm. The 243 was maxed out at 2700.

My final advise if you want to maximize a 6mm in a long action. I got my die set first. Seated a 95 grain Ballistic Tip, a 105 grain Speer SP, a 105 grain Hornady A Max to the max length of the magazine of the long action that was going to be rebarreled. When I dropped the rifle off to the gunsmith, I also gave him those three dummy rounds and told him to bore it to fit these three. I recommend also a 24 inch tube.

If you don't go the extra steps to bring out the potential, then you really gain nothing else, and the 243 is the route to go then.

Sorry,

forgot the other point of seconding Fred338s recommendation. If you want an increase in velocity potential,and heavier bullet just go with a 260 Remington.

It is like a 243 that you can get bullets up to 160 grains with. You give up any bullet weight under 85 grains to do so.

A 243 will give an average max velocity of 3000 fps with a 100 grain bullet. A 260 handloaded with a 100 grain bullet will give you 3350fps in a 22 inch barrel ( 43.5 grains of IMR 4064).

It will equal a 25/06 in a short action IMHO ( don't want to start that battle again, as this is not bashing the 25/06) plus give you bullet weights exceeding 120 grains.

It is as accurate as a 243 is any day. Recoil is no different in my observations. Who knows if the 260 will stay around; the 243 is established. However if you handload this becomes a mute point.

I look at the 260 Remington as a cross between the 243 and the 270 Winchester. 6.5 mm bullets also have some of the highest overall sectional densities of any caliber, and can penetrate farther at lower velocites base on that and the construction of the bullets to fit the handloading needs of the slower old European calibers. Yet the same bullets are designed to meet the needs of the 264 Mag owners also.

Cases will always be available by necking up 243 or necking down 308 or 7/08.

Here's another thought. Get a 6mm/284. The 284 case length is right in between the 243 and the 6mm. If throated to a 2.8" OAL, you'll have 6mm LA ballisitics in a short action. Lots of premium quality brass and the 284 case in designed for 54,000 CUP, more than both the 6mm and 243 (according to Speer #13). You may need some mag work, or you may not. You'll likely lose 1 round of mag capacity.

There are some rounds that just plain belong in a 3-3.1" action. The 6mm, Bob, 6.5x55, 284, and a few others. It is a shame that Remington or Winchester hasn't recognized this - I think such an action would have been a better choice for all the SAUMs anyway. It's such a trial to always be duking it out with OAL and often having to compromise on accuracy, bullet design, and/or velocity. For these reasons, I'd stick with the 243 or 250-3000 (or improved versions thereof) if you have a 2.8" mag.

Also, in the spirit of Seafire's point, these two shorter rounds can be cut with a somewhat longer-than-standard throat to gleen an extra 75-100 fps or so and still work comfortably within the 2.8" limit. This is particularly advantageous if you have preferences for the heavier bullets in these two bores (as I do).

9.3 :

Good added points!!

WyoJoe, 9.3x62, and seafire,

Thank you very much for your input. I really appreciate it. I had for a long time thought that the .260/6.5x55 was ideal for this part of the world. I believe too, that the 7mm family is where "all around" rifles most probably begin. I meant it when I said I was "all over the map" trying to make this choice.

But its done. I now own a Remington Model 700 BDL in .243 WCF. I was up late last night researching loading data and IMF shows what looks like honest (22" barrel) numbers and 3000+ fps is attainable using 7828 and 4831. Ironically done with Remington bullets, brass, and primers. Norma 204 and MRP look promising too.

I felt that the .243 would be a cartridge I could get a great start with and never outgrow. A Sightron SII 4.5-14x42 on a Leupold base and rings will finish her up.

At the same time I traded my Beretta 1201 FP for a barely used Pintail with a 26" barrel. The new Beretta has a wood stock and forearm instead of the black synthetic.

I am a very happy man.

[ 07-20-2003, 03:13: Message edited by: Pre64 ]

Pre64

A good choice, I have little doubt you'll be able to get very satisfactory results with that rifle.

Here's a quick and dirty trick to try if you can't get sub MOA groups as is. Pick up a thin nylon washer (perhaps with a 3/4" outside diameter) with a hole big enough for your front guard screw. Just place it between the action and the stock at the front guardscrew hole and you've got a "poor-man's" free-floated barrel.

Two caveats:

1) Do not try this with a hard kicking round - they need all the bearing surface that the lug can offer and all the threads that the guardscrew can spare.

2) Do not add a washer to the rear guardscrew.

I've found that this trick works pretty well with mild rounds such as the 243. I remember one 700 in particular that had its groups cut in half just by adding this little washer.

9.3

Thanks again guys.