A friend of mine just left who is having soot on neck or sealing problems with his .243 WSSM. The OD of the fired cases measures .291". This is the same for my .257.

The neck wall thicknes measures a hair over .020". That's more than .006" greater than anything I shoot. Trying to get a wall thickness of .020" to seal at modest loading just ain't real. What am I missing here?

Why is the neck diameter in this rifle as large as in the 25 calibers? Is the neck wall thickness large by design?

Any expert information out there?

Oh! FYI, He's using DP 85 and the rifle is a tack driver. roger

Rodger, if you are in fact talking about a 243wssm is answer is yes, not only neck thickness but the whole case is much thicker then normal cases we are used to.

In Win. brass the capacity is actually about 1 1/2grs. less then the standard 243Win. To be honest in loading for the Wssm I have not found any increase in velocity over the standard 243 unless one jumps the pressure some.

Another thing, it seems you can reach a point in resizing the Wssm cases and after that they just seem the spring back and not take resizing. Maybe anealling would help. I havn't figured this one out yet.

My friend is kind of scratching his hed as to what he can rebarrel to after his barrel goes?
He dosn't to go back to any of the wssm family and wonders what might work in the rails of his action. Pedro

I haven't shot the 243 WSSM much, but have fired nearly 800 rounds of 25 WSSM through 4 different Winchester/USRA 70 rifles and am loving it!

The WSSM brass is heavier/thicker than most "regular" brass. I have been using Federal 243 WSSM brass to feed my 25 WSSMs and really like it. The Winchester/Olin factory ammo is loaded at, or very, very close to, the safe maximum, so anyone looking to increase speed is probably going to be disappointed.

I'm currently shooting a lot of 75 grain VMax in a Shilen barreled 70 Super Shadow and a factory original 70 Coyote. Both rifles are capable of shooting sub-MOA groups consistently and I don't see any obvious signs of bore errosion at 3x, even though neither of these barrels is chrome lined, as the factory 223 WSSM and 243 WSSM barrels are.

I have been thinking that a Winchester/USRA 70 WSSM action mated with a barrel chambered in 500 S&W might be a viable post-WSSM option. That said, I'm so pleased with the 25 WSSM's performance that I don't see myself being without a couple any time soon.

Jeff

Thanks, Pedro. I did mean WSSM and I edited my post to reflect that.

The idea of a bullet leaving the case before the pressure is high enough to move the brass and get a seal at the neck not only will lead to sooty necks but gas in the face. This condition would be exasterbated with medium charges of slow burnig powders.

I just do not understand the manufacturers logic. For the reloader it just presents another variable to be concerned about, the necessity of which is questionable at best.Does anyone know the whys and wherefores of this design?

I guess that's my raving for today. roger

I think that Winchester/USRA was struggling to keep the doors open and the WSSM line of cartridges was a logical extension of the WSM line.

The WSSMs gave the consumer something new to play with and they filled incrimental shelf space in the dealers' racks with something new and different. New and different sells, at least for awhile or until the "newness" factory wears out.

I really like the 25 WSSM and if I need a less powerful cartridge, I'd by more likely to reach for a 250-3000 or 223 or 17 HMR.

Jeff

I am a 25 WSSM shooter. I had soot build-up with modest loads as well. I neck turm just enough to clean-up about 85% of the neck and anneal. Sooting disappeared. I've never had a problem with "hotter" loads. I think the WSSM line are well designed cases; short & fat for more uniform powder ignition and nice long neck. Short fat case leads to short fat bolt which adds action rigidity. My experience is in complete agreement with 260remguy's post. I don't quite have 800 rounds thru mine but I'm closing in on that number. My 25's are tack drivers.

Bartsche,

Winchester just took the parent WSM case and ran it through a forming machine to "squash" it down to WSSM length. So we get obsurdly thick brass and necks because they wanted to save money on manufacturing. Thanks Win.

All the Win 243 and 25 wssm brass I've measured goes between 20 and 22 thou at the neck. I turned all my 25 brass down to 14 thou and annealed the necks. I don't get any soot now, my pressures are sane, and I don't get the heavy bolt lift that I had problems with before. I know my case life is shorter with the thinner necks, but I have 4 reloads on my brass already, and no splits yet. I don't think I'll try for 6 reloads, just in case. I think when this batch of brass is "gone", I'll try some Federal brass, and I keep hoping Norma will put some out there for wssm. I've also wondered about getting 223 wssm and trying to neck it up to 25, to see if it'll thin it out a little.

I think the caliber has promise, but I think you'd be better off with a custom reamed chamber with a tighter neck, and turned brass down to say a sane 12 thou.

I wonder what Winchester was thinking....?


EDIT...

Oh, yea, plan on getting a neck bushing die and some bushings. I use the Redding bushing die to set my neck tension at .002". My original RCBS full length sizer die was giving me .007" of neck tension. Too much spring back with that battleship thick neck.

For you who own the .243 WSSM or the .257 wssm once the bullets exit the muzzles what advantage do they have over existing cartridge?I really am left in the dark on these short fat whatevers. roger

the quality of the wssn sucks...

the best thing you can do is neck it up to a medium bore imho.

unless they re design the brass it will fail as a cart imho

Bartsche,

Well I don't think the wssm's have any real advantage at all over an existing caliber "once the bullet leaves the muzzle." I'm not sure I was looking for any advantage, I was mostly just looking at the rifle itself.

I bought a Stealth 2. I originally bought one in 243 wssm with the idea of trying it on prarie dogs. I figured that, minus the trigger, I would try it as a "turn key" pd gun. However my original 243 had a bore that looked like the moon's surface, very heavily pitted. It looked like the barrel had been stored outside for a while.

When I sent it back there weren't any more 243's and Winchester wasn't gonna be open for long, the Browning repair center only could get me a replacement Stealth 2 in 25 wssm or 22-250. I chose the 25 and have wondered sometimes wether that was the right decision? I would rather have had a 243 than the 25 for better bullet selection.

Browning offered me ANY of their rifles in 243 wssm instead, but they didn't have anything in a stock I liked. I wanted the heavier, wide flat stock of the Stealth 2 over the Browning varminter.

I didn't already have a 6mm heavy varminter, and wanted one to try out. If I'd known what a pain in the ass it is to load for these wssm's, I probably wouldn't have bought one in the first place. They shoot, don't get me wrong, but they're "high maint" to handload for to be sure.

I'm thinking of either having mine rebarreled to a tighter neck, or just cutting the existing barrel back and re reaming it. But for now, I'll shoot it as is. I'd sure like to pick up that stainless laminated Savage with the heavy stock in a 220 swift, or better yet a 6mm!

quote:

Originally posted by Slowpoke Slim:
Bartsche,

But for now, I'll shoot it as is. I'd sure like to pick up that stainless laminated Savage with the heavy stock in a 6mm!

roger

When I jumped into the WSSM pool to satisfy my curiosity, I picked the 25 WSSM over the 243 WSSM because I thought that it would be a more flexible varmint and medium game cartridge. I don't think that the WSSMs do anything that a variety of existing cartridges don't already do, they just do it in a different package. If the WSSMs hadn't come along, I would be happy to shoot the .224", .243", and .257" bores rifles that I already had, but I was curious about the WSSM and have had nothing short of excellent results with the 25 WSSM.

Quality wise, I'm really happy with all 17 of the Winchester/USRA 70 WSSMs that I have and I have had good results with the Winchester/Olin factory loads. I would have liked to have seen a 100 grain 25 WSSM factory load, but the 110 grain AB produced a true "bang/flop" kill on a whitetail buck that was so big that I had to cut him in half to handle him. The rear half and the front half, minus the head and cape, weighed close to 180 lbs. at the meat locker 4 hours after the shot, so I though that a "dead in his tracks kill" was pretty impressive bullet performance. When CDNN was closing out the Winchester/Olin 70s, I bought each of my kids 3 stainless ultimate shadows, 1 chambered for each of the WSSM cartridges. I also bought them stainless barreled 70 Coyotes in 223 and 25, but could never find that configuration in 243 at a price that I was willing to pay.

I'm loading the 75 grain VMax, Sierra HP, and Barnes X for a Shilen barreled 70 Super Shadow with a 1 in 14" twist in 25 WSSM. That combination is so accurate that it is almost unfair to shoot varmints with the Hornady and Sierra bullets. I expect the Barnes to be equally good for deer, based on how well that bullet performs at the slower 250-3000 speeds.

Velocity wise, the 25 WSSM seems to be the equal of the 257AI, which is OK with me. All in all, I'm a happy 25 WSSM shooter in the 4 factory specs and 1 rebarreled rifles that I have used. As much as I generally dislike Browning A-Bolts, I almost wish that I'd latched onto a Browning Ti Mountain Rifle in 25 WSSM before they were discontinued.

FWIW, I also shot a whitetail doe with the 223 WSSM and 64 grain PowerPoint factory load. That deer went about 30' with a through/through lung shot. I haven't carried a 243 WSSM to the field, yet, but expect that it will do whatever the 243 or 6mm will do.

Jeff

For the average shooter/hunter that shoots factory ammo, or perhaps reloads, the extra hoops you have to jump through (neck turning and annealing) to work out the quirks of the cartridge (stiff bolt lift, sooty necks, etc) make it not worth it in my book. The hyped performance improvement isn't there, although the ones I've worked up loads for were accurate rifles.

My counter-point regarding the 25 WSSM is that the factory ammo is loaded to get the maximum performance out of the cartridge, such that you really don't need to be a reloader to get 1st class performance, at least that has been my experience. That can't be said for the 250-3000 or 257 Roberts, except for (maybe) the Hornady light-magnum ammmo in 257 Roberts.

I haven't turned or annealed a neck, but all of my reloads have used Federal 243 WSSM brass. All of it had the primer holes deburred and was trimmed prior to being sorted by case weight, but that is my standard process for all brass, whether it needs it or not.

Since I'm not a Browning A-Bolt or Cooper guy, and they are the only common rifles (that I know of) currently being chambered for the WSSMs, I don't see the WSSMs as a good choice for anyone in 2007. This is particularly so for the entry level/casual hunter who can buy a Stevens 200 in 25-06 for less than $275 and the factory ammo is both good and widely distributed.

I think that a lot of the bad publicity about the WSSMs comes from people who:

A. Have never shot a WSSM.
B. Who may have shot a WSSM, but not enough to make an informed decision regarding it.
C. Who have had a bad Browning or Winchester/USRA experience due to the (bad) luck of the draw.
D. Etc.

I can't speak from a position of any authority about the 223 WSSM or 243 WSSM, but after having fired around 800 rounds in 25 WSSM, I think that I can offer an informed opinion about what it can and can not do. But, as with many things, YMMV.

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
...The idea of a bullet leaving the case before the pressure is high enough to move the brass and get a seal at the neck not only will lead to sooty necks but gas in the face. This condition would be exasterbated with medium charges of slow burnig powders.

I just do not understand the manufacturers logic. For the reloader it just presents another variable to be concerned about, the necessity of which is questionable at best.Does anyone know the whys and wherefores of this design? ...

Hey Bartsche, I'd "speculate" it all begins with the Design Engineers trying to address a weakness in the M70's with the CRF bolts.

I've never had ANY communication with any Winchester employee except for a retired Manufacturers Rep. So, none of this is based on direct information from within, so to speak.

Anyone that has had a good many years experience with CRF designs can tell that there are far fewer Case Head Blow-Out problems with the Belted Cases. It seems obvious to me the reason for this is the extra "thickness" of the Belted Case Head where it tapers into the Chamber.

Soooo, if I had of been designing a new Cartridge, that had the potential to be used in one of the Winchester CRF designs, I'd thicken the Case in the same location to help address that problem. That also results in the Case Neck being a bit thicker. They could have made the Case neck thinner, but doing so would have increased the per Case cost.

Perhaps they should have considered some folks would be interested in Down Loading the WSSMs, but I would also guess it was not in their top 10 priorities.

I'd also speculate that 95% of the folks who buy them are interested in SAFE MAX or very close to SAFE MAX Load levels. As they approach a SAFE MAX, the soot on the Case Neck will be reduced, or of little concern to them as long as it is slinging bullets REALLLLY fast. Not saying "everyone", but "most".

Seems like most folks that do have them are very pleased with their WSM and WSSM cartridges. So, Winchester must have done a pretty good design job.
---

Not everyone likes every Cartridge Design as you well know. I wrestled with 22Hornets for 35 years before I decided to just "Down-Load" the excellent 223Rem to Hornets levels. For people that like the Hornet, I'm happy for them. But I'll never waste my time, money and effort on them ever again.

Best of luck with the WSM and WSSMs.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by bartsche:
...Seems like most folks that do have them are very pleased with their WSM and WSSM cartridges. So, Winchester must have done a pretty good design job.
---.

Hot Core! you're putting me on--; right? It seems that when MOST folks make a decession and buy a so-so rifle that's when the defensive rationalizations start as it is hard for people to addmitt that they could have made a whole lot better choice. Been there done that and am hopefully beyond that now. roger

The WSSM case incorporates all design features advocated by benchrest shooters i.e. steep shoulder, short & fat, and long neck with hunting rifle velocity. This case design has no peer in competition and Winchester made it available to the public. Further, the WSSM case design facilitates the most rigid repeater action so the shooter gets the best of everything. I appreciate Winchester's efforts.

I was looking for something off the beaten-path and am very glad I took the plunge and tried the WSSM. I've worked my loads up and want my loads at max velocity. I have no plans of getting rid of my traditional cartridges, but I look forward to loading for and shooting my WSSM.

Good shooting.

I'm happy with my 17 WSSMs, 2 WSMs, and 2 SAUM.

21 rifles is less than 5% of the herd, so while I don't have them all, I do have them most, so I don't see how I could have made a better choice unless I bought a NULA or an H-S Precision in 25 WSSM.

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
...Hot Core! you're putting me on--; right? It seems that when MOST folks make a decession and buy a so-so rifle that's when the defensive rationalizations start as it is hard for people to addmitt that they could have made a whole lot better choice. Been there done that and am hopefully beyond that ...

Hey Roger, I'm not speaking from an "owners" perspective, because I don't have a WSM nor a WSSM. The ones that buddies have are quite accurate though. Good, modern (Ackley inspired?) case designs that just seem to shoot well - even in the Winchesters.

I can say the same for the excellently designed Remington RUM and SAUM cartridges. It is quite amazing to me just how accurate the 300RUMs and 338RUMs shoot with that amount of Powder being consumed.

I can only remember seeing two negative things about the WSM and WSSM cases. First was "speculation" about the barrel life of the WSSMs by folks rationalizing why they didn't want one. Granted, I'd expect the barrel life to be shorter than the supurbly designed 308Win or 30-06 rifles. And if a person got into the Rapid Fire mentality, they could even shorten the life of a 223Rem. But from my perspective a person buying a WSM or WSSM should buy it and enjoy the performance. Then what ever the barrel life happens to be - just accept it for what it is.

The second negative thing about a few WSMs seemed to be Rifle specific and not cartridge related. I know we have a lot of Kimber rifle fans on this board, but there did seem to be an inordinate amout of bad-mouthing "some of the ones" chambered in the WSM cartridges. And there were a few "Feed Complaints" in some of the first M70s, but that was also Rifle specific. Come to think of it, one of the Stooges got a M70 WSM and had Feed Problems which he later claimed was simply due to him working the Bolt incorrectly. I really should have saved a Link to that.

I know what you are saying about "Defending" a specific cartridge, but all the ones I have are of such excellent design that they really don't need defending.