OT: .243 Winchester cartridge

Bobwhite

Bobwhite

Joined
Nov 30, 1999
Messages
2,913
Hi all. I love the book Cartridges of the World. I recently got my own copy and noticed the editor added a note in the .243 Win. section. It says something about the .243 having garnered a reputaion for erratic performance among handloaders. There is not an explanation or elaboration about what is wrong. Can anyone clue me in? Is it only handloads, or factory loads too? Is it accuracy, penetration or terminal bullet performance? I don't have a .243, but was looking into getting one. I'd like to know more.
 
I just got a Ruger 77 International in 243 and I'd like to hear about this too. Everybody I ever knew with one thought they were great.
 
Wow, that was one of the rifles I was considering. It really struck me as odd seeing the editors note in there. The rest of the description is glowing. Makes you think it is like a smaller .30-06. Then there is this vague warning tacked in there. Earlier editions don't have it.
 
IMO and experience, the comment regarding "erratic performance" is an exaggeration of sorts, but with some basis in fact, specifically two issues:

1) Due to the range of bullet weights available for the 243, the bullet length, seating depth in the case, and length of leade at the front of the chamber neck area can work against each other counterproductively w.r.t. decent accuracy. Depending on which manufacturer made the rifle, the length of leade will vary. As with any rifle, if the chambering has a long leade to accomodate long, heavy bullets and you are trying to load a light, short bullet that's seated a little deep, that bullet has to jump a good ways to the rifling. Not good, especially if the handloader is trying to "stoke" the load pretty hot. By the same token, seating a short, lighter bullet out of the neck and closer to the leade and rifling results in inconsistent force on the bullet by the resized case neck, and inaccuracy. It is best to do a chamber cast of your rifle, or at a minimum to select a long, heavy bullet, invert it and install it in a resized, unprimed case nose-first, and seat the bullet 1/2 turn of the seating die punch at a time, trying the reverse-seated bulleted cartridge, and repeating until the bolt just closes. That's your "master" for chamber length, and depending on how much leade your rifle's chamber has, you will get best results with bullets that are long enough to be into the leade and close to the rifling, but still having a good bit of bullet body held by the case neck.

The second "issue" with the 243 is the powder, and selection of a proper powder burn rate for a given bullet and desired target muzzle velocity. There are a slew of "modern" powders that have been introduced over the past 20-25 years that are fairly versatile for a number of cartridges and bullet weights. Historically, (IIRC) the 243 "liked" powders like IMR 4831, IMR 4350, and WW760, providing the loads were NOT "stoked" and the bullet length and seating depth were "matched" or optimized for the chambering and leade length.

HTH,

Noah
 
You might consider getting a 6mm Remington instead, since you plan on reloading. The larger case should be a little more forgiving, and you can get the proper twist rate now (Remington initially had a slower twist rate when the 6mm was introduced, forcing lighter bullets than the ballistically similar .243 Winchester, one of two reasons why the .243 outsold the .244).

You might also check around at the Handloading forum at TheHighRoad.org, or elsewhere.

John
 
My grandad used to reload .243 all the time and never seemed to have a problem.

Hey the 77 RSI is beautiful and shoots great. Managed to shoot about an inch and a half group with it at 150 yards. I got a Burris I think it's a 1.5 to 5 scope on it. I love the full stock. Reminds me of my 94 mauser.
 
It hardly seems fair to make such a statement and not further elaborate on why. I would not let this deter you from selecting the .243 Win. With the proper bullet selection, the .243 can be a varmint or medium game getter. As for large game....I probably wouldn't use a .243. Handloading should be pretty straight forward. Think it prefers slower burning powders. There should be a great deal of factory ammo available as well. As you probably know, the .243 Win. is based upon the .308 Win. case. I don't recall that any of the .308 Win. cased family had any real handloading "quirks". I'd buy any of them (.243, .260, 7-08, .358) and be happy.

I should probably qualify the above. I've never had a .243 Win. rifle. I did own a Rem. 7 in 6mm Rem. for several years and used it for deer and varmints. Wish I had not sold that rifle now as it was very light and handy.

FWIW, a friend's son has a plain-Jane bolt gun Savage combo in .243 Win. and he claims that it shoots 1/2" groups at 100 yds. This guy has lots of handloading and shooting experience and I don't doubt his claim one bit.

Jeff
 
My grandad also used to have a Remington 742? The auto in 6mm. That was a really nice gun. Hardly ever see them round here. Usually all 30/06
 
For some reason, I want to say the 6mm is having a bit of a resurgence, maybe partially because it has more potential, due to the larger case, and the fact faster twist rates are now available.

I have one, a custom Mauser "Cub Scout" I had a gunsmith build for me, but he cocked it up pretty badly. :(

He has serious medical problems now, so it's not like I can try to get it back, or even just settle on a good @sswhuppin'. Sigh. Not that beating anyone, in this case, would solve anything, just wish my nice Argentine wasn't screwed up to hell, with beaucoup bucks thrown at it.

John
 
'91- of course, I also paid for a nice heavy sporter weight barrel, GR sites, forward scope mount, replacement sporter trigger and American Classic style stock. I don't want to begin with everything wrong with her. :(
 
The .243 has been over used for starting hunters. They don't estimate range well,; espically if young. This has led to animals being wounded and sometimes missed. A .243 wil hit a deer at 300+yards but may not kill it. Al
 
One of my late great outfitter-gunsmith friends never could get the 243 to shoot accurately enough for him.

I don't believe the powder explanation. Other well known cartridges would show the same problem, and they don't, do they?
I think the 243 has always been a great antelope/deer cartridge, and nothing today changes my mind about that.

I've always been troubled by duo purpose cartridges. They're sold on versatility but give something up at either end to achieve it. We want our cake and eat it too. Also, there is a tendancy to use the 243 on bigger game than it is designed for. This would lead to 'erratic' results.

Noahzark leade explanation sounds good, but the trouble is there are the same issues for many rounds normally well regarded- like the 7 mag for instance. One year Speer threw up their hands in despair over that- unable to obtain the published velocities within SAAMI spec of other sources. They wondered if the chamber throats of some rifles had worn or were long.
But for the 243 to be called 'erratic' would mean something there not present in other cartridges. What is it?

I think it's the duo purpose role and using the wrong bullet weight. And on that, individual rifles do seem to vary. The 444 Marlin is not supposed to be able to stablize the larger 44 cal bullets, but in some guns does just fine.

I've always wanted a 243 (but then, the list of cartridges I haven't wanted is kinda small) I wouldn't let one blurb in a gun book change my mind if I wanted one. There is always the real possibilty the rifle would tend to shoot the lighter or the heavier bullets best, but not both.

munk
 
The 243 is a great cartridge. It is accurate and effective on game out to the size of deer. Problems can arise if the bullet is seated out to contact the rifling in the bore. Some manuals had excessive overall lengths listed. You just have to be sure that the cartridge length is not too great for your rifle - and this is easy to check.
If used for targets, you can get fine accuracy with lighter bullets and moderate doses of faster powders. I recall liking IMR 3031 for this. You can get excellent accuracy with heavier bullets (90-105 gr) and IMR 4831, and these work for hunting.

It is a great round. You just need to load it properly for the intended use - and know what you are doing. I had a Rem. 700 ADL that I regret selling to a friend. It would shoot under 1 1/4 inch groups with hunting loads off of a bench at 100 yards, hand-held, 2 1/4" groups at 200 yds. It would shoot 3/4" groups with lighter, target bullets.

The 243 is fun to shoot, accurate, and useful. It is not a moose gun, but packs a decent punch for smaller, deer-sized game.
 
When I got mine I was originally hoping to find one chambered for 6.5X55 which I really like and you can get a little heavier bullet for. Unfortunately they aren't made in that caliber. :( CZ makes a 550 with a mannlicher stock and 6.5X55, but it was either 2 or 3" longer and I was looking for a shorter stubbier gun than that. Since I just hunt whitetails I should be ok.

Always used my 35 mostly but over the last 20 years my woods have opened up way more and I get way more long shots than I ever got when I first moved here. Probably not long shots for you out West guys, but for me.

One thing I found interesting was my .243 with the full stock seemed to have more recoil than my 6.5X55 which has a very short stock. It is a 94 somebody sporterized :mad: I have another original 94 and it is so pretty it's a shame people did that to them. Guess back then they were kind of like the SKS of that time ;)
 
munk said:
I don't believe the powder explanation. Other well known cartridges would show the same problem, and they don't, do they?
Click to expand...

Depends on the ballistics, sectional density, velocity of the other cartridges, too. Some are more forgiving, some are less forgiving. Take the 6.5x55, one of my favorites. That one's kinda hard to mess up, and it can be done but you have to work at it. In contrast, the 32-20 can be a challenge and it shouldn't be, to look at the cartridge. But it's picky about powders and needs consistent case neck tension / crimp in order to perform with decent accuracy.

I think the 243 has always been a great antelope/deer cartridge, and nothing today changes my mind about that.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, with the right load and at the right distances. No question. But I wouldn't take it sheep hunting 400-500 yards across a ravine.

I've always been troubled by duo purpose cartridges. They're sold on versatility but give something up at either end to achieve it. We want our cake and eat it too. Also, there is a tendancy to use the 243 on bigger game than it is designed for. This would lead to 'erratic' results.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.
Noah zark: leade explanation sounds good, but the trouble is there are the same issues for many rounds normally well regarded- like the 7 mag for instance . . . But for the 243 to be called 'erratic' would mean something there not present in other cartridges. What is it? . . . I think it's the duo purpose role and using the wrong bullet weight.
Click to expand...

There are too many people that have tried to turn the 243 into a sizzlin' varmint gun with short, light bullets that were well-stoked, and tried to do so with long-leade guns with less than stellar results. A 'smith friend of mine 30 years ago showed me chamber casts of two different .243s, with difference in leade length of nearly 0.250". A given load shot fine in one, lousy in the other. All things equal, that's a fair jump for a short, light bullet. Spectre brings up another point about the rate of twist, some folks pushed that, too.

All that said, IMO you hit it on the head with your statement in the last quoted paragraph, the last sentence that I boldened. We're looking at the same thing from different aspects. It boils down to "use enough gun" and "don't make it into something it's not." The .243 got a bad rep from folks stretching its limits.

Keep it between the lines, it will do fine.

Noah
 
Noahzark,

I think the gun book made a reckless statement, is what I really think. You could say the same thing about an awful lot of common rounds; erratic performance. (Especially if the handloader doesn't know what is going on) When you started to explain loading issues with the cartridge, I misunderstood and thought you meant these were new issues.

There are some cartridges more generous than others, and none of the mathematical explanations I've read over the years are entirely believable. The 3 Swedes I owned were as forgiving as you say, even though the rate of twist should not have been kind to lighter bullets. The 308 seems to do better than it has any right to. The 32/20 suffers from dimension problems in the chambers of older revolvers. I've a single shot that is a single hole at 25 yards or more. There is nothing wrong with the cartridge.

The 243 is a cartridge come into its own with modern controlled expansion bullets, like the Nosler. When it was introduced some of the bullets were soft and would not take deer sized animals properly. That's what the boys who love the 243 tell me, anyway, and I think they're right.


munk
 
Spectre said:
'91- of course, I also paid for a nice heavy sporter weight barrel, GR sites, forward scope mount, replacement sporter trigger and American Classic style stock. I don't want to begin with everything wrong with her. :(
Click to expand...

Nice setup. IMO the 91 with the box magazine makes a sleek sporter. I particularly like it stocked to the muzzle, but that's me.

I know an excellent 'smith in Western Maryland who can set things right, and enjoys such projects, should you be interested.

Noah
 
munk said:
The 243 is a cartridge come into its own with modern controlled expansion bullets, like the Nosler. When it was introduced some of the bullets were soft and would not take deer sized animals properly. That's what the boys who love the 243 tell me, anyway, and I think they're right.

munk
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree!

GENERAL OBSERVATION: It speaks volumes about the Cantina and its inhabitants that one can make an OT post about a firearm in a knife forum, have a respectful, spirited, and informative discussion that goes upwards of four, five pages or so, and no one jumps in and locks the thread for being too long or not on point (no pun intended). Likewise, a member professes his intent to conquer alcoholism and the outpouring of support posts generates a continuing thread even longer.

I am a member of maybe a dozen or 15 boards of various interests, but NOT ONE comes close to the Cantina. Nicht einige.

Cold Molson Canadian longnecks for everyone!

Noah
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top