OT: .243 Winchester cartridge

Noah Zark said:
GENERAL OBSERVATION:

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

Noah
Click to expand...

What does it have to do with Kuhkuri's?

Everything.
 
One thing I think that makes this a great forum, apart from the variety of people of different viewpoints and cultures is the fact that it isn't too specific.

I really think that sometimes forums mess up having too many discussion folders. Too specific. I think that with a more general format people comment on stuff they might not take the time to hunt out on a forum with a lot of sub folders or a single issue forum like this that really sticks to a single issue.(unlike this one) So with a large number of topics you got people posting more often than in single issue forums so that in turn gets a lot of people stopping by and checking in. Then the Deal of the Day is the capper. Recipe for success! :cool:
 
Y'all mentioned my personal pet, the Ruger 77 RSI. Mine is .270 Win, and before I picked it up, several folks warned me (with excellent intent) that having a .270 with a barrel that short would "ruin accuracy..with lots of unburned powder", "make way too much noise" and , most damning of all "would lose huge amounts of velocity, ruining the effectiveness of the round". Having already used various .270's, most of which landed in the closets of my grown sons, I decided to take a chance, an' damned glad I did. I also happen to have an ancient Oelher chronograph, so off to the range.
To make a long, happy story short, I found velocity loss much more modest than expected, and one unexpected side bonus: recovered slugs from deer are classic mushroom, not all shreded looking like some high velocity rounds. After a number of years (15 or so?) this thing kills better than I have any right to expect. Balance and shootability are super...this one ain't leaving the house without me :D
 
I own a Model 70 in .243 that my father purchased in 1969. He brought it over to my house and gave it to me last year....said he hadn't shot it in 12 years and it was a shame to let it sit. He hunted with it for years and killed a truckload of deer with it and then got interested in muzzleloaders. I replaced the scope with a new swift 4.5-14 and took it to my cousin's farm to sight it in. I sighted it in at 100 yards and proceeded to put three diffent brands of ammunition and three different bullet wieghts in the size of a nickel. I have never reloaded anything except 7-30 waters cartridges for my contender, but factory ammunition does very well in this gun. We hunt woods mostly and rarely shoot over 100 yards. I agree with the advice given. If I wanted to shoot deer at 250 yards, the .243 with 90-100 grain bullets would not be my choice. It is a great/fun gun to shoot. Like shooting a .22.....the recoil is practically non-existent.
 
Noah,

Good point. At this present moment, I'll suggest virtual Blenheim Spicy Ginger Ales for all. ;) I may eventually get the name of that 'smith from you, but it cost a lot to get the rifle this screwed up, so I'd better save before I fix it any!

On the subject of range: I think one important component of using a .243 or similar light round, is (as both munk and jnarc mentioned) the velocity question. Larger calibers such as the '06 are more forgiving, in general, with their much greater bullet weights and diameters.

A 6mm (.243), on the other hand, needs a heavier bullet at closer ranges. If one *knew* shots would only be taken at much longer rangers, a lighter bullet would be used, since the explosive fragmentation that happens at close range will not happen on a longer shot. Instead, reduced velocity will cause more moderate expansion and deeper penetration, making what might be a varmint round at closer range a deer round at longer distances.

As always, with a long shot and a light caliber, be sure you're dialed in precisely, and have penetration/expansion tested your bullet for that range.

John
 
Thanks for good help all. I asked this question here for all the reasons Noah Zark was mentioning. Some other boards would have handled it much differently. You guys are all people I respect and get respect from, even when we disagree. This is a unique place on the Net and I consider it home. I have learned more here from you guys about a huge range of topics than I ever learned in school even. Thanks again.
 
munk said:
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
Click to expand...
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. - Munk
************************************************
There ya go making sense again. Sure the .243 is just a bit on the small side of effective rounds for deer sized game. On the other hand, hundreds of deer have been killed with smaller rounds. Shot placement is important. If you are really concerned about shot effectiveness, step up to my favorite round.... the .260 Remington and forget your worries forever!
Thanks,
iBear
 
The 308 case seems to work wherever you go and whatever diameter you stuff in the neck. What a happy case and cartridge.
The original complaints of the 260 was that it did not deliver the velocities hoped for in short barrels- particularly single shot handguns.
I never read anything about it that it wasn't accurate though, very accurate. The 7/08 seems to get better velocities with equal BC and heavier bullets. Not a dissimilar discussion as that between a 270 and a 280.
It's the old saw that if you owned one it wouldn't be worth going in hock for the other.

munk
 
munk said:
The 308 case seems to work wherever you go and whatever diameter you stuff in the neck. What a happy case and cartridge.
The original complaints of the 260 was that it did not deliver the velocities hoped for in short barrels- particularly single shot handguns.
I never read anything about it that it wasn't accurate though, very accurate. The 7/08 seems to get better velocities with equal BC and heavier bullets. Not a dissimilar discussion as that between a 270 and a 280.
It's the old saw that if you owned one it wouldn't be worth going in hock for the other.

munk
Click to expand...
Certainly!
 
I can only atest to my experience with the .243. I joined a varmint hunting club and hunted with them for about 4-5 years. When I first joined I asked around for recommendations on a good gun and I got a lot of support for the .243, regardless of who made it. Long story short, a Ruger M77 MKII in their varmint/target configuration served me very well for the time I spent with them. I did most all of the usual tircks to prep my brass and shot 70 gr. Nosler BT's with (if I recall) about 43 grains of IMR 4320 behind it. Seated the bullets so they were right up within a few .001's of the lands and all within a couple of .001's on the runnout. So long as I did my part and placed my shot properly I never had to chase a dog one. The interesting difference that I noticed was in the performance from different bullets. I first went with Berger bullets because of their recommendation. Oh they were accurate all right but they seemed to do massive amounts of external damage but I had to chase the darned animals, no good. The same 70 bullet from Nosler with their ballistic tip allowed for good penetration before it exploded like a small grenade. Often times the round would not exit, there was only a single 6mm entrance wound and the insides of the animal were exploded bad, worked very well.
 
munk said:
The 308 case seems to work wherever you go and whatever diameter you stuff in the neck. What a happy case and cartridge.
The original complaints of the 260 was that it did not deliver the velocities hoped for in short barrels- particularly single shot handguns.
I never read anything about it that it wasn't accurate though, very accurate. The 7/08 seems to get better velocities with equal BC and heavier bullets. Not a dissimilar discussion as that between a 270 and a 280.
It's the old saw that if you owned one it wouldn't be worth going in hock for the other.

munk
Click to expand...
I agree! The .308 was my first choice for a rifle. I was sixteen and my Grandfather, William Amos Goodman, stopped by and said Patrick, lets go. :) :) :) So I went. He took me down to Bill Harless Gun Shop, North Bend, Oregon. He said, for your sixteenth birthday I want to give you your rifle of choice. In those days, huge amounts of surplus military ammunition was available cheeep in 7.62 (.308). This allowed me to shoot very inexpensively. I chose a Savage lever action in .308. My Grandfather said it was a great choice and was so impressed with my choice that he also bought another one of the exact same rifle for my cousin.
Thanks,
iBear
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top