Anyone care to waxe eloquently on the virtues of these two cartridges? Which is better?

I would hand load for one or the other, my current leaning is toward the 6mm Remington. I know it's not as popular as the 243 Winchester but I think it would be more interesting to load for.

The real question - 6mm Remington in the Remington 700 VLS (Varmint Laminated Stock) heavy 26" barrel or the 243 Winchester in the Ruger 77 MK II 26" heavy barrel (Target model also with laminated stock).

Unless you have one of the slow twist barrels that spelled the undeserved death nell of the 6mm you will find the 6mm to be everybit as much as a cartridge as the.243 with the bonus of a smidge more poder room if you reload . Seemed that people back then couldn't live with out that extra ten grains of bullet weight (100 v.s. 90) that the .243 seemed to push more accurately than the Remington . If this situation presented itself today with the variety of different bullets and how they are consructed with would have probably have been a non -issue and the Remington might have enjoyed a larger slice of the spot light.


444fitch

Anyone care to waxe eloquently on the virtues of these two cartridges? Which is better?


Well, forgetting the "eloquent" requirement, I will add only a couple of observations.

I've never owned a .243 Win, but some years ago I was going through the same process of choice between the two that you apparently are going through now. I ended up buying a Remington BDL Stainless Synthetic chambered in 6mm Rem. Its a short action and that is its only fault. Its is a fine cartridge and I've killed some coyote with authority (I think its a bit much for coyote) and two deer that died as fast as any other heart-shot deer that I've killed with 30-30, .270, etc.. The only problem(?) is that the short action magazine precludes seating the more streamlined bullets like the Nosler Ballistic tips out for maximizing powder space. Many of the heaviest bullets also suffer from this fault. When I seat these bullets out as far as possible while still allowing the cartridge to fit in the magazine, they don't even approach the lands and the bullet is far inside the case. The Nosler partitions, for instance are ok, but the ballistic tips and their ilk could do much better with a longer action/magazine.
So, I suggest that you consider the action/magazine length of your chosen firearm before you decide on the chambering.

Actual practical ballistics of the two are similar and bullet shape may affect trajectory more than the powder charge.

I do like the longer neck of the 6mm, and think the heavier bullets would do better in the 6mm IF THE MAGAZINE will handle the length.

But, the .243 is very comparable and you would do well with either cartridge.

As far as your question of "which is better"; It matters what you want it for. If you are hung up on the fastest cartridge being "better", forget everything I said and buy the one with the most powder. If you believe that the fastest is "better", you will always want the faster 6mm if you "only" bought the .243. But I'm pretty confident that after a few years of shooting, you will get over that "fastest is best" thing.

Good luck!

I had a 6mm VLS and it was VERY accurate, more so than I. Factory ammo is very limited but since you are reloading you are set. I chose the 6mm just because it is different and not so common. I had no complaints. "Had" because I traded it off for a Model 71 348. But what I do have is a lot of 6mm brass, factory ammo, and dies if you are interested. Cheap!

Bill

Both guns have a 26" heavy barrel and my interest is shooting distant targets. I hadn't considered the comments regarding magazine length being a potential limiting factor in hand loading but you make a very good point.

I sat the two cartridges beside one another on the counter top today at the gun shop. By comparison to the 6mm Rem, the 243 construction looks like it was a precursor to the super short action magnums offered today. I just can't bring myself to go the SSM route. The conventional cartridges are fine by me. My Speer #13 Manual offers the opinion the 6mm Remington has more potential at the high end of the reloading spectrum and IF you hand load you might want to take advantage of it. I don't see where the ballistics differ so much to say one is superior to the other but the comments in the Speer manual make sense to me.

I will probably end up flipping a coin, heads I win, tails I win.

flashhole
Well I've owned both and to be frank I really couldn't tell any difference in the way they killed, grouped, or felt when shot.

Currently I have a Ruger 1B and a Remington 700 Varmiter, both with 26 inch barrels in 243. They both shoot better than I can.

If your looking for higher velocity in a 243 diameter bullet you might look at the 240 Weatherby. It surpasses either the 6mm or the 243 for shear velocity.

Personnally I settled for the 243 Winchester because of the availability of brass. You can buy surpluss 308 brass and make lots of nice 243 cases out of it.

I use my 243's for coyotes, squirrels and once in a while for deer hunting. I think either one would do you well. Look at that Weatherby though if shear velocity is your thing. I'm not sure but I think Weatherby just re-introduced it.

I've owned both. Most of the difference between them is on paper, or in your head, really. In the field, you can't tell them apart.
The 6MM might give 100 fps more with heavy bullets- if that makes a difference to you, then the 6mm gets the nod. With light bullets (87 or less) they'll both give the same performance.
Really, you got it right: it's win/win. They're both excellent cartridges.
As to the 240 Weatherby, its always intrigued me, but I've never owned one, for the simple reason that the brass costs a friggin' fortune, and only Weatherby makes it (there may be a connection there....). Something to think about.
If you want 240 Weatherby performance, the 6MM-284 is another possibility.

go to www.long-range.com to see what they say. I'd go with the 6mm Rem's longer neck for what some claim will be longer barrel life.

SS'