Why shouldn't I get a .243?

[LoneWolfUSMC]

I hate seeing the "which caliber" debates, so lets take a different view on this one.

Let's assume I am set on a .243Win bolt gun. Convince me why I shouldn't go that route.

It's purpose will be totally and completely oriented towards tactical rifle competition from 0-1000 yards. My current primary .308 weighs in at 18+ lbs so swinging a long barrel isn't an issue for me. I don't need to tromp through the woods, jump from planes or fastrope from a helo with it. I have short .308's, semi-auto .308 and .223's and a long barreled .308 so that territory is covered well. I have a pile of other guns to fine tune the fundamentals of marksmanship.

The rifle will need to be a bolt action and magazine (AICS). These are non-negotiable since I have a ton of other AICS systems I don't really want to add another magazine system.

I really want to keep the discussion focused on the cartridge and bullet selection with mentions of barrel length and twist. The attraction to the .243 is mainly for the wind-cheating and flat trajectory properties of the 115 DTAC, and others.

This is one instance where I truly do "need" another rifle.

 

[Mike]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

You may not knock down some targets at very long distance (800+ yards). Other than that, nothing should stop you.

 

[Onemoretime]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

Never had one but the main concerns I've heard from users are:

1) Barrel Life
2) Some have had trouble knocking down steel targets at distance

 

[Rob01]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

Sorry but no reason not to get it. I am just waiting for my Surgeon action to show up and I am building another with a Manners T3 with mini chassis and Bartlein 8.5 twist barrel. Going to shoot the 105 BTHP exclusively.

Mike you have had problem with steel going down? I never had any with my old .243.

 

[Mike]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Onemoretime</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Never had one but the main concerns I've heard from users are:

1) Barrel Life
2) Some have had trouble knocking down steel targets at distance</div></div>

Let me start off and Rob01 will back me up the "barrel life" issue with the 243 is BS.

2K rounds is the standard.

 

[turbo54]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

In terms of exterior ballistics only, the 243 is a winner.

Interior ballistics? Eats barrels.

Terminal ballistics? Weak

For paper-punching only, I think its a fine choice, but spotting misses in the dirt is tough, "splash" on steel isnt nearly as pronounced as some heavier calibers, and in some matches where you have to make a target move (flashers and stuff), the 243 comes up short.

 

[Rob01]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

Agreed Mike.

 

[Onemoretime]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Onemoretime</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Never had one but the main concerns I've heard from users are:

1) Barrel Life
2) Some have had trouble knocking down steel targets at distance</div></div>

Let me start off and Rob01 will back me up the "barrel life" issue with the 243 is BS.

2K rounds is the standard. </div></div>

Some consider that LOW...

 

[turbo54]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

I might add:

My buddy uses a 243, launching 105s and 107s at 2850 (which is VERY moderate!!). The barrel started to suck at 1500 rounds and was crap at 1700 rounds. Set it back, now at 1200 rounds its done.

 

[Rob01]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

Odd, my old .243 was shooting 115 DTAC at 2990fps and at about 1850 round was still sub 1/2 MOA when I sold it.

 

[Onemoretime]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

2k isn't great considering that out of the 6.5's you can get MORE THEN double that. All depends on your wallet.

If I got one I'd get two barrels done at the same time just so I'd have a spare for a quick turn around if the barrel took a nose dive and I had to replace it quick.

My 2 cents.... probably worth more like .5 cents, depending on who you ask.

 

[Mike]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

Moon from GAP had a 243 holding sub MOA with over 3K rounds on it. I personally saw (Rob may have been there too) him win a 1K contest with it.

 

[LoneWolfUSMC]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

Rob, does the 105 BTHP offer any advantage over the 115 DTAC?

 

[turbo54]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

Are we really satisfied with "sub moa"? I'm not. When I shoot a 1.5" group at 200 yards, I'm embarrassed. A good rifle/ammo/driver should make little bugholes at 200 yards.

 

[Southpaw357]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

I think 6mm is good for a comp gun. Low recoil and great ballistics. I chose 6xc instead of 243. Just seemed like a better design to me Components are reasonabally priced through david tubb. But if i didnt go 6xc it would have been 243.

I shoot with the lrprs group here in phoenix and ive shot a few of these guys 6xc rifles and man are they sweet. With a brake it does not move. Nice for awkward positions,etc.

sure the barrels go quicker, so be it.

By the way, i really appreciate the videos you make. I have the utmost respect and appreciation for our service men/women, especially our scout snipers!!!

 

[LoneWolfUSMC]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are we really satisfied with "sub moa"? I'm not. When I shoot a 1.5" group at 200 yards, I'm embarrassed. A good rifle/ammo/driver should make little bugholes at 200 yards. </div></div>

Sub MOA will win me 90% of the matches I shoot.

Wind is the killer. The occasional botched range estimation can eat points too. Tactical matches are not bench rest matches.......although I would love to be able to use this rig in local banchrest too.

 

[Mike]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are we really satisfied with "sub moa"? I'm not. When I shoot a 1.5" group at 200 yards, I'm embarrassed. A good rifle/ammo/driver should make little bugholes at 200 yards.</div></div>

I LOL'd. First, in tactical comps rarely do you have a nice stable platform. I know at the K&M match we just hosted there were very few.

Second, any caliber out there should bughole at 200 yards. What is it doing at 800+? If you're "embarrassed" at .5 moa results can we expect to see your name on the record books soon?

Real world tactical comps can be won with a sub-moa gun all day long.

 

[Rob01]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rob, does the 105 BTHP offer any advantage over the 115 DTAC?</div></div>

Only if you shoot for Hornady

Seriously, it's got less BC at .530 but will shoot nice and flat and still have enough energy to knock down steel. Getting to 3100fps with it is easy too.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Onemoretime</div><div class="ubbcode-body">2k isn't great considering that out of the 6.5's you can get MORE THEN double that. All depends on your wallet.
</div></div>

I wouldn't bet on double that if shot hard at matches. A good match rifle and shooter will win back enough off the prize table in a season to rebarrel without trouble. My .243 paid for itself a few times over so a barrel isn't a big deal.

Barrels are like tires. You don't see Nascar drivers worrying about tire milage.

 

[7mmRM]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

FWIW, the throat on my 243, with ~1500 down the pipe, is in pretty rough shape. 1-7.7 twist Bartlien. 107s @ 3000fps. The only reason I really even checked was because accuracy dropped off significantly.

 

[Rob01]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

7mm, I ran Tubb TMS rounds down the tube about every 300 rounds. Helps to keep the throat smooth.

 

[ejb]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

man can not have enough guns harleys good liquor and good woman which i dont have so i buy liquor guns and harleys

 

[LoneWolfUSMC]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Only if you shoot for Hornady

Seriously, it's got less BC at .530 but will shoot nice and flat and still have enough energy to knock down steel. Getting to 3100fps with it is easy too </div></div>

I kind of thought that might have something to do with the shirt you wear.

 

[turbo54]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are we really satisfied with "sub moa"? I'm not. When I shoot a 1.5" group at 200 yards, I'm embarrassed. A good rifle/ammo/driver should make little bugholes at 200 yards.</div></div>

I LOL'd. First, in tactical comps rarely do you have a nice stable platform. I know at the K&M match we just hosted there were very few.

Second, any caliber out there should bughole at 200 yards. What is it doing at 800+? If you're "embarrassed" at .5 moa results can we expect to see your name on the record books soon?

Real world tactical comps can be won with a sub-moa gun all day long. </div></div>

No argument. A 1 moa rifle is plenty good to win a match. It's hard for me to be really confident in a rifle only goid fir "sub moa".

 

[LoneWolfUSMC]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

So I guess this isn't the worst idea I have had.

I am seeing that to get the most out of the 243 in 115gr variety, I am going to need a 1:7.5 twist and 28" or so of length. Is this correct?

 

[Mike]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So I guess this isn't the worst idea I have had.

I am seeing that to get the most out of the 243 in 115gr variety, I am going to need a 1:7.5 twist and 28" or so of length. Is this correct?</div></div>

Yes

 

[spaniel]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

You shouldn't get a 243 because you can do everything it can and more with a 243AI, and your brass will require less TLC.

 

[broke_again]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

I personally would recommend a 6XC but the .243 will be cheaper to load for due to cheaper brass.

 

[sethmstanton]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: broke_again</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I personally would recommend a 6XC but the .243 will be cheaper to load for due to cheaper brass. </div></div>

^^^^^This

Check out the 6xc. This will be my 6mm build. Great ballistics, superior case design, with slightly better barrel life. For tactical matches I don't think you can beet the 6mm. Low recoil, laser beam shooter, and cheap to reload. I shoot with a lot of guys in tactical matches that use the 6mm, but with 26" barrels. 28" maybe a bit long especially if you decide to brake it. Speaking in terms of shooting positional and the fact that depending on the contour you chose and braking it, the rifle maybe slightly front heavy. I think a 26" tube in a medium palms contour and a brake will work out perfect.JMO

 

[79_z28]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

I really have no complaint with 243 works good for me

 

[-=boone=-]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

Here's the skinney on .243's...They own, period.

For us .308 and .223 guys they suck because we get owned...

 

[Niles Coyote]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

I say go for it lonewolf. I didn’t go the custom route on mine, chose to buy a Remington varmint for now. Until that time all I was shooting was a few 223's and 308's out to 1000y. I am sure you know how difficult that can be at times.

The 243 opened my eyes to just how easy 1000 could be. I could see energy on target at LR being an issue once you get there, that is if you have to knock it over. I ended up buying a custom 260 shortly thereafter and the only thing I like about it better (cartridge wise) is the louder impact and slash on steel.

 

[z28kid]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: boone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's the skinney on .243's...They own, period.

For us .308 and .223 guys they suck because we get owned... </div></div>
Lol, my next one is gonna be a .243 shooting a 105 grainer as well. Planning on a 22-24" tube tho

 

[kraigWY]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

I'm 5th on the waiting list for the SH Sniper Challenge, If I move up and make the cut, I was going to use my '06, but decided to go with a .243, It's a Model 70 w/ a medium weight barrel in a wood stock.

One thing I do know, is it shoots a heck of a lot better then I do.

Who knows, I might use a revolver for the hand gun stage.

If the barrel goes, I'll put a new one on.

 

[mdesign]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

The 243 is a great cartridge but pretty sure either the 260 or 7-08 does everything the 243 does....only better in the wind.

If you want to shoot to 1000, the wind is a very real adversary and that would be the main reason I would give for not going with a 243 if other cartridges are available. The 284 would also be another better choice.

It's not too hard to beat the ballistics of a 308 but you can certainly do better than a 243.

 

[Mike]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mdesign</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The 243 is a great cartridge but pretty sure either the 260 or 7-08 does everything the 243 does....only better in the wind.

It's not too hard to beat the ballistics of a 308 but you can certainly do better than a 243.</div></div>

Really? Apprise us how a 260 or 7-08 beats 1.7 mil @ 1K @ 10mph FV wind?

Because they do not.

 

[varmint slayer]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mdesign</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The 243 is a great cartridge but pretty sure either the 260 or 7-08 does everything the 243 does....only better in the wind.

If you want to shoot to 1000, the wind is a very real adversary and that would be the main reason I would give for not going with a 243 if other cartridges are available. The 284 would also be another better choice.

It's not too hard to beat the ballistics of a 308 but you can certainly do better than a 243.</div></div>

Every time this comes up, somebody walks into that trap thinking the 115's are easy to beat with a 6.5 or 7mm. The numbers don't lie and they are very impressive.

 

[rrflyer]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

George from GAP shoots a 243 as a match rifle.

Big downsides are that sometimes hits are hard to call at distance.

If your planning on setting it up for the 115's the DTACs have been in very short supply. I've also heard that a rifle won't shoot the 105s and lighter of throated for the 115.... But not 100% on that

 

[blackblue]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

Im considering 6xc, 243ai or 6 super myself, I had a tikka in 243 that I loved but the brass not being stable drove me nuts, might have just been the chamber on that rifle but it grow alot.

 

[Niles Coyote]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

With my loads 105vld @2930 and 140vld @2800 the 260 wins in the wind but not by much. If I had a custom tube on the 243 and a twist to shoot the 115’s it would be a little closer still. Drop wise the 243 holds the edge by a couple tenths.

 

[stapletonb08.1740]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

[/quote]

No argument. A 1 moa rifle is plenty good to win a match. It's hard for me to be really confident in a rifle only goid fir "sub moa". [/quote]

+1

 

[WhiskeyWebber]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: blackblue</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Im considering 6xc, 243ai or 6 super myself, I had a tikka in 243 that I loved but the brass not being stable drove me nuts, might have just been the chamber on that rifle but it grow alot. </div></div>

This is why I chose 6XC over .243. You don't have to trim 6XC.

Plus, I'm able to get 3100+fps on the 115s so I'm not giving up much performance and I'm getting at least double the barrel life of .243.

Not sure on the 6SLR or 6CM. I think these outperform .243 but there's a limit of 3200fps on most matches and I think you are testing the limits of most bullet integrity when you are talking 3200+ with a 1:7 barrel.

 

[Awesymoto]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

you shouldn't get a .243 because then that's another shooter who will have a nicer setup than mine.

 

[105amatt]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

I just started testing the 105 bthps, so far they are my new favorite. I'm running a 7.7 twist, it shoots the dtacs great and the 105 hornadys. Im getting 3000 fps out of a 25 inch barrel.

 

[Brandon05_88]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Let's assume I am set on a .243Win bolt gun. Convince me why I shouldn't go that route.
</div></div>
So you can leave some 115s for us mere mortals.

Sometime in the near future, Roscoe is gonna be sending a Surgeon 591, Bartlein 7.5 twist Rem Varmint contour at 26.5" my way. I'm gonna have her melonited, and I'm hoping for 3,000 rounds of 115 DTACs around 3,000 fps.

I considered the .243, .260, 7-08 and .284 for my new rig. I kept coming back to the .243. Lapua brass is available. DTACs are $120 for 500; try that with VLDs or Scenars. Rifle doesn't move with a brake. Flat trajectory, good in the wind, no recoil, somewhat cheaper to reload for...what else must be said?

 

[LoneWolfUSMC]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

Great, now I just have to decide if i am going to rebarrel the 700 or get a barrel for the AE MkII.

I don't like to monkey with the AE but I don't know if I really want to go back to shooting a 700 when money is on the line.

 

[Massoud]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

.243 is great, I used to run that then switched to a .243AI. I'm getting ready to put a .243 barrel on my TRG, and one of the other guys here has a .243 TRG barrel as well. I'm planning on trying the RE17 cause I'm reading you can get close to AI performance in a standard .243.

As far as hitting steel, the .243AI was whacking steel out to 700 quite a bit harder than the .308. At least it seemed that way.

P.S. you should send us your AE and let us take some measurements...
Justin

 

[-=boone=-]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

My W.W.J.D. bracelet (What would John Do) says get a barrel spun up for the AIAE.

 

[kraigWY]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

Opps wrong spot.

 

[z71rat]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

I absolutely love mine. Flat shooting, no recoil at all with the RWS brake, super accurate, easy to load for, tons of projectile choices... I wish I had gone this route a long time ago!!

DK

 

[LoneWolfUSMC]

Re: Why shouldn't I get a .243?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: boone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My W.W.J.D. bracelet (What would John Do) says get a barrel spun up for the AIAE. </div></div>

It's very tempting, but the barrel and tools will be quite a bit more than the 700. Of course once I have it all, then I can just order a new barrel and not need to send it off for re-barreling.