Help, Why the 243 WSSM sucks...

elks

New member
So my moms husband, is convinced that the .243WSSM is the greatest thing since sliced bread. He is convinced because he cousin has one and blah blah blah...

I prefer the good old 243!!!!

Since I am just a "punk kid" (I am 34 years old and have shoot circles around him). He assumes I know nothing or at least refuses to acknowledge I know anything.

So here was my thoughts...

1. The 2 are not much different for the everyday hunter/shooter (I honestly believe the guy has only shot 3 times in teh last 2 years).

2. When it comes to game the deer and possible elk are not going to know a difference at acceptable hunting ranges (under 300 yards).

3. The WSSM ammo is almost nonexistent. When you do find it it is almost 10-15 dollars more a box.

I did state that you should be able to find a cheaper 243 WSSM as most people I know who bought em have sold them used and still have the old 243...


SO what else?


 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: mkruegerI have a feeling this post isn't going to go very well for you.

Sorry I wanted to state that he thinks the 243 WSSM is so awesome, and I say just go with the 243....

Especially for someone who shoots very little and only occasionally hunts some.
 
I don't really see enough performance out of the 243 WSSM to justify it. It's basically a 6mm Rem.

Punch your 243 to 6mm Rem AI and smoke him!
 
Originally Posted By: elksOriginally Posted By: mkruegerI have a feeling this post isn't going to go very well for you.

Sorry I wanted to state that he thinks the 243 WSSM is so awesome, and I say just go with the 243....

Especially for someone who shoots very little and only occasionally hunts some.


Well, the bad news is that the 243 WSSM has LESS case capacity than the standard 243 Winchester. 243 WSSM = 50gr of H2O, 243 Win = 52gr of H2O

So, with the same length barrels, and running the same pressure limits, the 243 Win is a bit faster.

Plus, the resale value of a 243 WSSM is nada.
 
Originally Posted By: pahntr760
"I don't really see enough performance out of the 243 WSSM to justify it. It's basically a 6mm Rem. "



That's an insult to the 6mm Rem (in any version!!)

.
 
I shoot them both.
243- 39.6 grains IMR 4064, 87 grain Berger vld, rem 26", 9.125 twist barrel = 3250 fps.
243 WSSM- 40 grains IMR 4064, 87 grain Berger vld, win 24", 10 twist
= 3400 fps.
From a ballistic stand point, in my opinion the WSSM is superior. It does have a whole list of issues when it comes to reloading but that is a whole other thread.
 
The problem is that at the current rate of use--or lack thereof--your 243 WSSM lover will never realize the main disadvantage: Short barrel life.

The 223 and 243 WSSMs will go down as the dumbest factory chamberings of the last century. And that's saying something!

As I've said before, they were invented to solve a problem that doesn't exist and in the process they fail miserably to solve it. All that hassle for 150 FPS? I can't stop laughing!

Grouse
 
Originally Posted By: OK243I shoot them both.
243- 39.6 grains IMR 4064, 87 grain Berger vld, rem 26", 9.125 twist barrel = 3250 fps.
243 WSSM- 40 grains IMR 4064, 87 grain Berger vld, win 24", 10 twist
= 3400 fps.
From a ballistic stand point, in my opinion the WSSM is superior. It does have a whole list of issues when it comes to reloading but that is a whole other thread.

If you are going to compare them, at least compare them at the same pressure levels - a smaller case with a larger charge will always give a higher velocity.

It's like saying that the 308 at 47 grains is faster than the 30-06 at 45 grains...

... well, Duh!!! Ya thunk??


.
 
Originally Posted By: CatShooterOriginally Posted By: pahntr760
"I don't really see enough performance out of the 243 WSSM to justify it. It's basically a 6mm Rem. "



That's an insult to the 6mm Rem (in any version!!)

.

Sorry, Cat. I was simply trying to point out the silly redundancy with most new rounds. I'd take a smooth feeding, readily available 6 Rem over a horrible feeding, lack of market support, short fatty any day. I'm just silly, too, I guess.
 
Originally Posted By: pahntr760Originally Posted By: CatShooterOriginally Posted By: pahntr760
"I don't really see enough performance out of the 243 WSSM to justify it. It's basically a 6mm Rem. "



That's an insult to the 6mm Rem (in any version!!)

.

Sorry, Cat. I was simply trying to point out the silly redundancy with most new rounds. I'd take a smooth feeding, readily available 6 Rem over a horrible feeding, lack of market support, short fatty any day. I'm just silly, too, I guess.

I know... your heart was in the right place - you are forgiven
lol.gif



.
 
Originally Posted By: pahntr760Is it acceptable to put the 40* shoulders on a 6 Rem??
confused.gif


Only if it is acceptable to put falsies on Raquel Welsh
lol.gif
 
Originally Posted By: CatShooterOriginally Posted By: pahntr760Is it acceptable to put the 40* shoulders on a 6 Rem??
confused.gif


Only if it is acceptable to put falsies on Raquel Welsh
lol.gif


lol.gif
 
Originally Posted By: YellowhammerI think the main reason to have one if you are going to is the get them in a AR-15. Can't do that with the old .243
This was my thought as well.
 
Originally Posted By: mkruegerI have a feeling this post isn't going to go very well for you.

That is funny, I started laughing when I read it.
lol.gif
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top