Why did the 6mm have to disappear? It was everything the .243 is not!

Hihi962

Hihi962

Regular
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Location
Alberta
The only thing I can think of is that americans dislike the metric system.

There is no logical reason to choose a .243 over a 6mm ballistically. Unless you choose to shoot poorer performing guns. I can think of several other chamberings that should have disappeared before the 6mm, but i guess they are still around for sentimental reasons, perhaps grandpa shot them or something.

Personally i miss seeing the nice varmint/deer rifle on store racks.
 
Since the 243 is a 6mm, is it safe to assume you are talking about the 6mm Remington? (Formerly known as the 244 Remington)
 
As with the 6.5X55, it's not 'American' So, not popular. Ask the typical American Fudd what size cartridge that, or the 6mm is, or how it compares to any standard cartridge, and he won't have a clue.

I think that may be changing, but slowly, the 7mm's have done that.
 
Last edited:
From what I've read it goes beyond the "anti metric" designation. The 244/6MM Rem was made with a rather slow twist barrel and wouldn't stabilize bullets over 80 gr (?). It was thought the rifle would be used primarily as a varmint round. When the people at Win came out with the 243, it was designed as a dual purpose round and the barrel was made with a faster twist to stabilize a heavier bullet, 90-105 gr(?). The heavy bullet is better for deer.
 
There were two elements at play. Remington built their 6mm rifles with a slow 1:12 twist, envisioning a pure varmint cartridge rather than a varmint-big game rifle. Winchester gave the .243 a 1:10 twist which would stabilize 100 gr bullets, therefore the .243 was seen as more versatile right out of the gate. By the time Remington made the change to 1:10, the .243 was already well established, and pushed by scribes like Warren Page.

The second element at play was the metric designation the Remington cartridge received, which sounded foreign to the American ear in the 1950s. Remington seemed fixated on metric designations, with their 6mm, 6.5mm, 7mm, and 8mm, cartridges. The only one that caught on was the 7mm magnum, which again was pushed inadvertently by Page who wrote at length about the success he had with his 7mm Mashburn Magnum in locals from Afghanistan, to New Zeland, to Africa, to Jackson Hole. Deer hunters of the day flocked to the 7 mag with dreams of making those marvelous 600 yard shots. As with the .280 which was briefly called the 7mm Express, a term that caused confusion for consumers, the 6mm Remington was also called the .244 Remington for a time, but nothing helped.

Today if you want a 6mm with more than the .243 can give you, you might as well build a rifle based on the .284 or the '06 case. A 6.5 magnum necked down to 6mm would be interesting as well, but really doesn't do anything the .284 case doesn't do as well.
 
There are many good and logical reasons why the 243 survived and the 6mm Rem did not.............the 6mm was based on the 7X57 case, where the 243 is based on the 7.62/308 Win case with availability of millions of basically free brass from military ranges and police ranges. Secondly the 243 runs exceptionally well through a short action where as the 6mm, although marketed in a short action really needs a long action to attain it's full capabilities, where it now competes with the 25-06. The original 244 Rem introduction was with a 1-12 twist barrel which would only stabilize up to 90 gn bullets and was aimed solely at the varminting market. Winchester on the other hand envisioned their cartridge as a light game cartridge as well and put it in a 1-10 twist barrel and offered 100 gn loadings making it much more attractive to the eastern groundhog/deer hunters as a one gun does all cartridge.
When one goes back to the 50s you will also find that Winchester had a much larger following among gun nuts and gun writers of the day. Remington not nearly as much, so in them days Winchester could do no wrong and very little Remington did was ever noticed or written about. But the single largest reason was the first one stated...........availability of cheap/free brass and almost any cartridge based off a current military case is going to flourish, just look at the line up today.........243, 260, 7-08, 308, 338 Fed and 358 Win, all moderately to roaringly successful..............all for the same reason. You will not find a single mainstream cartridge in NA based on the X57 case, several fringe cartridges hang on, but certainly could not be called immensely successful, 6mm, 257 Rob, 7X57, 8X57 and 9.3X57...........why....lack of an endless supply of quality brass, cheap!!!
Look at all the successful and current cartridges based on the 06 case, same reason.

Oh and by the way Remington did not initially market it as a metric designation, so that argument is actually moot. Remington marketed it as the 244 Remington for the first years of it's life and only changed it to the 6mm when they reintroduced it with a 1-9 twist about 9 years (I think) later, by which time it was too late and the whole cartridge, regardless of twist was pretty much dead.
 
Last edited:
If you wanted a cartridge to fail on the American market, a metric designation is a good place to start. Stamping Remington on it is another. There's a few exceptions like the 7mm rem mag(.264 necked up) .223 (hard for a U.S. military cartridge to fail) and 22/250 (which was doing fine as a wildcat before Rem hung their name on it.) Otherwise, the Rem name is almost the kiss of death.
 
I think C-FBMI hit the nail on the head
Cartridge popularity isn't all about ballistics. Component avalibility, marketing and cartridge length also play a role.
 
c-fbmi said:
There are many good and logical reasons why the 243 survived and the 6mm Rem did not.............the 6mm was based on the 7X57 case, where the 243 is based on the 7.62/308 Win case with availability of millions of basically free brass from military ranges and police ranges. Secondly the 243 runs exceptionally well through a short action where as the 6mm, although marketed in a short action really needs a long action to attain it's full capabilities, where it now competes with the 25-06. The original 244 Rem introduction was with a 1-12 twist barrel which would only stabilize up to 90 gn bullets and was aimed solely at the varminting market. Winchester on the other hand envisioned their cartridge as a light game cartridge as well and put it in a 1-10 twist barrel and offered 100 gn loadings making it much more attractive to the eastern groundhog/deer hunters as a one gun does all cartridge.
When one goes back to the 50s you will also find that Winchester had a much larger following among gun nuts and gun writers of the day. Remington not nearly as much, so in them days Winchester could do no wrong and very little Remington did was ever noticed or written about. But the single largest reason was the first one stated...........availability of cheap/free brass and almost any cartridge based off a current military case is going to flourish, just look at the line up today.........243, 260, 7-08, 308, 338 Fed and 358 Win, all moderately to roaringly successful..............all for the same reason. You will not find a single mainstream cartridge in NA based on the X57 case, several fringe cartridges hang on, but certainly could not be called immensely successful, 6mm, 257 Rob, 7X57, 8X57 and 9.3X57...........why....lack of an endless supply of quality brass, cheap!!!
Look at all the successful and current cartridges based on the 06 case, same reason.

Oh and by the way Remington did not initially market it as a metric designation, so that argument is actually moot. Remington marketed it as the 244 Remington for the first years of it's life and only changed it to the 6mm when they reintroduced it with a 1-9 twist about 9 years (I think) later, by which time it was too late and the whole cartridge, regardless of twist was pretty much dead.
Click to expand...
I agree. As much as I like my 257Roberts, the same 25cal bullet would be better in a 308 case for all the above reasons.
 
I have 4. 243w rifles and no 6mm rem rifles....so it must be better!! :)

(haven't seen any 6mm Rem ammunition for a while) fwiw it is interesting to see the observations made when the .308w was introduced and how quickly all the long range target shooters migrated from the 30/06...citing demonstrable accuracy gains made with the .308w over the 30/06. Not only is the .243w pretty good as far as terminal ballistics go..but it is a VERY accurate little speedster!
 
Well, I have had a long and enduring love for the 6mm Remington. Just a nicer case to load for, IMHO.

Owned several 243 rifles over the years, but never kept one longer than 4 months. They are fine, but........ :)

With the 6mm, I have shot a trainload of deer, a couple of moose and umpteen Black Bears. Never lost any due
to that little 100 grain Partition [a few were shot with the 95 Partition] not doing its job.

At present, I have 3 - 6mm's in my gunsafes, a Ruger flat bolt 77R, a 700 Classic, and a custom HB for long range work.
It is built on a 700 action, and has shown itself to work well on targets out past 1000 meters. [Berger 105's and 108's]

The lack of popularity the 6mm has is quite well summarized by Douglas. Mores the pity. Dave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom