I have had the privilege of "wearing out" a couple of 6mm barrels, but in the 6mm Remington chambering, not 243 Win.
[Also managed to toast a Swift barrel or two, lol.]
These barrels were on varmint rifles, and I rebarrelled when they would no longer keep 5 shots under 1.25 moa.
One of these rifles was a Ruger M77V (tang safety) It started out as a very accurate rifle, ¾moa or better for 5 shots.
At around 2200 rounds, I noticed that accuracy had dropped off noticeably, so I started experimenting.
I seated the bullets out a bit more, and the accuracy came back somewhat. [Ammo no longer fit the magazine]
This extended the accuracy life for an additional 350-400 rounds, and that was it. I rebarrelled at that point.
I took the removed barrel, sawed off the back 8" and split the barrel.
There was virtually no rifling for 5" up from the chamber.
This rifle had been cared for, and cleaned properly....not shot "hot" [allowed to cool between shots/groups]
The second rifle was a Remington 700V, early vintage.
The accuracy life of this one was quite similar, I started discerning the accuracy loss at around 2500 rounds.
I did not section this barrel, but could see the effect of the erosion from the chamber end with a good light.
The 243 would be quite similar, IMHO. The powder charges are only slightly less than the 6mm, so results would be alike.
Now, if these rifles were being used strictly as "hunting" rifles, then they would probably have been Ok for a considerable time yet.
But it is hard to hit a gopher reliably at 350 yards with a 1¼moa rifle.
Anyone that claims stellar accuracy after 5000+ full powder loads out of a 243 (or 6mm Rem) has his figures screwed up somewhere.
Regards, Eagleye