6mm remington

Status
Not open for further replies.
6mm Rem is a better cartridge all around than 243 Win. for handloaders. Longer brass life, better velocity, less pressure spikes, feeds smoother.
Are you sure on the case life? 6mm always seemed hard on necks. I always split neck much faster, fewer reloads, than 270 Win and 7mm Rem Mag I was loading and shooting at the same time.
 
Yes , the 6 mm is still a viable round. You can find ammo. I do certainly like mine.
 
Are you sure on the case life? 6mm always seemed hard on necks. I always split neck much faster, fewer reloads, than 270 Win and 7mm Rem Mag I was loading and shooting at the same time.
No never split a case neck on a 6mm. Rick Jamison published notes on unpredictable pressure spikes with 243 Win. though.
 
The saga for the 6mm Rem, which is a born-again .244 Rem, reminds me of Remington's near fatal name-change fiasco for the .280 Rem during which it was marketed under three different names. We are all familiar with the usual explaination for the .244's demise: being that it was marketed as a varmint caliber for lightweight bullets whereas the .243 Win. had greater appeal as an all-purpose varmint/big game caliber. But what we never hear, and gun writers seem to have overlooked or ignored, is that in 1955, when the .244 was introduced, it was only available in Remington's plain and simple and hard to love M-722, whereas the .243 was offered in Winchester's highly regarded and much loved M-70. Which I'm sure steered many buyers toward the .243. Which is why I had artist Gary Goudy craft this 6mm Rem on a Pre-64 M-70 action. It makes a big difference. DSC_1622 (3).JPG DSC_1627 (3).JPG DSC_1646 (2).JPG DSC_1664 (2).JPG DSC_1643 (4).JPG IMG-2766-2.jpg
 
Last edited:
The saga for the 6mm Rem, which is a born-again .244 Rem, reminds me of Remington's near fatal name-change fiasco for the .280 Rem during which it was marketed under three different names. We are all familiar with the usual explaination for the .244's demise: being that it was marketed as a varmint caliber for lightweight bullets whereas the .243 Win. had greater appeal as an all-purpose varmint/big game caliber. But what we never hear, and gun writers seem to have overlooked or ignored, is that in 1955, when the .244 was introduced, it was only available in Remington's plain and simple and hard to love M-722, whereas the .243 was offered in Winchester's highly regarded and much loved M-70. Which I'm sure steered many buyers toward the .243. Which is why I had artist Gary Goudy craft this 6mm Rem on a Pre-64 M-70 action. It makes a big difference.View attachment 1113933 View attachment 1113934 View attachment 1113935 View attachment 1113936 View attachment 1113938 View attachment 1113939
That is beautiful. I agree with your post also. Remington had a habit of shooting itself in the foot.
 
Here's my humble Rem 788 wearing an old scope I've since replaced. I've had it since the late 70's, and it is so amazingly accurate for a lower tier rifle. If I didn't load my own 6mm Rem ammo, I wouldn't be able to afford to shoot it! Besides, I haven't seen any factory ammo anywhere around here anyways.

Remington 788 211123 555.jpg


If you don't reload, then I agree with this:
sounds like a bad investment all around. thanks y'all
 
Had a workmate who took a lot of deer with his 6mm Remington ... but here's the thing, he always took neck shots. Told me that on one deer, his rifle blew-out three vertebrae from its neck. The fellow was a deadly accurate shooter and great hunter. He was also poor (had two families to support, long story there). He HAD to kill deer, therefore he got very good at doing just that thing.

The above speaks to the accuracy he was able to achieve with his 6mm Rem with factory ammunition. As far as killing power when shooting game and aiming for the "boiler works" (lungs and heart), his story falls short. Often -- and depending on the shoulder width of the animal -- one needs bullets that have mass, i.e. weight, to retain enough energy to punch through muscle and bone, THEN keep on going into the boiler works. Many will say that one needs more than 100gr / 120gr bullets to do this.

So, how thick are the shoulders of the animals you wish to drop? How close will these critters be to you?

Most eastern white tail deer are simply not big at all and the 6mm Rem will surely drop them. I'm from Southern Appalachia and long shots are not the norm, but then neither are thick-shouldered deer. Heavier deer, I'd want a bullet weighing 140+ grains.

Here's a person who knows the topic:

https://www.americanhunter.org/content/head-to-head-243-winchester-vs-6mm-remington/
 
The saga for the 6mm Rem, which is a born-again .244 Rem, reminds me of Remington's near fatal name-change fiasco for the .280 Rem during which it was marketed under three different names. We are all familiar with the usual explaination for the .244's demise: being that it was marketed as a varmint caliber for lightweight bullets whereas the .243 Win. had greater appeal as an all-purpose varmint/big game caliber. But what we never hear, and gun writers seem to have overlooked or ignored, is that in 1955, when the .244 was introduced, it was only available in Remington's plain and simple and hard to love M-722, whereas the .243 was offered in Winchester's highly regarded and much loved M-70. Which I'm sure steered many buyers toward the .243. Which is why I had artist Gary Goudy craft this 6mm Rem on a Pre-64 M-70 action. It makes a big difference.View attachment 1113933 View attachment 1113934 View attachment 1113935 View attachment 1113936 View attachment 1113938 View attachment 1113939
gorgeous rifle. looks like it never comes out of the safe except for pics lol. my hunting rifles get beat up
 
The saga for the 6mm Rem, which is a born-again .244 Rem, reminds me of Remington's near fatal name-change fiasco for the .280 Rem during which it was marketed under three different names. We are all familiar with the usual explaination for the .244's demise: being that it was marketed as a varmint caliber for lightweight bullets whereas the .243 Win. had greater appeal as an all-purpose varmint/big game caliber. But what we never hear, and gun writers seem to have overlooked or ignored, is that in 1955, when the .244 was introduced, it was only available in Remington's plain and simple and hard to love M-722, whereas the .243 was offered in Winchester's highly regarded and much loved M-70. Which I'm sure steered many buyers toward the .243. Which is why I had artist Gary Goudy craft this 6mm Rem on a Pre-64 M-70 action. It makes a big difference.View attachment 1113933 View attachment 1113934 View attachment 1113935 View attachment 1113936 View attachment 1113938 View attachment 1113939
Like is NOT a strong enough statement...
 
6 mms Remington were built on a short action M700, so either of your suggested cartridges would not feed from the magazine.

Oh my mistake, I was under the impression it was simply a necked down 30-06.

If it's a short action, then a 308 or 358 winchester is my suggestion I guess.
 
For a handloader it's a great cartridge.I would love to find a Remington 788 in good shape that was chambered for the 6MM.One of my hunting buddies had one and it was an impressive rifle for deer and groundhogs.He had a great job and could afford high dollar guns,but when he went hunting with a center fire rifle,he took his 788.I shot some crazy tight groups with it.The round has great potential.
 
Heckuva cast bullet chambering.....

"Mostly" factory 1980 R700V. Bedding and tuned factory trigger.... 6-18 gloss Redfield.

85g Saeco pretty much full tilt load of IMR4831.... about 1/2 way into book JB load,2800+ fps. Was running the bolt fast as I could on this 100yd 5 shot group. Yanked the frick outta last shot but still....

Screenshot_20221113-094008_Gallery.jpg
 
I hand loaded 6mm Remington for a while a few years ago...very accurate and no issues but gave it up and did a rebarrel in 243.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top