Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

.243wssm or .223wssm

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by bluecowdawg, May 17, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bluecowdawg

    bluecowdawg Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Messages:
    226
    Location:
    east texas
    has anyone got one of these yet? or has anyone had the oppurtunity to shoot either of these two rounds? if so i would like some first hand opinions on either one please


    __________________
     
  2. BusMaster007

    BusMaster007 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    900
    Location:
    Upper Left Coast
    If I read an article about these two correctly (can't remember the recent issue of which magazine...anybody else know which one?) the cases are exactly the same.
    Only the bullet/caseneck is different sized.

    How long before someone interchanges the two 'unintentionally' and what would happen?
    OOPS.:what:

    Isn't this the reason many cartridges have gone into production 'slightly altered', so that OOPS doesn't happen?

    Correct me if I'm wrong.
    Sorry I can't recall which magazine I was reading.
     
  3. Sunray

    Sunray Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2003
    Messages:
    10,481
    Location:
    London, Ont.
    .243wssm ain't out yet. Another example of the firearm industry announcing things we can't have. I'm hearing June, but...
     
  4. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    42,974
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    The June issue of Guns&Ammo has an article on the .243WSSM.

    http://www.gunsandammomag.com

    It seems to me that these new, short cartridges would really be great for a handloader. You can load down and use the less expensive bullets and get the same very-good performance that we've known for decades. Or, you can use premium bullets and load hot and play Ma Bell in the wide-open country.

    For a given barrel length, the rifles are shorter and lighter. To me, that's a big plus.

    Also, we've learned that the shorter and fatter cartridges with their stiffer actions give a bit better accuracy in both target and hunting rifles. As these cartridges become more common and more loading data is developed, I thinks folks will be pretty much pleased...

    The caveat, of course, is that if you're already doing quite well with your existing cartridges, you don't really need one of these new hotshots.

    New toys are always fun, though.

    :D, Art
     
  5. cratz2

    cratz2 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    Location:
    Central IN
    Yeah, for anyone other than a handloader that was wanting to get creative, I'm not sure I understand the new supershort magnums - the 223 and 243 - the 270, 7mm and 300s, I don't have as bit a problem with. I'm all for change and new cartridges and as much variety as possible, but the WSSMs just seem to have a lot going against them.

    I mean, the 243 Winchester and the 6mm Remington have been around for just under 50 years and the new 243 WSSM has what... 150 fps difference in the 55 Gr Ballistic Tip loadings. That translates into 100 ft/lbs of energy at 200 yards and a one inch difference in drop at 400 yards and a two inch difference in drop at 500 yards.

    This is at the cost of the same weight of a rifle, fewer rounds in the rifle, more expensive ammo for non-handloaders and with the stunning accuracy the .243 Winchester is capable of, I really doubt any increase in accuracy. The SSMs have a rebated rim which isn't going to help feeding at all and the larger diameter cartridges need to move more vertically to feed properly which isn't going to help. And for folks that shoot a lot, the 243 has never been known for long lasting barrels and with the WSSM and it's higher velocity, it will burn em up faster still. And even with the increased energy and velocity, you still probably aren't going to take any larger game or game currently on your list at any longer distances. I mean, at 500 yards, there's 50 ft/lbs difference in the 243 and the 243 WSSM.

    For the guy that want's to be the first on the block - which I do understand - I guess it would probably be pretty neat to play with. For the guy that actually shoots quite a bit at either paper or more responsive targets, it just doesn't add up for me. Well, other than rifle and ammunition companies having new products on the market and more choices to sell.

    :confused:

    Edit - just went to Winchester's website and when comparing the rifles that come in 243 Winchester and 243 WSSM, there is no difference in weight or length but it looks like they do have a new model available only in the WSSMs that is sort of an ultimate mountain rifle that weighs only 6lbs flat and is one inch shorter than their Featherweight.
     
  6. six 4 sure

    six 4 sure Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    372
    Location:
    Harrisburg, IL
    If you want to know a little more about them I'd check out www.shortmags.org

    Six
     
  7. JShirley

    JShirley Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    20,841
    Location:
    Atlanta
    Aside from building a DG rifle, the next rifle I expect to buy will be a .243 WSSM Winchester. Controlled feed super-short WINCHESTER for $500!

    John
     
  8. hksw

    hksw Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,157
    Location:
    OH
    IIRC, the 7 mm WSM and .270 WSM are slightly different in case dimension as the bullet diameter were very close (difference ~ 0.007"). Conceivable that someone could shove a loaded 7mm into a .270 chamber.

    The difference between the .223 WSSM and .243 WSSM are much bigger. (~0.019"). I'm thinking this larger difference will prevent the .243 case neck from fitting into a .223 chamber neck (without the use of a mallet).
     
  9. Steve Smith

    Steve Smith Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,394
    Location:
    Southeastern US
    Barrel life

    I'm wondering what the barrel life is going to be on those. .243 was bad enough. Either would be a really interesting space gun round if it weren't for that issue.
     
  10. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    42,974
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    I dunno, Steve. From all I've read about these shorter and fatter cartridge cases and the "performance per grain", they might be about equal in the case of the .243.

    I'm guessing that the short magnums will be slightly better than the standard or long magnums, given such data as 20% less powder for only 10% less velocity.

    For hunting or benchrest, I don't see it as a problem. The hunter doesn't shoot that many times; the benchrester already expects to change barrels rather frequently. The main impact might be, then, on competitive paper-punchers: You might need one of these new wonders to get the last gnat's-rear of accuracy, but you won't get the barrel life of the past.

    Lotsa unknowns; time will tell...(How's that for "the future lies ahead"? :D )

    Art
     
  11. Steve Smith

    Steve Smith Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,394
    Location:
    Southeastern US
    Art, if the barrel would last long enough, wouldn't one of those be the bee's knees in an AR based space gun?
     
  12. GunNut

    GunNut Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,075
    Location:
    Washington State
    Steve Smith,

    You mean like this Olympic Arms PCR-8Mag???

    I've got an extra lower that probably will get a 223 Varmint upper, but in the end might get a .243 WSSM upper. Then I'd be deer legal in Washington State.

    Steve
     
  13. Andrew Wyatt

    Andrew Wyatt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,468
    Location:
    Bakersfield, California
    I'd like to neck one of these up to .30 caliber and chamber it in a mini-14.

    then i'd have an m1 carbine with the terminal performance of an m1 rifle.
     
  14. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    42,974
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    Andrew, I can't help but wonder at the R&D for the diameter of the gas port.

    :D, Art
     
  15. makdaddy03

    makdaddy03 member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2003
    Messages:
    638
    Theres an article in Guns & Ammo june 2003 about the 223 wssm. But I have'nt read it yet.
     
  16. Andrew Wyatt

    Andrew Wyatt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,468
    Location:
    Bakersfield, California
    well, that'd be easy. make the gas system adjustable.
     
  17. Steve Smith

    Steve Smith Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,394
    Location:
    Southeastern US
    GunNut, yes, that's what I'm talking about. But I bet accurate 600 yard barrel life is about 2000 rounds. :barf:
     
  18. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    42,974
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    Steve, doesn't that get us into the realm of cost/benefit analysis? That is--as a for instance--using a similar rig for practice, that's maybe of lesser quality/cost, and saving the high-dollar rig for "the real event"? Or, loading down a bit for practice, thus extending the barrel life? Downloading (seems to me) changes the recoil somewhat, but mostly affects just the scope adjustment for range and wind.

    I'd want the feel, the trigger, the length of pull to all be the same...

    Sorta like with my carry pistol: I don't shoot the LW Commander a lot, but I do shoot a good bit with a regular 1911 that's about the same trigger.

    Art
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page