6mm Creed or .243 Winchester

[WisBorn]

• ok so I'm really starting to lean towards the 6 Creed but what about rifles, which brand will provide the biggest bang for the buck?
• Please keep in mind my 1K max budget.
• Sticking to a bolt action platform.

Two manufacturers came to mind with your budget. Savage and Ruger.
Savage 110 Tactical Desert msrp $799
Ruger American Predator msrp $549

I have owned several Savage rifles, great accuracy.
I have heard nothing about comments about the Ruger American rifles (next on my list).

Don't think you could go wrong with either!
Have fun with your search and safe shooting!!!

 

[Weflyfast]

Which would you chose in a new rifle and what brand.
Primary use is target shooting.

Both- guns heat up quickly....best to have two or three!

Ha!

 

[mshootnit]

Which would you chose in a new rifle and what brand.
Primary use is target shooting.

Primary use is target shooting, then its 6mm Creedmoorre. For hunting I'd take the 243 Win. or even better the 6 mm Remington.

 

[dave951]

At your proposed distance, either is fine. What hasn't been mentioned is that 243 can be hard on a barrel as can some of the new 6 and 6.5s. Accuracy can start falling off in as little as 1500 rounds. That generally doesn't happen in a 308. While the 308 is easier on barrels and ammo is easier to find, the 243 and 6mms are better long range choices.

 

[horsey300]

At your proposed distance, either is fine. What hasn't been mentioned is that 243 can be hard on a barrel as can some of the new 6 and 6.5s. Accuracy can start falling off in as little as 1500 rounds. That generally doesn't happen in a 308. While the 308 is easier on barrels and ammo is easier to find, the 243 and 6mms are better long range choices.

At 300 yds, I'll raise you a 300 Bo.

 

[LoonWulf]

At 300 yds, I'll raise you a 300 Bo.

Pffftttt noob, .22lr or nothing ........

 

[brutus51]

For hunting I'll stick to my 30/30, 30-06 and 45-70. My interest in the smaller calibers is for target shooting as it's a lot easier on the shoulder and allows for more shooting. Heck, I own an AR15 but my preferred assault rifle is a 44mag lever gun.

 

[Poper]

Define "target" shooting?

What's your budget?

To some guys TGT shooting is informal at a bench at 100-200 yds. To others it's LR precision and a match grade rifle & optic. The difference in "context" of TGT shooting is the difference between an $1100 factory rifle complete with $500 worth of glass to a $4000 rifle complete with $1500 worth of glass.

You're about to get recommendations all over the spectrum.

Or, if you're not very smart (like me, for instance) you buy a $400 rifle and stick $1300 in glass on it.
But I have to admit, the .243 Win. Mauser M18 with the Swarovsky 3.5-18x44 do look good together....

 

[horsey300]

Or, if you're not very smart (like me, for instance) you buy a $400 rifle and stick $1300 in glass on it.
But I have to admit, the .243 Win. Mauser M18 with the Swarovsky 3.5-18x44 do look good together....

I'd say that's perfectly smart!

Pffftttt noob, .22lr or nothing ........

Wow you guys really cheat, my 3 year old's aiming at prairie dogs at 250 with a crossman!

 

[dave951]

At 300 yds, I'll raise you a 300 Bo.

I hope you are aware that the 300BO is ballistic copy of the 7.62x39.

I'll take the 7.62x51 for 500 Alex.

But back to the original topic- the term "target shooting" is very generic. I frequently shoot in competition. Target shooting to me means something very different than to Joe Average going to the range with a box of ammo and some paper. Both calibers mentioned in the original post will perform well. The real crux of the issue is does the OP know that a barrel is considered a "consumable" item?

 

[Coal Dragger]

6mm Creedmoor, easier to find guns with barrels running twist rates that will do well with long heavy for caliber or monolithic bullets that you will want for want for target shooting (high BC), or hunting.

 

[horsey300]

I hope you are aware that the 300BO is ballistic copy of the 7.62x39.

I'll take the 7.62x51 for 500 Alex.

But back to the original topic- the term "target shooting" is very generic. I frequently shoot in competition. Target shooting to me means something very different than to Joe Average going to the range with a box of ammo and some paper. Both calibers mentioned in the original post will perform well. The real crux of the issue is does the OP know that a barrel is considered a "consumable" item?

For 300 yds either a 30x39 or blackout would be considered here as they will wear the shoulders (mine) and throat (barrel) considerably less, ideally I'd still fall back to the grendel or ARC types for a 300 yard bullseye. For thin skinned game such as a bullseye, the .223 would be dandy but the op NEEDS a new loading job so we'll not be fudds and beat on that drum, instead as enablers we need to encourage the new purchase. However, based on a relatively short distance, the higher b.c.s for wind bucking, lower recoil, and we'll include barrel life, a 6 or 6.5 is still a phenomenal answer, just in a package with less powder usage and we can still keep a barrel alive relatively longer.
I'll still take the grendel for 800 (yds) over the .308 (yes it'll trump wind drift and barrel life here, and doesn't give up enough in drop to matter for someone who knows their dope). The .308 has certainly earned a reputation, and I'll not deny that. I will contest that it is no longer as necessary as it once was for most applications. If I'm throwing hundreds of rounds downrange in a sitting at tiny targets a long ways away, I can live without the extra muzzle jump and recoil of the .308, I'll park my metrics, dope the wind as we go, and hope the mat catches all brass.
For the op, I look forward to seeing some pix and chronicling this journey, Lord knows we can all use more good stories these days.

 

[jmorris]

For hunting I'll stick to my 30/30, 30-06 and 45-70. My interest in the smaller calibers is for target shooting as it's a lot easier on the shoulder and allows for more shooting.

I suppose with that, it’s worth noting that before 6mm PPC overtook it .222 Remington was the king of benchrest calibers. Get your hands on one of those antiquated BR rifles at an estate sale for under $1000 and you will likely have a much more accurate rifle than you could spend $1000 on new today and as easy on the shoulder as it gets for centerfire rifle.

That said, are you “target shooting” to shoot one hole groups or are you just having fun shooting at paper?

FWIW none of my 300blk or 7.62x39 rifles will shoot smaller groups than most of my .223’s and the .30 cal projectiles cost more.

 

[Carpman62]

Considering your "short" shooting distance of 200 to 300 yards, you don't need the long heavy VLD bullets!

Get a Savage with a varmint weight barrel on 243 Winchester, add as much scope as you can afford, then get a couple of boxes of Sierra's 100 gr. Boat Tail Spitzer bullets, along with a can of IMR-4831 powder and some CCI-200 primers.

With good optics and a proper handload, 5 shot groups at 200 yards should easily be covered with a nickel, and with 300 yard groups, you should very easily be able to cover 5 bullets with a quarter and even get some change back!

Been there and done that many many times over the years, and if you know your way around the loading bench, it is a lot easier to achieve the level of accuracy you are looking for.

 

[daniel craig]

Already own a .223 and a 6.5 Creed along with a 6.8 SPC. Just looking for something new to quench my reloading addiction.
Also considering a 7mm-08

In my OPINION 6mm and 243 won’t do anything for you, at the distance you’re shooting, that your 6.5 won’t do just as well.

 

[Varminterror]

In my OPINION 6mm and 243 won’t do anything for you, at the distance you’re shouting that your 6.5 won’t do just as well.

Except reduce his recoil by about 15% to do the same job, and knock a nickel to a dime per bullet off of his ammo cost.

 

[cdb1]

Or, if you're not very smart (like me, for instance) you buy a $400 rifle and stick $1300 in glass on it.
But I have to admit, the .243 Win. Mauser M18 with the Swarovsky 3.5-18x44 do look good together....

I think it’s very intelligent, it’s definitely the way I think. There is also the old saying,
“If one puts a five-hundred dollar scope on a two-thousand dollar rifle, one has a five-hundred dollar rifle”.

 

[cdb1]

With a 300 yard max but more often shooting 200, it doesn’t matter. I’d get .243 if I didn’t handload.

 

[labnoti]

Open sights or optic? It's already been mentioned in this thread, but I'd reiterate the priority of any optic on the budget. There's nothing wrong with shooting open sights, especially at 300 yards. On the other hand, shooting a cheap optic at any range is just wrong. If you already own other rifles, maybe you have a nice optic you can remount with quick-change rings, but in that case I'd want to be sure they were compatible. It could also be that you only have cheap optics, which might explain the lack of satisfaction with what you already have.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

With a 300 yard max but more often shooting 200, it doesn’t matter. I’d get .243 if I didn’t handload.

I do handload, and I chose 243.

 

[JDeere]

Already own a .223 and a 6.5 Creed along with a 6.8 SPC. Just looking for something new to quench my reloading addiction.
Also considering a 7mm-08

That 7-08 would be and is my choice all day long at the ranges you are talking about. Use them for target or hunting all day long. I have a .243 that shoots less than moa at said ranges and its a stock rifle. To each his own I suppose but I just keep things simple and find the right load/bullet combo. A lot has to do with the shooter himself as well...

 

[JFrank]

Already own a .223 and a 6.5 Creed along with a 6.8 SPC. Just looking for something new to quench my reloading addiction.
Also considering a 7mm-08

A 6 BR Norma outta quench that addiction real quick, reloading is super easy with accuracy that will blow your mind.
The attached picture is my 4 shot test group at 1000 yards last Friday morning under near perfect conditions, I still didn’t win but that was an amazing example of the capabilities of this little cartridge.

 

[dranrab]

I was just in the market for a 6. There's really no reason not to go with a 6 Creed. I guess if you found a great deal on a 243, that would be a reason. Otherwise the 6 Creed makes more sense. That's what I bought. With that said most buyers will never tap into the advantages it offers. They simply don't come into play for the way most of us use our guns.

 

[Varminterror]

I do handload, and I chose 243.

Would you expand a bit - have you reloaded for 6 creed also? What made you choose 243win of the two?

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Would you expand a bit - have you reloaded for 6 creed also? What made you choose 243win of the two?

In fairness, no, I don't have any first hand experience with the other 6mm cartridges beyond 243 Win. My dad bought me a 243 Savage 110 and a Lee single stage press for my 19th birthday. So that's how I chose 243. (My dad shot competitively and hunted with a 243 pretty much since the cartridge's inception.)

What I like about 243 and why I've stuck with it for over 25+ years: I like the lack of recoil compared to 30 cal cartridges, yet it pushes enough velocity and has enough BC to buck wind at longer (300 plus yards). For purely target shooting (as I mentioned, I ran mine in High Power for a few years), the lighter bullets do extremely well. (60 grn SMK HPBT with 4895 was my preferred, and that would do 5 shot groups into a ragged hole at 100 yrds.) For a hunting gun, it has a broad application from varmints to caribou. (I know of people who have taken moose with 243.) With the advent of Barnes TSX bullets, it becomes even more useful. Lastly, to some extent, it's what I know; why would I move to some other 6-6.5mm cartridge?

What I dislike about 243, and I suspect this might be an issue with other 6-6.5mm cartridges as well, is that the bullets, even the heavier 100 grn projectiles, tend to be quite fragile, especially at the higher velocities of 243. Thus, in a hunting application, if your projectile encounters even a twig from a branch, they the bullets tend to break or at least deflect easily. It's not a good brush gun caliber. The other shortcoming is, as others have stated, is barrel life; 243 tends to erode barrels more readily than do 30 cal cartridges. But i have to say, that I haven't seen a significant negative impact from this yet, but it's probably on my horizon. For most people, I doubt it will be an issue.