Anyone try a fast twist(7.5:1) on a 243 win?

JmacD

Micah 6:8
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
1,226
Location
Nebraska
I found a 243 win barrel with a 7.5 twist rate. It seems like they’re trying to turn it into a creedmoor, but I’m curious if anyone has run one?
 
I did for a while, mostly with Berger 105 Hybrids, I never tried anything lighter in it. Once that barrel was gone I re-barreled with a Bartlein in 6mm SLR (Basically a reformed .243Win with slightly less capacity) in a 1:7.5. Again I mostly shoot 105 Hybrids and 115s.

I've taken mine out to 1200yds without an issue. Shooting along side a .308 and 6.5C it uses quite a bit less windage. Barrel life will be less, but the performance is there.

The .243Win will have slightly greater capacity over the 6mmC. Guys were running fast twist .243s before the 6mmC was developed.
 
It would be a great long range cartridge if loaded with heavy hi BC bullets.Only drawback would be overall length.
 
Sounds interesting. I bought a McGowen 1:8 .243 Ackley a while back but haven't really done any serious development for it yet. One of my goals for 2023.

In the SLR with H4831SC in a 26" Bartlein I get 3130FPS (72 degrees) and I'm not close to max. The drift (mils) for a 10MPH 9 O'clock:
200yd Zero:

Yds EL Wind
500 1.8 0.8
600 2.6 1.0
700 3.5 1.2
800 4.5 1.5
900 5.6 1.7
1000 6.8 2.0

With a brake I can spot for myself. About the only disadvantage is barrel life compared to smaller 6mms and larger bores.
 
It so happens that I've done some testing with the .243 Win. in a fast twist barrel, if you consider a 1in8" a fast twist. That was a few years ago when I became intrigued by the .243 Win. Vs .244 Rem. debate. Which held that the .243 became successful and popular because the rate of twist of Winchester's M-70 rifles stabalized the heavier bullets needed for big game hunting, whereas the slower twist of Remington's M-722 rifle was inaccurate with bullets in the 100 gr weight range and mainly suitable only for varmint hunting with lighter bullets. At the time it seemed to me that much of the debate was about the respective rifles: Remington Vs Winchester. Apparently there had been no real testing on an evenly matched comparison so I had a target grade .243 built, fitted with three otherwise identical barrels in 12" 10" and 8" twists. The plan being to shoot all three with a variety of loads and bullet weights. The rifle was bult on a Rem 700 SA in a S-H precision stock and barrels being Douglas XX grade 26" target profile, with Leupold 24X scope, as shown in attached pics. Bottom line proved that 12" twist was woefully non-accurate with heavier bullets like Sierra's long 107 gr MK bullet, with keyholeing at 100 yds not uncommon. But shorter 95 and 100 gr hunting type bullets by Hornady, Nosler and Sierra delivered what might be considered acceptable accuracy, that being 100 yd 5-shot groups averaging around 1.5" or under 2". The same barrel also printed 1/2" 5 shot groups with 55, 68 and 75 gr bullets, thus confirming it to be an accurate barrel otherwise. The 10" twist barrel proved to be best all-around, delivering good groups with lighter bullets (but not as good as the 12"barrel) and surprising accurate with the heavier and longer target type bullets like Berger's 105VLD and Sierra's 107 MK. The 8" twist, as expected, was at its best with the heavier target type boattail bullets but couldn't equil the level of accuracy of the 12" and 10" barrels with lighter, varmint type bullets. Comfirming that Winchester was on the right track from the beginning with their M-70's with 10" barrels. IMG-3023.jpg IMG-3024.jpg
 
Last edited:
I found a 243 win barrel with a 7.5 twist rate. It seems like they’re trying to turn it into a creedmoor, but I’m curious if anyone has run one?

The 6 Creedmoor is the result (one of the results) of what some of us were doing with custom barrels like that with 243win for decades before the creed came to be.

I shot over 2 dozen 1:7 and 1:7.5” barrels chambered in 243win and 243AI between ~2000 and 2015 for long range hunting, plinking, and some competition. I’ve swapped to 6 creed for all of my “fast 6” needs over the last several years as it’s simply easier to load, has better barrel life, and is short enough to get into repeater mags with long bullets. Nothing wrong with a fast twist 243, especially a 243 Improved, but there’s more right with the 6 creed.

If a guy had plenty of Palma brass and wasn’t shooting high volume, there’s a lot to say good about a 1:7.5” 243win. There are a lot of good things to be done with 100-115grn, high BC 6mm bullets trucking ~3300fps. H4350-H1000 ballpark powders.
 
Thanks for the info everyone. I figured it had to be a barrel burner. I was toying with setting one up as a deer slayer and try to tap the “creedmooresque” bullets. I have a lot of admiration for the new creedmoors &PRCs etc, but I hate to see the “old guard” pushed to the wayside. One reason why I’m tinkering with an old 250 savage…
 
I've never run a 1-7.5 but I currently have a 1-8 that shoots the 105-108 grain bullets really well. Never have run the 115's.
 
Sounds interesting. I bought a McGowen 1:8 .243 Ackley a while back but haven't really done any serious development for it yet. One of my goals for 2023.
Nice! I have a McGowen 1:7.5 25-06 light Palma on a factory Remington 700 action with a Timney trigger. I am awaiting a factory Remington walnut stock from Gunbroker that dad and I will inlet ourselves and try it out. I have some 135gr Berger bullets that are really sleek looking... cant find much load data on it... I actually had it put together previously but the Magpul Hunter stock was not inlet enough and I tried sanding it down but I blew right threw the polymer shell and ruined it in the process...
 
Thanks for the info everyone. I figured it had to be a barrel burner. I was toying with setting one up as a deer slayer and try to tap the “creedmooresque” bullets. I have a lot of admiration for the new creedmoors &PRCs etc, but I hate to see the “old guard” pushed to the wayside. One reason why I’m tinkering with an old 250 savage…
See, I'm a mixed bag, as you know from our reloading forum discussions, I'm a fan of 6.5 PRC, 30-06, 270, 223 and others like 45-70. Having multiple calibers allows you to have a broader selection of ammo during crazy times such as these and also just having something different to tinker with is fun too! So a fast twist 243 sounds like a nice fun range discussion starter. Id like to see how that set up does vs a stock 6mm Creedmoor. It should be pretty close if you have a long chamber for the longer 110-115gr bullets...
 
Id like to see how that set up does vs a stock 6mm Creedmoor.

About 100-150fps faster, eats ~2-5grn more powder, smokes barrels about 250-400rnds faster, and is a little more finicky to develop loads. 20” less drop and 3” less drift at 1000 in a 10mph full value…

But in practice, if you can’t do it with one, you can’t with the other, and vice versa.
 
I had a 24" bull 1:7 twist 243 barrel on my AR and was real happy with how it shot. Decided I wanted a bolt gun also and got a great deal on a Ruger Precision in 6 Creed. Like @Varminterror said the 6 Creed is just gooder, one of the big draws at the time was relatively cheap factory ammo that's loaded with 105-107gr match bullets.
I ended up selling the 243 and buying a 20" H-Bar profile 6 Creed.
 
Think how much fun you could have using one of the x57 intermediate cartridges (like 6mm Rem / .257 Roberts / 7mm Mauser) with a fast twist barrel and all the extra room in the requisite long action for the trendy heavy bullets. It would make the Creedmore/Hornady fanboys hot under the collar.
I’m far from a fanboy of anything; I just like what works. But I’m kinda sorta doing that with a 250-3000/250 savage. I’m thinking of a barrel on a interchangeable custom (probably bighorn/Zermatt) in the cartridge and just see what I can coax out of it. Probably a 1:8 twist or so. Maybe a 1:9 to shoot some varmint pills out of it without spinning them to Smithers. I agree! Sounds like fun!!!
 
Last edited:
Think how much fun you could have using one of the x57 intermediate cartridges (like 6mm Rem / .257 Roberts / 7mm Mauser) with a fast twist barrel and all the extra room in the requisite long action for the trendy heavy bullets. It would make the Creedmore/Hornady fanboys hot under the collar.

Nah, we’ve done that before and figured out really fast that the extra powder and extra action length aren’t worth it.

The Creedmoor case with a SAAMI throat allows the longest of the long 6mm’s to fit into short actions, barely getting a full caliber into the neck, and not placing the boattail junction below the neck/shoulder junction… that was the whole point of its inception.

If you’re burning that much powder and loading that long and carrying a long action, pushing up to something like a 6-06 improved or 6.5-284 hammers any of the x57 based cases, and naturally, magnums like the 7 PRC or 300 WM hammer those…

But speed isn’t really a metric of success.

ETA: a 7x57, then a 7x57 improved was my first “long range rifle” I had built. I’ve built fast twist rifles in a few of the intermediate length cartridges like 284 Shehane and 6.5-284, 7maus and Improved, even did 300 wsm on a long action at one point. Other than chasing speed, I still can’t quite figure out why I went down those roads. For hunting, sure, but again, kick up the length to match the action length. I’ve wanted an excuse to build an intermediate Defiance action to be able to recreate that old 7x57, just as a hunting rifle, but I can’t bring myself to do it - I’ll likely end up with a 280 Improved or maybe now a 7 PRC instead.
 
Last edited:
Nah, we’ve done that before and figured out really fast that the extra powder and extra action length aren’t worth it.

The Creedmoor case with a SAAMI throat allows the longest of the long 6mm’s to fit into short actions, barely getting a full caliber into the neck, and not placing the boattail junction below the neck/shoulder junction… that was the whole point of its inception.

If you’re burning that much powder and loading that long and carrying a long action, pushing up to something like a 6-06 improved or 6.5-284 hammers any of the x57 based cases, and naturally, magnums like the 7 PRC or 300 WM hammer those…

But speed isn’t really a metric of success.

The above is kinda moot if you are satisfied with the flexibility of a long action using standard brass and non-magnum loads. I don't get too worked-up about the latest cartridge "innovation" may or may not offer any significant practical advantages over established rounds.
 
The above is kinda moot if you are satisfied with the flexibility of a long action using standard brass and non-magnum loads. I don't get too worked-up about the latest cartridge "innovation" may or may not offer any significant practical advantages over established rounds.

From where I sit, you have it backwards. Wildcatters and custom rifle builders have been doing this stuff for decades before anyone ran it through SAAMI and slapped boxes on Walmart shelves. We did these things with custom barrels, custom reamers, and custom dies to garner practical advantages we knew existed over rounds like 7x57 or 243win - changed which now have become standardized because they were realized and proven worth chasing by wildcatters.

We knew there was more to be had in a given case - some cases, at least - and we spent a lot of money for custom barrels, custom dies, custom reamers, all to get those improvements… the improvements which can be bought from a Walmart shelf today.

Lord only knows why it took so long for our industry to figure out that the world doesn’t end at 400yrds and “flat shooting” doesn’t mean a light for caliber bullet over an overbore powder charge. But we’re finally in an era where money isn’t wasted on custom equipment to do a task the way we’ve all known it should be done for generations already, just couldn’t buy without a lot of effort.
 
Think how much fun you could have using one of the x57 intermediate cartridges (like 6mm Rem / .257 Roberts / 7mm Mauser) with a fast twist barrel and all the extra room in the requisite long action for the trendy heavy bullets. It would make the Creedmore/Hornady fanboys hot under the collar.

Or just barrel up a long action in 243. I have a long action 260.
 
Interesting thread, in reading @offhand as well as a few others some thoughts come to mind.

It seems to me the caliber is "invented" to do a specific job, the 243-244 debate and post was real interesting. Change this that or the other and yes the 243 can shoot a heavy bullet just fine, change this that or the other and it will shoot a light weight bullet just fine. It all depends on that specific setup.

So why the different calibers? If you can change the twists and go from keyhole to "good" group. Why "invent" the "new" thing? Easy new sells, there is money to be made.
 
So why the different calibers? If you can change the twists and go from keyhole to "good" group. Why "invent" the "new" thing? Easy new sells, there is money to be made.

As a wildcatter myself, I’ve never made a damned dime from doing so, and have spent a LOT of extra money to get what I want out of cartridges. Not many folks have heard of any of the folks which made the first wildcats of which yielded the standardized commercial cartridges we know today - these inventors aren’t the ones making any money from their ideas.

Your line here just sounds bitter. Most cartridges are designed with a specific purpose in mind, delivering against performance expectations for “this is really close, but I’d like it a lot more if it did this…” People don’t buy bad ideas either - when rotary engine cars came out, certainly a novel invention, consumer wallets didn’t fly open, and the novelty died. P.F. Lambert isn’t a name folks know, but he invented the 25-08, which, for whatever reason, didn’t take off, whereas all of its neighbors in 243win, 260rem, and 7-08 have done well. Lots of us have been making 6 Dasher for over 20 years after Dan Dowling and Al Asher invented it, and it’s still not commercialized, and they sure haven’t found fame and fortune from it. PO didn’t have anything to do with his namesake 6BRA, but Tom Mousel saw fit to give Ackley a tip of the hat when he invented the BRA… Anyone who has read Elmer Keith’s books can understand he wasn’t pushing the envelope of the 38spcl or 44 spcl or 45 Colt to become rich. There were half to a dozen dudes making 6mmAR, 243LBC, 6 Grendel, 6 Grinch, Rat, FatRat, Turbo40, PredatAR, etc for over 15 years before the 6 ARC came to market, and dudes which had done 6-6.8’s like the WOA and Hagar… Who’s making all of this money to be had on the invention of the 20 vargtarg, or 20 practical, 25-45 Sharps… How many millions of dollars have been earned for inventing the 6.5-06 or 338-06 A-Square? I have a Ruger Single Six chambered in “218 Bee Short” dubbed the “22 Hondo” designed by a guy I knew through forums years ago, because we both just wanted a centerfire option for a 22mag/Hornet-ish Single Six, and last I checked, Hondo sure didn’t get rich from it, and he didn’t ask a penny of me for the idea…

Lots of us like to tinker to improve whatever we’re using in whatever way we think is an improvement, so invention is inherent. But money doesn’t get made until stuff is commercialized.

Hell, the entire metallic cartridge industry is really designed to PREVENT inventors from from capitalizing on their inventions - if an inventor wants to commercialize, they have to buy consumer confidence through SAAMI, meaning they waive rights to trademarks for their inventions’ names, and waive rights to their design work to allow publication and utilization of chamber and cartridge drawings and specs, and performance standards…
 
As a wildcatter myself, I’ve never made a damned dime from doing so, and have spent a LOT of extra money to get what I want out of cartridges. Not many folks have heard of any of the folks which made the first wildcats of which yielded the standardized commercial cartridges we know today - these inventors aren’t the ones making any money from their ideas.

Your line here just sounds bitter. Most cartridges are designed with a specific purpose in mind, delivering against performance expectations for “this is really close, but I’d like it a lot more if it did this…” People don’t buy bad ideas either - when rotary engine cars came out, certainly a novel invention, consumer wallets didn’t fly open, and the novelty died. P.F. Lambert isn’t a name folks know, but he invented the 25-08, which, for whatever reason, didn’t take off, whereas all of its neighbors in 243win, 260rem, and 7-08 have done well. Lots of us have been making 6 Dasher for over 20 years after Dan Dowling and Al Asher invented it, and it’s still not commercialized, and they sure haven’t found fame and fortune from it. PO didn’t have anything to do with his namesake 6BRA, but Tom Mousel saw fit to give Ackley a tip of the hat when he invented the BRA… Anyone who has read Elmer Keith’s books can understand he wasn’t pushing the envelope of the 38spcl or 44 spcl or 45 Colt to become rich. There were half to a dozen dudes making 6mmAR, 243LBC, 6 Grendel, 6 Grinch, Rat, FatRat, Turbo40, PredatAR, etc for over 15 years before the 6 ARC came to market, and dudes which had done 6-6.8’s like the WOA and Hagar… Who’s making all of this money to be had on the invention of the 20 vargtarg, or 20 practical, 25-45 Sharps… How many millions of dollars have been earned for inventing the 6.5-06 or 338-06 A-Square? I have a Ruger Single Six chambered in “218 Bee Short” dubbed the “22 Hondo” designed by a guy I knew through forums years ago, because we both just wanted a centerfire option for a 22mag/Hornet-ish Single Six, and last I checked, Hondo sure didn’t get rich from it, and he didn’t ask a penny of me for the idea…

Lots of us like to tinker to improve whatever we’re using in whatever way we think is an improvement, so invention is inherent. But money doesn’t get made until stuff is commercialized.

Hell, the entire metallic cartridge industry is really designed to PREVENT inventors from from capitalizing on their inventions - if an inventor wants to commercialize, they have to buy consumer confidence through SAAMI, meaning they waive rights to trademarks for their inventions’ names, and waive rights to their design work to allow publication and utilization of chamber and cartridge drawings and specs, and performance standards…
I hadn’t heard the Lambert name in a loooooong time. Charles Newtons 250-3000 was WILD for the time(3000 fps!!!! Wow!!!!) but savage put there name on it relatively quickly if memory serves(I believe he developed it in 1913 and savage picked it up in 1915; but that’s my memory; don’t quote me). 25-06 was around almost 50 years after Nieder necked down the 30 cal big bro before Remington put its name on it. I find it interesting how many of the “new” cartridges like 300 PRC for example, really started out as a wildcat; this one based on the 375 Ruger. Joe thielen just works for Hornady. It had quite a lot of testing and use etc before it came out with an actual name. I doubt I’ll ever be a success as a wildcatter, but a tight twist on some cartridges not really associated with a tight twist seems like a start. Haha.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top