6 mm Remington, sad its gone for good.
- Thread starter chow chow
- Start date
- Status
On of my first rifles was a 742 in 6mm...loved it
So when I found a Model 7 in 6mm and a Model 700 Varmit/heavy barrel in 6mm, I grabbed them both. Sweet little guns. The only problem is encountered by those who dont reload. Every Academy, Wal-Mart, Dick's etc. doesnt stock them.
So when I found a Model 7 in 6mm and a Model 700 Varmit/heavy barrel in 6mm, I grabbed them both. Sweet little guns. The only problem is encountered by those who dont reload. Every Academy, Wal-Mart, Dick's etc. doesnt stock them.
IMR_SR4895
Inactive
I dont know why the 6mm would not make a fantasic long action rifle.
That brings up a question:
Was the 6mm's slightly bigger brother the 257 roberts commerically made in both long and short action rifles?
Long ago,I built a .257 Ackley on a small ring short action 98 Mex Mauser that was originally a 7x57.Great rifle,still a favorite.Hard to look at a .243/6mm.
I'll suggest,if you are buying a modern rifle,.243 probably makes sense.If you are building with a modern short action,.243 makes sense.If,however,you are building on a Yugo 48 or a Brazillian short large ring or a mex,they were made to feed a 7 or 8x 57 and a 6mm is a necked down 7x57.It will feed and function ,no problems.In an old action designed for mauser ctgs,I would certainly prefer a 6mm.
I'll suggest,if you are buying a modern rifle,.243 probably makes sense.If you are building with a modern short action,.243 makes sense.If,however,you are building on a Yugo 48 or a Brazillian short large ring or a mex,they were made to feed a 7 or 8x 57 and a 6mm is a necked down 7x57.It will feed and function ,no problems.In an old action designed for mauser ctgs,I would certainly prefer a 6mm.
I picked up a used Remington BDL with heavy varmint, 26" barrel recently from the original owner. I had not heard of the cartridge before, but realized quickly that it is not that common, so I bought it. It came with a Leupold scope, and the price was right at $450. I have been hand-loading for it. My son took his first hog with that gun. I think I'll keep it in the family.
Gunplummer
New member
I picked up a .244 take-off barrel really cheap a few years ago and stuck it on an action I had laying around. I use Horandy 100 grain RN with IMR 4350 @42.0 grains. It is not a tack driver, but I am shooting deer, not tacks. In my area reloading was not big with the average deer hunter when the .244 came out. I think a lot of dissatisfied hunters that bought the .244 were not reloaders.
Mannlicher
New member
A given cartridge is never 'gone for good' as long as some rifle nut is loading it.
Dallas Jack
New member
Of course hindsight is 20/20 but I think Remington made several mistakes with the 6mm. First I think they should have called it the .243 Remington. Second they should have given it a faster twist. Third I think they should have made more changes to the case. For instance less body taper, sharper shoulder, and shorter neck (the shorter neck becoming more case capacity). I think the case body changes would have given it a larger velocity advantage over the .243 Winchester. I don't know how others feel but I don't get to excited about 200 fps increase.
I've thought many times about getting a 6mm Remington but always end up with a .243 Winchester. My current .243 Winchester is a Weatherby Vanguard and it does every thing I ask of it.
Dallas Jack
PS- I hope the 6mm Remington stays for a long time. Perhaps all the interest in long range will rediscover the 6mm.
I've thought many times about getting a 6mm Remington but always end up with a .243 Winchester. My current .243 Winchester is a Weatherby Vanguard and it does every thing I ask of it.
Dallas Jack
PS- I hope the 6mm Remington stays for a long time. Perhaps all the interest in long range will rediscover the 6mm.
Funny about my 6mm. I have owned 4 of them over the years. My first rifle I bought for myself was a 7 mm Mag. but got rid of it for a 6 mm so I could use it for varmint and deer hunting. I bought a new 700 BDL. and loved it. Lost it to poverty after a few years and latter got a new one again. Loaned it to a friend for a weekend and his house was robbed and lost that one. Then I ran in to a good used 700 BDL varmint rifle and kept it for a long time but got rid of it for some reason or another. So I got the notion to get another one and they quit making them. So I started going to the gun shows till I found one for a good price and got it home and after a good cleaning it was so shot out the barrel got replaced with a good 100 dollar take off barrel from the local gunsmith. Then I was picking it up from him after a good cleaning and some machine work to true up the action( I really got in to making this one a good one) and he said the stock was cracked and he would replace it before it hurt someone. He was right. A hairline crack I didn't see. Well this one is costing me more than I thought. So to the gun show again and I found a good Classic stock to replace it with. Took it to the gunsmith to have it bedded and pillar's put in and it now shoots like a house on fire. 3/4 in. gropes at a hundred yards and real happy. Found a good used 2.5x8 Leupold and in the draw for some old rings and bases I had left over and I now have a gun I am proud of again. And what happens now. My wife put claim on it and I still don't have my favorite 6 mm to use come deer season.
Two of the most accurate rifles I have ever owned were Remington 788's. One was in 222 rem and the other in 6mm rem. I actually used them for woodchucks, never needed a HB rifle when I had them. Many a woodchuck fell to that 6mm, and at some extreme ranges.
If I find a 6mm Rem 788 in excellent condition and have the money for it in hand, it's going home with me.
If I find a 6mm Rem 788 in excellent condition and have the money for it in hand, it's going home with me.
Another triumph for the Remington marketing department, who couldn't sell a bucket of water to a man whose pants were on fire.
The 6mm Remington is no longer offered in a model 700 rifle as of the 2010 Remington catalog. I don't think anybody else offers a production rifle for it, so it's obsolescent. Remington still offers factory ammo, so it is not yet obsolete.
Mike Irwin
Staff
Weird thing is, if you look at Remington's master caliber by model list on their webpage...
The 6mm Remington isn't even listed as being a discontinued offering.
Weird.
The 6mm Remington isn't even listed as being a discontinued offering.
Weird.
Flatbush Harry
New member
The Rem 700 CDL SF Special in 2011 is done in 6mm Remington. Go figure.
FH
FH
In reading through this thread, I've found it interesting that many posters have apparently read the same accounts that I have over the years concerning the reasons for the success of the .243 Winchester over the .244 (aka 6mm) Remington. Most "experts" of the day argued that the faster twist of the Winchester made it a more flexible cartridge that prioritized heavier bullets for deer, while saying that the folks at Remington misread the public's mind and produced the .244 with a slower twist, making it more appropriate for stabilizing lighter bullets and, therefore, making the .244 more suitable for varmints. The public preferred a DEER/varmint rifle over a VARMINT/deer rifle, or so they said.
Author/shooter Jim Carmichel saw the reason(s) a little differently, as he explained in his 1975 book, The Modern Rifle:
"...It has been charged that the folks at Remington got off on the wrong foot by envisioning their new round only as a varmint-getter, while Winchester touched all bases and claimed its .243 was great for both big game and varmints. The source of this charge is that the early Remington rifles had a rate of twist of one in 12 inches, ostensibly for varmint-weight bullets only, while Winchester barrels packed a one-in-10 inch twist in order to stabilize longer and heavier hunting bullets. Now this sounds like a clever piece of supposition, but doesn't explain why Remington offered both 75- and 90-grain bullets. Obviously, if Remington had seen its round as a varmint cartridge only, it wouldn't have bothered with the heavier bullet loading. Winchester, at the same time, offered both 80 -and 100-grain bullet loadings. Anyone who thinks that the .243 load with a 100-grain slug is a big game load (muzzle energy 2090 foot-pounds) while the 90-grain .244 isn't (at 2050 foot- pounds) has been reading too many comic books.
"In time such arguments did come into vogue and no doubt impressed a good many people. But this was after the fact. At the time of the first encounter between the two cartridges the vote went to the .243 mainly because it was available in a far more attractive rifle! Remember, the Model 722 Remington, for which the .244 was chambered, was a decidedly plain-Jane affair; no checkering on the stock, a finish that looked like clear fingernail polish, and the rattiest-looking tin-can floorplate and trigger-guard unit yet devised. The .243, on the other hand, was available in the great Model 70, one of the most stylish and beautifully made bolt-action rifles ever placed on a dealer's shelf. Its reputation was without peer. Keep in mind that during this time period shooters were actually buying Model 70 .22 Hornets and having them re-chambered to .222, rather than face the ignominy of buying a M722 in .222.
"Also, don't be led down the primrose path and fall for that yarn about the 12-inch twist not stabilizing the heavier bullets. It sounds great in unschooled theory, but in actual practice there's no way to tell the difference...The point is that no other firearms-related topic is more guaranteed to make someone sound like an expert and make a fool of himself at the same time...
"The faster twist offers no improvement whatever over the slower turn-possibly it's not even as good-but was undoubtedly considered necessary to pacify the hoards of ballistic experts overrunning the country. (In fact, I think the 9-inch twist was specified with some malice of heart)."
Anyhow, I found Mr.Carmichel's take to be an interesting "twist" (yep, pun intended
) on this decades old debate.
Author/shooter Jim Carmichel saw the reason(s) a little differently, as he explained in his 1975 book, The Modern Rifle:
"...It has been charged that the folks at Remington got off on the wrong foot by envisioning their new round only as a varmint-getter, while Winchester touched all bases and claimed its .243 was great for both big game and varmints. The source of this charge is that the early Remington rifles had a rate of twist of one in 12 inches, ostensibly for varmint-weight bullets only, while Winchester barrels packed a one-in-10 inch twist in order to stabilize longer and heavier hunting bullets. Now this sounds like a clever piece of supposition, but doesn't explain why Remington offered both 75- and 90-grain bullets. Obviously, if Remington had seen its round as a varmint cartridge only, it wouldn't have bothered with the heavier bullet loading. Winchester, at the same time, offered both 80 -and 100-grain bullet loadings. Anyone who thinks that the .243 load with a 100-grain slug is a big game load (muzzle energy 2090 foot-pounds) while the 90-grain .244 isn't (at 2050 foot- pounds) has been reading too many comic books.
"In time such arguments did come into vogue and no doubt impressed a good many people. But this was after the fact. At the time of the first encounter between the two cartridges the vote went to the .243 mainly because it was available in a far more attractive rifle! Remember, the Model 722 Remington, for which the .244 was chambered, was a decidedly plain-Jane affair; no checkering on the stock, a finish that looked like clear fingernail polish, and the rattiest-looking tin-can floorplate and trigger-guard unit yet devised. The .243, on the other hand, was available in the great Model 70, one of the most stylish and beautifully made bolt-action rifles ever placed on a dealer's shelf. Its reputation was without peer. Keep in mind that during this time period shooters were actually buying Model 70 .22 Hornets and having them re-chambered to .222, rather than face the ignominy of buying a M722 in .222.
"Also, don't be led down the primrose path and fall for that yarn about the 12-inch twist not stabilizing the heavier bullets. It sounds great in unschooled theory, but in actual practice there's no way to tell the difference...The point is that no other firearms-related topic is more guaranteed to make someone sound like an expert and make a fool of himself at the same time...
"The faster twist offers no improvement whatever over the slower turn-possibly it's not even as good-but was undoubtedly considered necessary to pacify the hoards of ballistic experts overrunning the country. (In fact, I think the 9-inch twist was specified with some malice of heart)."
Anyhow, I found Mr.Carmichel's take to be an interesting "twist" (yep, pun intended
) on this decades old debate..244 6mm Rem. vs. 243
I have had them both. I hand load my own ammo. The 244 will out perform the 243 everytime. People who have the Remington 788, have one of the best multi-purpose rifles made. I have had my 788 since the mid 1970's, and will have it forever, as will most who own one. For anyone who shoots one of these rifles, try hand loading with Hodgdon 4831 with Nosler 95 gr. ballistic-tip loaded for 2900 f.p.s. The result is smaller than a 1/2 inch group at 200 yards. Very impressive, but wait until you shoot a deer & drop him in his tracks @ 300 yards and see what they do for damage. 243 is a good round, but if you have the ability to hand load the 244 is the better pick.
I have had them both. I hand load my own ammo. The 244 will out perform the 243 everytime. People who have the Remington 788, have one of the best multi-purpose rifles made. I have had my 788 since the mid 1970's, and will have it forever, as will most who own one. For anyone who shoots one of these rifles, try hand loading with Hodgdon 4831 with Nosler 95 gr. ballistic-tip loaded for 2900 f.p.s. The result is smaller than a 1/2 inch group at 200 yards. Very impressive, but wait until you shoot a deer & drop him in his tracks @ 300 yards and see what they do for damage. 243 is a good round, but if you have the ability to hand load the 244 is the better pick.
- Status