For those who reload, the .243 WSSM is just a fat, short .243 Winchester that uses common components and once you get a supply of fired cases, there's not much difference in cost to reload this "oddball" cartridge than any other 6mm standard cartridge.

Lee Precision has a special run of reloading dies, for only $30.56.

https://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/ ... -2-die-set

The cartridge was intended to duplicate .243 Winchester performance in a very short action rifle. It's not likely to be a super boomer barrel eater.

The real value of the .243 WSSM was they came in those last, righteous, New Haven made Winchester Model 70s made just before Winchester became just another brand name owned by FN.

Once you've got a good stock of fired cases and a set of dies, a fellow should have a light recoiling, flat shooting, and versatile rifle that should be just the ticket for a deer or predator rifle.

 

The real value of the .243 WSSM was they came in those last, righteous, New Haven made Winchester Model 70s made just before Winchester became just another brand name owned by FN.

Winchester, already USRAC, failed in 1989, and became a brand of Herstal Group shortly thereafter.

The .243 WSSM wasn't designed until 2003.

 

The real value of the .243 WSSM was they came in those last, righteous, New Haven made Winchester Model 70s made just before Winchester became just another brand name owned by FN.

Winchester, already USRAC, failed in 1989, and became a brand of Herstal Group shortly thereafter.

The .243 WSSM wasn't designed until 2003.

The Model 70 rifle was made at Wincheter's New Haven plant from 1936 until it closed in March 2006.

Those super short, fat magnums were an attempt to keep sales up, which unfortunately was too little, too late.

An attempt was made by FN to make Model 70s in the USA in a South Carolina plant, but now they are assembled in Portugal.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Model_70

The .243 WSSM caliber is no reason to avoid a good, New Haven made Model 70, but it is reason to get a good supply of ammunition and dies if you'd like to shoot the Model 70 quite a bit.

The round reloads with bullets, powders, and primers that are readily available.

 

Those super short, fat magnums were an attempt to keep sales up, which unfortunately was too little, too late.

No, they were not. The short magnums had nothing to do with firearm companies originally. It was Olin Chemical that developed them and promoted them. Olin dumped Winchester Firearms in 1981.

The Outdoor Wire of February 2, 2006, reported a situation of well-known gun writer Rick Jamison (John R. Jamison) which reads, in part:

"Jamison's offering a legal settlement in avoidance of a lawsuit. According to these letters, Winchester purloined Jamison's intellectual property in their short magnums. He sued, winning a decision in a Missouri court (his state of residence). Winchester, the letter states, settled the claim as has fellow short-magnum rifle manufacturer Browning and Olin Winchester ammunition. In the heretofore unreported letters, Jamison is reportedly seeking a monetary "cure" from each manufacturer, in addition to an ongoing royalty for the sale of each rifle in the contested calibers."

Olin screwed Rick Jamison. The courts agreed with Rick Jamison.

 

Whoever Olin stole the short fat Magnum from, it wasn't enough to keep the Model 70s in production at New Haven. It was named the -Winchester-Super Short Magnum,,,but had the round caught on the other rifle makers would have used the cartridge as well. Now it seems the AR-15 crowd is the last holdout for the .243 WSSM.

So what was the cartridge good for?

It seems that it was just another middle range capacity 6mm in a very short, fat case. You could get 55 grain bullets to scream, but the barrel life wouldn't be so good if used like a 22 Swift.

The handloads that are on the net seem to be concentrated on getting a 100 grain bullet running about 3,000 feet per second, using very common powders, slightly bettering the venerable .243 Winchester,,,,but not by much.

http://handloads.com/loaddata/default.a ... le&Source=

It's probably close to a 6mm Remington in case capacity, another good round that seems to have a hard row to hoe.

Look at a big reloading manual and you'll see lots of cartridges that didn't get as poplar as the ones you see deer season specials for at the Big Box Marts.

A man could find a lot worse cartridge than a .243 WSSM, and none better for the intended purpose.

 

Whoever Olin stole the short fat Magnum from, it wasn't enough to keep the Model 70s in production at New Haven.

It wasn't the point at all, would you please stop making this stuff up?

Olin wants to sell ammo. They still do. Olin had nothing to do with USRAC except collecting royalties from USRAC and then, Herstal Group. They still collect royalties from Herstal Group.

 

Whoever Olin stole the short fat Magnum from, it wasn't enough to keep the Model 70s in production at New Haven.

It wasn't the point at all, would you please stop making this stuff up?

Olin wants to sell ammo. They still do. Olin had nothing to do with USRAC except collecting royalties from USRAC and then, Herstal Group. They still collect royalties from Herstal Group.

Remington was pushing its own oddball short fat magnums at the same time Winchester was, but Remington never made a super short fat magnum. The Remington short fat magnums still barely cling to life, but barely.

http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowled ... agnum.html

It's confusing that Olin owns the Winchester ammunition line and FN owns the Winchester rifle line, but when Winchester came out with those short fat magnums they wanted to sell more Winchester guns and Winchester ammunition.

Why else would you make a new 6mm in a world full of 6mm cartridges, except to sell more guns and ammo?

 

It's confusing that Olin owns the Winchester ammunition line and FN owns the Winchester rifle line, but when Winchester came out with those short fat magnums they wanted to sell more Winchester guns and Winchester ammunition.

Herstal Group does not own the "Winchester Rifle Line." It didn't work that way. Olin got rid of Winchester in 1981. USRAC was formed by investors that were the former Olin-Winchester employees.

It was a bad deal, a really lousy deal from the outset, for while they got a plant that was losing money, full of older equipment and line shafts, they didn't get Winchester. Instead, Olin retained the logo, trademark, and the brand. They had to pay Olin to use "Winchester." Herstal Group still does. After the multiple failures of U.S. Repeating Arms, Herstal lost a small fortune trying to keep the plant running, just as USRAC had done. It was still called U.S. Repeating Arms. Here is the final press release:

For Immediate Release -- January 17, 2006 -- U.S. Repeating Arms Company To Close New Haven, CT Facility -- U.S. Repeating Arms Company, maker of Winchester brand rifles and shotguns will close its New Haven, Connecticut manufacturing facility. Many efforts were made to improve profitability at the manufacturing facility in New Haven, and the decision was made after exhausting all available options.

Effective March 31, 2006 the New Haven manufacturing facility will stop manufacturing the Winchester Model 70, Model 94 and Model 1300.

Winchester Firearms will continue to sell and grow its current line of Select Over & Under shotguns, the new Super X3 autoloading shotgun, the new Super X autoloading rifle and Limited Edition rifles. The company also plans to introduce new models in the future. There will be no change in Customer Service.

This action is a realignment of resources to make Winchester Firearms a stronger, more viable organization. Winchester Firearms plans to continue the great Winchester legacy and is very excited about the future.

The press release was written by Browning in Arnold, Missouri. It does give the wrongful impression that there is a "Winchester Firearms," and people have been perpetually bewildered by it. Winchester Firearms is essentially an imaginary company, consisting of only the logo and trademark obtained by a licensing agreement from Olin Chemical.

Whatever patents there were on the Model 70 have long ago expired. Anyone can make them, they just can't use the Winchester horse and rider, etc. The old model 1300, now called the SXP, is purchased from an OEM in Turkey.

The Model 70 was reintroduced as "Made in USA" at FN America. It didn't work well, for now Model 70s are from Portugal.

The "Deathwatch" of the short magnums was reported on long ago: http://www.rifleshootermag.com/uncatego ... t-magnums/

 

EV, I will guarantee that you will shoot that barrel out quicker than you think, especially if you reload and take full advantage of the cartridges potential.

Olympic Arms is the only manufacturer I am aware of that makes the WSM/WSSM rifles. I haven't followed it since I rid myself of the only WSSM I ever had and converted the 2 WSM Coyote rifles I have to 450 Marlin.

Regardless of what is said, I hope you have a long and great relationship with the rifle and the round.

 

Here's a back story: http://www.ammoland.com/2016/06/243-wss ... rt-magnum/ . He didn't get it all right, I went over the saga with Rick Jamison in person, but it gives you the flavor of things.

 

Whoever Olin stole the short fat Magnum from, it wasn't enough to keep the Model 70s in production at New Haven.

It wasn't the point at all, would you please stop making this stuff up?

Olin wants to sell ammo. They still do. Olin had nothing to do with USRAC except collecting royalties from USRAC and then, Herstal Group. They still collect royalties from Herstal Group.

That will never happen.

cdb

 

Whomever begat it, by whatever name it was born under, the .243 WSSM won't be found under many Christmas trees this Christmas.

But it's not a bad cartridge, although it's almost an orphan today.

It is a red headed stepchild to find ammunition for, but after you get enough fired cases and some dies, the owner has a 6mm rifle capable of a just a bit more speed than a 243 Winchester.

I'd load more 100 grain bullets at 3,000 feet per second than light bullets at 4,000 feet per second of I'd like it to last longer, though, same as any other 6mm cartridge.

If you've got one, go shoot it.

 

Whoever Olin stole the short fat Magnum from, it wasn't enough to keep the Model 70s in production at New Haven.

It wasn't the point at all, would you please stop making this stuff up?

Olin wants to sell ammo. They still do. Olin had nothing to do with USRAC except collecting royalties from USRAC and then, Herstal Group. They still collect royalties from Herstal Group.

That will never happen.

cdb

Ole SuperX reminds me of what my mother used to say about my brother-in-law: "what he doesn't know, he makes up"

 

Thanks, gents, for the info.

My red-headed stepchild and I are going to go hunting a few times a year. I have enough 95 grain ammo to do that.

I normally use my 7mm-08 and will probably continue to use it more than the 243.

I am sure the dealer gave the wife a deal on the WSSM just to get rid of it. I know how to take a lemon and make lemonade.

Before I got my 7mm-08, I used a 270 exclusively. I really can't tell the difference between the 7mm-08 and the 270. Dead is dead and both make deer and black bear dead!

 

The 243 WSSM is a bit more than the 6mm Rem which puts it a noticeable length ahead of the 243 Win in performance. I would say the difference is enough to justify, if not need, the use of controlled expansion bullets at moderate distances or less. I can say from personal experience that the 6mm Rem with standard 100 gr cup and core bullets is a bit light under 100 yards when used on 200+ pound deer when other than mostly broadside shots are offered. 100 gr Remington Core-Lokts were somewhat of an exception as they seem to have stronger/thicker jackets and the factory loads I used then ran a bit slower than advertised. Even so, the bullets broke up more and penetrated less than I wished. My longest and hardest tracking jobs were with this round when used on deer facing me at 40 yards or less.

As for the article Ev posted, that was an opinion piece written back in 2012 before the latest ammo madness broke out after Sandy Hook. Things have changed a bit since then and that which was in low demand before then will be less likely to have runs made now and in the future. The WSSM family was not nearly as popular as the writer believed so factory support will be pretty low if not non-existent. One will have to probably use WSM brass to form new cases which is not as easy as running them through the WSSM die. Special dies will probably be needed which are expensive and it can be time consuming. Buying brass from independent sources is a "sometimes" thing in my experience and often ends up more expensive than planned. You are at their mercy for timeliness and price, some can give lessons to those gouging 22 LR ammo a while back.

I am glad Ev found ammo at prices he is willing to pay. The lack of support for brass for the WSSM line is something I cannot accept. I am not unfamiliar with forming one case into another but this is just more work than I would care to take on for something I would expect to be a working gun rather than a curiosity piece. The 243 WSSM is a decent round but it's abandonment by it parent is too much of an uncertainty for me.