New 243 WSM

Yes I saw a product introduction notice in a magazine on them. Still don't fully understand just what niche they are supposed to fit into. I think the .22 is about an equal to the .22-250 or .220 Swift which are both already short action rounds so I fail to see what it is to accomplish. Dunno if the .24 is to duplicate the .243/6MM Rem. or the .240 Whby. But again I fail to see what it is all about other than making more money for Winchester and Browning.

Just can't generate any enthusiasium for some new round that is likely to be just another that Winchester dumps in a short while like so many others. Then you are stuck with a gun for which ammo and cases aren't available. Maybe I'm just not part of the "in crowd" but for the life of me I don't see the need to buy something new that does nothing others already out there for years does just as well.

GB

I see nothing in the article posted I believe it was by Zachary to indicate the projected performance of the .243 version. Just that the .223 version is targeted for about 200 fps more than the .22-250 or basically same as the Swift.

Now I fail to see how that is a technological advance. We've had the Swift for over 50 years moving bullets that fast. Same for the .240 Weatherby. The new short fat case isn't likely to exceed that. I'm all for technology improvements. BUT I don't see making a whole passle of new rounds that do nothing current rounds don't all ready do as a technology improvement. IT is just a ploy to see more guns to help the manufacturer and then a few years down the road they will drop them like a hot potato and the new owners will be stuck with useless guns for which ammo is not available. Winchester is famous for just this.

Now I could care less who falls for it and buys them. Matters not one whit to me. But to fall for the magazine writer BS that only the newest and greatest introduction is worthy of consideration is a gross misscarriage of justice as they really seldom offer anything current rounds don't already provide. Comparing these to the introduction of smokeless in the BP days or of more modern rounds to the .25-20 is a weak argument at best and stupid at worst. Just an apples to oranges comparison. These are mostly just for sales increases for the gun makers not about making any real technoloical improvements.

GB