As originally introduced the .244 Remington had a 1:12 twist. These early rifles struggle with heavy bullets. When they renamed the cartridge the 6mm Remington most rifles were then sold with a faster twist.
My understanding is that length is the determining factor of whether a bullet will become spin stabilized when fired through a certain twist of barrel. Increased bullet weight is a byproduct of longer bullets, but weight isn’t the determining factor of what will or won’t stabilize. When you begin to push the edge of a barrels spin stabilizing potential, a flat based-round nosed 110 grain bullet will stabilize better than a boat tailed-pointy 110 grain bullet, because the first bullet is shorter. I believe there were heavier shorter flat bottomed, blunt nosed bullets specifically made to stabilize in the .244 Rem.
Most cast bullets are flat based and blunt. Lead is heavier than jacket material. Therefore a cast bullet of any given weight will usually be short than a jacketed bullet of a similar weight. Shorter is better when dealing with the border of a barrels ability to stabilize a given bullet.
Does a slower cast bullet of a certain length stabilize better or worse than a jacketed bullet of the same length going 1000fps faster? I don’t know. I know that FPS is part of Miller’s and Greenhill’s stabilizing evaluation equations. I’m no math wiz, I don’t use these equations, but I’ve read about the theory behind them. I really don’t have an answer for you as to whether or not the NOE bullet will work in your 1:9 twist. I suspect it will, I wouldn’t buy that mold if I owned a earlier made .244 Rem with the 1:12 twist.
Side note:
I recently had a chance to bid on a very nice scoped K98 Mauser conversion in .244 Rem. But after some reading I passed on it because I suspected it had the 1:12 twist, and I didn’t want to be limited by that. Also given it’s age the throat might already have been shot out.