Hey, Remington is bringing back the .350!

[Mike Irwin]

Just noticed on the website that they're chambering the 673 in .350 Rem. Mag.

I wonder if they're going to do it right this time and allow enough magazine and action lead for the heavier bullets to be set out far enough not to jam into the powder chamber...

The .350 always seemed to me as if it would be a good cartridge if fitted to the proper action -- not as short as the short action, but not as long as the long action...

Hum... Nope, in reading the specs, it looks as if the 673 is based on the short action Model 7.

Oh well. Sayanara 250 and 275 gr. bullets.

 

[rugerfreak]

Looked over 3 different 673's in 3 different stores-----2 were $699 the other was $720----the thing that stopped me was only 1 load out---Remington 200gn Core-Lokt-----and that was it. Not a handloader anymore and never will be again.

The .350 would fit in nicely with the calibers I already have---but still too much an oddball to seriously consider it.

There will have to be several bullet weights---offered from several different manufacturors for me to even think about it.

The stupid rib on the 673 could go too---as far as I'm concerned.

Maybe Winchester will wise up and offer us the .338 WSM---along with the Browning and Winchester rifles to go with it-----think that will catch on better than Remington digging up old cartridges.

 

[FedDC]

I looked at 3 of these and all 3 had the sights machined on crooked. The front sights were not centered on the top of the brl???

 

[stevelyn]

Check my sig line. 'Nuff said.

 

[critter]

Want to shoot the heavy bullets long loaded? Get a .35 Whelen! Ballistic equivalents! Have fun.

 

[BigG]

376 Steyr fires 270 grain bullets...

 

[Keith]

I use a .350 in a Model 7. With the right powder (4895 is a good choice) you can get a 250 grain bullet up to 2500 fps from a 20 inch barrel. I could do better with a longer action where the bullet could be seated out a bit more, but then I might as well choose a round with a bigger case - like the Whelen...
I think these new short mags would be a better choice all around and if they'd been available when I ordered my .350 from Remington, I'd have just ordered a custom .350 or .375 based on the Winchester short mag.

Still, I'm quite satisfied with the .350. It's really a lot of power in a very tiny rifle and that's what I wanted. I have data showing velocities up to 2750 fps with 250 grain bullets, but they are based on some powders that aren't commonly carried in my neck of the woods.

Keith

 

[Mannlicher]

The Remington folks never were worth a hoot at picking, and then marketing cartridges. Just look at the long string of flops. 6mm, 8mm Mag, 6.5mm Mag, .350 Mag, 7MM Express................

This reincarnation of the .350 will flop also, and for the same reasons. No savvy with presenting a cartridge that works, in a rifle that will maximize performance with the round.

 

[Keith]

I would argue that the .350 was not a flop! The 0ld 600's and 660's are treasured items in this part of the world. The Alaska F&G people still have a bunch of them and each one is babied and cared for as if they were old H&H doubles.

It's just a very specialized niche for a rifle; one that most people will simply never need or appreciate for what it is. You can't even find one for sale up here, in any condition.

The best you can do is call the Remington Custom shop and plunk down about $1300 for a Model 7 so chambered.

Keith

 

[Badger Arms]

Yes, Kieth, but even you'd have to admit that the 350 was popular ONLY in our neck of the woods and didn't catch on in the lesser 48. I have one, but who has one down there? It kicks like a mule and doesn't do anything better than the 35 Whelen. It's the same reason that the 358 Winchester is underpopular.

 

[Mike Irwin]

From a marketing, sales, and use perspective, the .350 was a flop.

Finding a home in a small, highly specialized niche is virtually never enough to keep a cartridge alive, as Remington found out.

 

[Keith]

Yeah, I suppose you're right. It's certainly a niche rifle, but it's certainly a nice niche! I don't feel overgunned shooting deer with it, not do I feel undergunned with larger critters. And it's a damned nice little rifle to have when every hunt starts with a climb up the mountain.

I don't think it kicks too bad, of course mine is a nice custom Model 7 with a fat, soft butt pad. I've never shot one of the old 600's.

Keith

 

[Mike Irwin]

"I've never shot one of the old 600's."

Do yourself a favor.

Don't.

Especially not with 250-gr. bullets. Recoil can be politely described as brutal.

 

[Detritus]

the original 600s were too light and had a poorly designed stock, even in .308 the SOB would knock you into next week!! speaking as a person who's first experience with a non-22 rifle was a M-600 in .308, i can say that the only advantage i've found is, that i've never really been "recoil sensitive" since

but i also can not imagine shooting one in .350 Rem Mag

 

[Mike Irwin]

A friend of mine has taken many deer with his 600 over the years. His is the only experience I have with the 600 in .350.

He's reloaded for it, and keeps it in the range of the .35 Remington power wise, simply because of the recoil aspect.

 

[Badger Arms]

Keith:

When you're going to be in Anchorage, email me and I'll see if I can piece my 600 together. I've got my Brother machining a new trigger guard for it and the scout scope mount still isn't set up. That and I don't have any rounds loaded for it. You supply the Ammo and maybe we're there! IIRC, we still had to have a shoot-off to see which was quicker, the Mauser or the Enfield? Can't remeber what that thread was all about.

 

[Keith]

I'll remember and bring along the Model 7 as a comparison. It may be that shooting the .45/70 has rattled loose all my recoil synapses and I'm simply immune!

Keith