Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 284 Winchester Thoughts

My Ruger 77 in 284 is a "go to" gun. And now with the R17 giving the round some added zip -- Wow.
Since there aren't many bad 7mm rounds, just hanging on forever is good.

Really like my 6.5x284 too.

That case needs a little more than a short action (as noted above) to perform best.
JMHO

Why was the 284 so popular in the ULA 20? IT seems like the times that Ruger and Browning brought it out, it didn't make it.

ddj

Back in '84 I shot out my M77's 6mm rem barrel. I happened to talk to Harry Lawson and he suggested the 284. He had several new Rem takeoffs in 7 Rem mag. The barrel was rechambered with approx 1" of the old chamber removed for a final length of 23". That old rifle is on barrel #3 now. It was my only rifle for over a dozen years. It has killed 6 elk, 12 coues wt, at least 10 javelina and hundreds of jackrabbits and a few dozen coyotes.

This old tang safety M77 is in a McMillan ultralight stock. A few years ago when a buddy showed me his NULA I had my gunsmith make the M77's magazine longer. It is now 3.1" just like the NULA. I have read that some rifles have feeding issues. This particular rifle feeds them fast or slow perfectly.

Until the recent marketing of RL-17, IMR 4350, H4350 and Win 760 were used. Bullet weights from the 100 gr original X bullet to 175 mag tips were used.



I have only tried two bullet weights with RL-17 at this point. Both bullets are moly coated Nosler Ballistic tips. The 150 seated out just shy of the lands handled 59 gr of the powder for a velocity of 3200 but accuracy wasn't that good. It does shoot well with 57 grs for a velocity of 3100. Today with temps of 82-90 degrees I tested the 120 Nos bt. The 120 used the same seating depth as the 150. I worked up to 60 grs with no signs of pressure. 60 gr yielded 3375 fps. Accuracy once again was best with a bit less powder. 58 grs was 3250 and 59 was 3310. These two loads might tighten with some bullet seating changes.

Soon I intend to try a moly coated 140 TSX. Based on the two loads above it will most likely shoot best with 58 grs for an estimated velocity of 3175 or a bit more. I'll post the results here in a day or so.

I also tried RL-17 in a 7 Rem Mag with a 24" SS barrel. Used the moly 150 Nos bt and the new 150 E-tip. Both shot very well with 67 gr for a vel of 3280 and 3285 respectively and this was in temps from 85-90 degrees! Used the same seating depth for both bullets. The E-tip's ogive is different and it was a .100" jump, the bt less which I can't recall at the moment. (they recommend .050" to /100" jump for the E-tip) My impression with this larger case is that RL-17 is not as effective in increasing velocities compared to the smaller 284.

I hope this sheds more light on your questions.

Tom, I forgot to include the fact the 1968 Shooters Bible says that was the year the carbine was introduced. It sure isn't there in the 1966 Shooters Bible but those are all I have of that era as my book collection is rather slim. There was no checkering on the stock so I'm thinking someone checkered that one. Sorry about the earlier omission. Ward

It is possible that this is an Model 88 which had a checkered stock in 1963 and was the first year for the 284 cal. If so it is rare but Still not sure if that rifle came with a barrel band. (Carbine) Got to get a little smarter on these guns I guess but love the caliber. Tom.

I'm probably not the best guy to address this question to, but my best guess would be the difference in markets. ULA/NULA are semi (some would say full) customs aimed at the ultra high performance crowd (rifle loonies and handloaders). Rugers and Brownings are more of a mass market item. It is possible that Ruger/Browning have sold more .284 rifles than NULA, it's just that compared to their sales of of rifles in standard chamberings, the sales of .284's didn't account for a big enough percentage to justify further production.

The carbine with the barrel band was introduced in 1968 with no checkering. There was no carbine before this.

That is exactly what I thought. Yet the rifle I saw was a model 100 in 284 cal with checkering and barrel band with 19 inch barrel. Is it possible someone had the checkering cut at a later date to give the appearance of it being a pre 64? Got to find out serial # and that should explain alot. Tom

One of my 99s is in 284, and the thing is amazing. The 140 grain Partition shoots right at one minute and the velocitys are scary enough but no signs of pressure or difficulty in extraction or re-chambering reloads from maximum loads. Because the OAL of the 99 is restrictive, I havent tried the 160 and 175 stuff, but as a deer and sheep rifle it's dandy with the 140s.

Wayne

Makes sense. Thanks

ddj

AZ: Have you tried R17 with non-moly bullets to see what it does?

Wondering out loud how that stuff does in the 280 Rem?

Hi Bob,

No data, I use moly with those rem takeoffs so never tried without moly. I think you will see significant velocity increases even without moly. As you know the 280 and 284 have very similar internal capacities.

Bob Jensen and German Salazar did some serious testing with a strain gauge and their remarks made me go buy some RL-17. I am not disappointed. http://www.6mmbr.com/reloder17.html

Passed up a Browning Micro Medallion in 284 years back. That is one of the sweetest light production pieces ever made---- IMHO
I should not have passed that one up.

I got 2900 fps with 19 1/2" barrel using RL17 and Nosler 160 Part. --and no pressure signs.
Tim

I have had 2 284 Win. at one time! The first I found at a gun show in San Diego, CA. It was a SAKO L61R action heavy barrel, it was a custom built by Art Alpine! I got it for a song! Later I found a custom FN Mauser in 284 Win. I kept the Mauser in 284, rebarreled the SAKO to 338/06 AI. When I go out west to hunt, I always take the 284 WIN. I shoot it with IMR 4350, Hornady 154 gr. Interlock. I have never shot it with lighter bullets, the heavier ones work so well!

284 win and RL-17 update. Just got back from the range. Temperature was in the low 80s.

Moly coated 140 TSX seated .050" off rifling. Shot 4 rounds per charge, cooling to ambient temp between every pair of shots.

57 gr ave 3117
58 gr ave 3172
59 gr ave 3231

No signs of pressure with the highest load.
First two shots with 59 gr touched. After cooling next two shots made the group 3/4".


This RL-17 sure is interesting.

AZshooter,

With that load I can't see any advantage going to the saum.

What is your barrel length?

Have you tried any 168 grain bullets yet?

The .284 is an outstanding cartridge for what it was designed for and that is short lever action actions like the Sav. 99, Browning BLR, Win. 88. It shines in the right house, and is argueably a better round than the popular .308 Win..

Why anyone would opt for it over a 280 Rem, .270 Win., or even a 7x57, in a bolt action rifle is beyond me, but it's a personal choice and you won't go wrong either way.

Because you can shoot it in a short action Ray.
That may not be excuse enough for you but it's reason enough for me.

I'm one of those you refer too. Sold my .280 and bought a Rem Ti in 7mm/08, rechambered it to .284. I went from a club of a rifle to a svelte, sub 6 pound rifle with the same ballistics. My thinking was to move to a lighter rifle while still having the .280 ballistics. The short action doesn't save that much weight but it does save some and makes the rifle a tad shorter. Probably would have been happy with the 7mm/08 but for the $130 rechambering I didn't think I could go wrong. I also swapped the steel trigger guard for one of aluminum and made the same swap on the bolt housing - probably two other changes you may question the value of. Like you state, it's a personal choice, and all the calibers you listed are winners.

The archaic and obsolete case design of the 7x57 makes it an easy choice