Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game 350 Remington Magnum yea or nea ???

Not that I need another rifle, but I've been thinking about getting a Remington model 673 in 350 Remington Magnum for a while now! I'll put a Leupold VX-II 3-9x40mm scope on it. I don't really have any hunting plans for this rifle other then maybe taking it on a black bear hunt in Canada. I might go out west for elk, antelope, mule deer. Or Maine for black bear and/or moose. Again I do plan on going to Canada for black bear and maybe even caribou. I also have a Remington model 700 in 280 Rem. and a Marlin lever action in 444 Mar. (plus a few others)! I was going to use these two rifles depending what and were I was hunting. I'll probably put the 350 rem. Mag. into this mix as well.

I don't reload/handload my own ammo yet, but I do have a good friend that is very knowledgable and will help me get started or even come up with some good handloads for me so I will be able to use 225gr. or 250 gr. bullets for the larger game. I was wondering what you guys/gals think of this rifle/cartridge/scope combo? Also what is the maximum effective "real world" range of this cartridge on the game I mentioned? Thanks ! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I have an Montana 1999 being built right now into a 350 RM. It appears on paper to be an equal in a short action of the 35 Whelen which has a very good reputation. I should have real world data in a couple of months but I really doubt you would regret getting it.

I'll be testing 225 grain TSX and NBT as well as 250 grain Partitions. I expect to have excellent results with them all.

Take the plunge! Bruce

Isn't the 350 Remington Magnum a little hotter then the 35 Whelen?

I forgot the mention Bison hunting. Like I said other then my father and I going to Canada for a black bear hunt I don't have any real hunting plans right now for this rifle. I want to know the capability of this cartridge.

I bought a Ruger 350 last week to use on a WY bison hunt in November. Shot it with factory 200 grain ammo today, getting under 1moa. I plan to load 225 Partitions. I sold a Whelen a few days prior to getting the 350. Recoil seems the same.

The Nosler #3 with 225 gr. Partitions shows the 350 RM with a bit of an edge 2640fps to 2500fps over the Whelen.

Barnes #3 shows 2713fps to 2734fps also favoring the 350 RM. Barnes shows the 250 gr. advantage going to the Whelen by a margin of 2586fps to 2517fps in the 350 RM.

These are just two guides and certainly don't take into account seating depth, or any of the many variables involved. So depending on the OAL for a given rifle I figure they're pretty close.

I had a Mag. Bolt Face short action and wanted a larger diameter hammer so the 350 RM got the nod.

Good luck with your project, Bruce

The .350 rem mag is an excellent cartridge and the 673 looks to be a winner as is the leupold scope. Personnally i would go with a 1-5X vari X lll, but a fixed 4X would be just fine for the 350.

I own a 35 Whelen and it seems to perform better than the 350 when you use bullets of 250grs and up. I want to handload bullets that are at least 270grs in mine. I have a one in 14" twist which is faster than the one in 16" in the remington 35's whether its a 350 or whelen they all have the one in 16" which doesn not do too well with heavier bullets.

A 350 with a 225gr partition or barnes TSX would be able to take probably all the game in N.A. so i wouldnt worry about its capability. The only reason i want to load heavy for caliber bullets is i feel thats what the Whelen was originally intended for 275gr bullets. There are the 270gr North Fork, 275gr Hawk, 280gr Swift A-Frame and the 310gr Woodleigh. I would only use those on elk, moose, or brown or grizzlies.

I also have a .358 win in a Browning BLR but i will use it for deer and black bear, although it would make an excellent elk rifle in the timber. Buy the .350 you wont be sorry.

I suspect the .350 Rem. Mag. is a bit "hotter" than the .35 Whelen (a .30/06 case necked up to .35 caliber) because a good many reloading books give the .350's velocities out of a Remington 600's 18-inch barrel whereas the .35 Whelen's velocities are often shown from out of a 24-inch barrel.

But... even so, the two calibers are pretty close in the muzzle velocities of most weight bullets. HOWEVER, if you fire the .350 Rem. Mag. from a "24-inch barrel", the .350's muzzle velocity would undoubtedly be higher than from the 18-inch barrel of a Remington 600.

When comparing the muzzle velocities of two different calibers, you must compare "apples-with-apples"... and a 6-inch "difference" in barrel-length would make a fair amount of "difference" in muzzle velocity... � 100 fps "difference" or possibly even more.

Jus' an educated guess & my 2� since I don't have either caliber. Other's opinions may vary.


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

I own a 350 rem in the classic. I also own a Whelen in a Ruger 77. They are both great rounds. I also believe the nod goes to the 350. As far as how far it is effective, it will shoot farther than the average hunter can. I would say anything inside 300 yds. Which as I stated is farther than most can shoot accurately anyway.

Get it and "GET ER DONE"

I considerd the .350 mag in the Rem 673 at one point. The weight of the rifle scoped is what turned me away from it. Instead I opted for the BLR in 358 Win. The rifle scoped weighs only 7 1/4 lbs.
The difference in velocity between the .350 mag and the 358 Win. is about 200 fps. I don't think the game I shoot will know the difference in the fps. but my aching back sure will appreciate the lighter rifle.

NY,

The 350 RM is basicaly the same as the 35 Whelen.
I have a M700 Classic in 35 Whelen with a Leupold VXIII 2.5X8 scope. It is a real tack driver as well as a 300 yd hammer. I use the 225 gr Nosler PT and have taken many WT Deer and a Black Bear. I have only had to blood trail a couple of deer, in both cases short with a heavy blood trail.

I don't think you will be disappointed with your decision and the 350 RM will become your go to gun.

Regards,

JD338

As for the scope i would say: Too Much magnification! Get a Fixed 4x33 or a 6x36 and get better eye relief. I have a fired a 35 Whelen with a Leupie 6x42 and I was really impressed. I have the scope you suggested and it os OK, but a loweer magification would be better for the caliber and game mentioned (IMHO)>

BMT

Surprised no one brought up magazine length as the culprit in 250 or heavier. 350's on short actions tend to have the longer bullets seated deep to fit in the SA magazine.

Almost forgot...Yea on the 350 or the 35

NYH2

I have both and consider them basically equal until you get to heavier than 250gr bullets. Then the 35W gets the nod.

The .350 is a "shot action" Whelen. Mine is a 700 Classic with a tupperware stock. With 225 Nosler Partitions or 250gr Hornady RN along with IMR4895 or IMR4064 it is amazingly accurate and consistent.

The new 1.75X6 VX-3 would be the cat's meow on your rifle.

If you get one I'm sure you will be happy with it.

WN

I think you've got a winner. I had a 673 and let it get away. I regret that I think that is a very nice looking rifle. I've still got a 350 in the Ruger M77 SS with the tupperware stock. The magazine is longer than on the 673 is my understanding and the 225 NP is a home run for ANYTHING in NA including the big bears. I'm going to put a 2.5-8 Vari XIII on Ruger. My vote is definately YEA!!!

Thanks for the replies everyone!

Cariboujack, I was on Ruger's web site and saw that they are chambering the M77 in 350 Rem. Mag. again! I didn't know magazine length was a problem on the 350 RM until davef mentioned it above. How big of a problem is it???

NYH2:

IMO the 350 RM (and also the 35 Whelan ftm) are superb large game cartidges. I have a few 350 RM cases laying about and from measuring some .338 bullets, it looks to me as if any good 225-250 gr. flat base bullet (spitzer or RN) will be fine in a 2.800 magazine. The 350 RM has somewhat more powder capacity than the 35 Whelan, but the magazine length probably makes them about equal.

FWIW I'd rather face Mr. G or an enraged prehistoric woozel with a 350 RM than a 300 mag of any flavor. Naturally YMMV.

JimF

I would need to do some measuring but it "may" prevent the use of 250 gr with out deep seeting and loss of potential. The 225 which is a very good round in itself should be just fine.

Can a gunsmith relieve some of the material in the magazine so the longer 250 gr. bullets can be used? Would that even worth doing?

IMO:

The issue of seating bullets deeply seems to be a non issue to me. The only concern is that given a bullet with a very long ogive, said ogive might extend down inside the neck. This situation could impair feeding and reduce neck tension on the bullet to an unacceptable level.

Some express concern that the base of the bullet reaches down into the powder space. My opinion is so what? After all the 350 RM was designed around a 2.800" magazine box. The cartidge develops good velocities at 90-95% load density with several powders. This means that even with a long bullet, powder compression will be either minimal or non-existant.

So......while some potential could possibly be lost, it would only be with the very slowest powders that are useful in the case. Even then, the "loss" would be so minimal that it would almost be imaginary. Again, my opinion there is so what? The 350 RM gained it's solid reputation by delivering big, bone crunching bullets at moderate velocities. An extra 50-60 fps gives one absolutely no advantage.

I have an ultra-light 284 built on a short action with an extended magazine box. My chrony tells me that this set up reaches max expected velocities with powder charges that would not be compressed at all (or very little) even without the extended box. So....what did I gain? IMO....nothing. Later, when I built up a 6.5x284 on a short action, I did not bother with the extended box. What did I give up? Again, the answer is absolutely nothing.

JimF