Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 284 win

Although the 7 WSM or 7 SAUM were not available 20 years ago that case design was where we all wanted to be when the 284 was entertained. I always wondered why the 350 Rem Mag case was so ignored. THough I like the WSM case since it has no belt, the 350 Rem Mag case had a lot to offer in wildcat terms. It could have done then, necked down to various calibers, what the WSM's & SAUM's do now.

Reloder28, you are right.
With all the new powders a lot of old cartridges and wildcats would be much better.
Butch

John, as a matter of conjecture, since some rifles (probably mostly custom or semi- so) seem to show an improvement as to chambers, etc; and brass too, have we found ourselves in a day where traditional SAAMI spec's may not reflect the thresholds of safety as before.

For example, in the 284 I mentioned above on a reworked 700 action, the only pressure sign seems to be the velocity; the usual flattened primers, extractor marks, hard to extract case, and case head expansion are all absent at a velocity that rivals factory 7mm mag ammo. And by the way I backed down to 3100 from a ways above. Then too, there seems something semi-mysterious about R17 in some cases as seems to be here.

However, I don't condone fire walling any cartridge and pose the question supposing that if we stay within 60k psi in some cases we may have a greater margin of safety than we might suppose.

Beauty, and coolness, is in the eye of the beholder, at least for me.

I once had a Browning bolt action in 284 (I liked the performance and short action and light weight). In a fit of madness, I sold it and now have no 7mm rifles (other than a 7mm Mauser Remington Rolling Block for nostalgia). I do want to build another 284 - it is a great cartridge, but then again, the 7mm-08 does all I need.

goodnews,

The basic problem is not the case, but the action. Modern rifle actions are very strong and most are very safe, but if subjected to pressures over 65,000 psi repeatedly even the best actions actions can fail due to metal fatigue. This is the basis of the pressure limitations pretty much universally imposed by the industry itself, both in the U.S. and Europe.

An example: a few years ago a guy who then worked for a powder company (and so should have known better) built a wildcat cartridge that, he claimed, got faster velocities than any other round of its size. I can't remember the mystical reasons for this, but they were pretty much the same as most such claims, whether a magic shoulder angle or a "fast" barrel.

Anyway, it was a varmint rifle and he used it for a couple of years, shooting a lot of prairie dogs--and targets, since the company had its own range at the facility. One day he was testing a new load and the rifle went blooey. I can't remember all the details, but essentially the front end of the action disintegrated. The scope (a big high-X varmint scope) was blown off and went flying past his ear, putting a dent in a metal building 20 feet behind him.

Until that moment there had been no traditional pressure signs, except for LOTS more velocity than you'd expect from a case of that size.

Chambering the rifle in 7x57 would be cool, but to go beyond cool have Mel stamp it "275 Rigby".

--Bob

No, I have not had it pressure tested but for the 6.5-284 I load under manufactures recommended load data.

Shown below is from Ramshot's web site.


Magnum 120 SIE HPBT 64.0 3,245 62,200 psi

Magnum 140 SIE SBT 62.0 3,070 64,000 psi


I'm loading 61 grains of Magnum behind a 130g
for 3,150 mv. I'm two grains less powder and 10 grains less bullet.

Surely, I would think that if a 284 case shooting a 6.5 140 grain bullet at 3,070 the
larger mouth 284 win can send a 140 at the same speed via maybe a grain more powder that would easily fit in the case at less than book psi limit.

As can be seen, it's obvious that I am within pressure limits of what load data tells me and where I want to be pressure wise.

As well, entering my load data into QL it's telling me that I'm at the low 60K range.




Yes, for the 280 06 based case.

RL17 has a proven track record of being a go to powder for top speeds in the short fat cartridges.

Alliant advertises it as such.

As it works for the short fats for higher than "normal" speeds there is strong reason for me to believe that the 284 case design falls into that same category as the short fats therefor it is able to deliver higher than "normal" speed.



And by using that same 139 g short shank bullet you can expect for certain that the 284 Win case will scoot it along just that much faster as well.

I'll stand by my claim that for certain you can expect 200 fps more out of a 284 case over the 7mm-08 case within book limits.

That in itself gives excellent reason to build one, not to mention that I believe the case is inherently accurate.

To put it into practical terms...

I can build a 20" barreled 284 win rifle and still be ahead of a 708 24" barreled rifle by
approximately 100 fps.

The 20" 284 would be lighter by a 1/2 lb and a faster MV mountain rifle.
Up there on the mountain things like this matter in my hunting book.




That's over 10 years ago, just about the time 1000 yd shooters were kicking 300 win mag butt and winning matches by necking down 284 Win brass to 6.5.

Just think what they would have done had they good brass!

Melvin's still telling people to dis the 284?
i thought it was his flagship.



One other thing, I hope the OP realizes that when he drives that Forbes rifle off the lot it will have a $1000.00 depreciation value.

As good as Melvin builds rifles he's just as good at salesmanship.

Nothing wrong with that.

I look at the x57 case as pissing up a rope.

Better rounds can be had in the long action via 280 Rem and better rounds can be had in the short action via 284 win. Technically speaking of course.

SU35,

Good point about the 6.5/.284 and Magnum. That would certainly indicate that the .284 itself should do about what you're getting.

I still would like to see Alliant list some RL-17 data using the SAME bullet side-by-side with their other powders. All their data with the short-fat magnums is shot with BTSP's, while their data with their other powders is shot with flat bases. The Speer Hot-Cor flat-bases produce average than higher pressures, while the BTSP's produce less than average. It would be nice to compare apples to apples.

However, I have quit believing in the magic of case shape affecting pressures, or how certain powders burn, having seen too much evidence to the contrary. Plus, a lot of people have claimed vastly increased velocities with RL-17 in standard cases, again without any pressure documentation.

There have been other powders introduced more-or-less specifically for the short-fat magnums. Ramshot Hunter is one, and it was designed to fit a large gap in their powders, between Big Game (about like 760 in burning rate) and Magnum (about like H1000, IMR7828 or RL-25). Alliant had a similar gap in their powders, between RL-15 (only a little slower than IMR4895) and RL-19 (close to H4831).

Both companies needed something a little better suited to the short-fat magnums, and produced it. That doesn't mean that it somehow burns better in the short-fats than longer cases.

Whether it truly is the magic powder many people believe remains to be seen with more pressure data. There have been some major advances in powders in recent years, but I have seen magic powders come and go over the years. Back in the 1970's a lot of people were loading cases to outlandish velocities with Norma 205, until some rifles were damaged. That powder eventually went off the market.

Until there is some more data, shot with the same bullets in the same pressure barrels, I'm going to remain a little skeptical, partly because that is my job.

By the way, Kenny Jarrett highly recommends the 7mm-08 AI, or at least he did a few years ago. He sent me a rifle with a 20" or 21" barrel, I can't remember which, and his handloads with 140 Ballistic Tips. They got over 3200 fps from the short barrel, with no sign of excessive pressure. Can't remember what powder he used (it's in my loading notes) but it wasn't anything new or magic.

It certainly was possible to turn the Winchester .284 brass of 10+ years ago into good stuff, but it took all the techniques of case uniforming to do it. That's why Melvin quit recommending it to his customers who weren't really avid handloaders, suggesting the 7mm-08 instead. And the last time I talked to him about all this, maybe a couple of years ago, he said we was seeing signs that Winchester .284 brass wasn't as good as it was right after they retooled--though it was still better than it had been a decade ago.

Actually, Melvin's rifles don't usually drop $1000 in value as soon as purchased. Quite a few people have sold them for only $500 less than they paid for them, if the rifle was in almost-new shape. But even $1000 off (1/3 off new for the Model 20 and 24) still makes them a better resale value than most synthetic-stocked custom rifles.

I knew when I brought up short fat case shape and
RL 17 it would bring up the question of "does case design and certain powders equal higher velocity?"

And of course you did bring it up which is indeed your job!
That's why I like your writing.

But since it fit in to my rifleology I decided to say AMEN!


Edited to add..................



That's a freaking hot load. No doubt about it.

The AI's are generally overloaded and over rated.

Mule Deer,

There was some strain gauge work done by Bob Jensen and German Salazar. It was posted on 6mmBR.com when RL-17 first came out.

Here is the article:

http://www.6mmbr.com/reloder17.html

-----------

I have gotten great results with RL-17 in two 7 rem mags, a 284 Win and a 6mm rem. No other powder comes close to the velocity that this powder does with these four rifles.

------

Side note on previous remark: 284 F class rifles that are driving 180 gr bullets just below 3000 fps with RL-17 are using 28" or longer barrels.

Azshooter do you have any recipes for 284 in 120 or 140gr TSX?

NOTHING WITH EITHER ONE. I ON THE OTHER HAND LIKE THE 6.5 284. GREAT SHOOTER, AND WASTE NO TIME GETTING THERE. BUT EVERYONE HAS THERE SPECIAL TOY

PM sent

Azshooter,

Thanks very much for the info!

I have read the article several times and still see no pressure readings for the RL17 and 180grn. bullets.
Butch

Below is info that I just received. As MD said, HIGH PRESSURE.

Cartridge : .284 Win.
Bullet : .284, 180, Berger M T VLD #28502
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 2.800 inch or 71.12 mm
Barrel Length : 24.0 inch or 609.6 mm
Powder : Alliant Reloder-17

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 73 37.20 2220 1970 33820 7835 98.4 1.624
-18.0 75 38.13 2269 2057 35965 8008 99.0 1.583
-16.0 77 39.06 2317 2146 38239 8168 99.4 1.541
-14.0 79 39.99 2366 2237 40651 8315 99.7 1.497
-12.0 81 40.92 2413 2328 43208 8446 99.9 1.456
-10.0 82 41.85 2460 2420 45920 8563 100.0 1.416
-08.0 84 42.78 2507 2512 48802 8666 100.0 1.378
-06.0 86 43.71 2553 2606 51859 8766 100.0 1.341
-04.0 88 44.64 2599 2700 55107 8865 100.0 1.305 ! Near Maximum !
-02.0 90 45.57 2644 2795 58561 8961 100.0 1.271 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 92 46.50 2689 2890 62235 9054 100.0 1.238 ! Near Maximum !
+02.0 93 47.43 2733 2986 66148 9145 100.0 1.206 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.0 95 48.36 2778 3084 70314 9234 100.0 1.176 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+06.0 97 49.29 2822 3182 74757 9320 100.0 1.146 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0 99 50.22 2865 3281 79499 9404 100.0 1.117 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Butch

Butch,

Very interesting.

Out of curiosity I went through Alliant's data, occasionally looking up other data when RL-17 was listed with higher velocities than any other powder:

.243 Win.--
85 BTSP R17 3316
(Nosler lists 3308 for AA3100 under 85/90 grain data.)

.25-06 Rem.--
120 BTSP R17 3046
" R25 3071

.260 Rem.--
140 SP R17 2645
" R19 2701
" R22 2731

.270 WSM--
130 BTSP R17 3258
130 SP R22 3220

150 BTSP R17 3041
150 SP R25 3050
" R22 3009

.280 Rem.--
145 BTSP R17 2968
145 SP R19 2973
160 BTSP R17 2829
160 SP R19 2813

7mm WSM--
160 BTSP R17 2964
160 SP R19 2956

.30-06--
180 BTSP R17 2762
180 SP R22 2762
200 SP R17 2552
" R22 2499
" 4000MR 2595

.300 SAUM--
180 SP R22 2896
180 BTSP R17 3008
(This looks like a big R17 advantage, but Nosler lists IMR4831 at 3017 with 180's.)

.300 WSM--
180 BTSP R17 3082
180 SP R19 2978
(Again, this looks like an R17 advantage, yet Nosler lists IMR4831, again, at 3082.)

.300 Win. Magnum--
180 BTSP R17 3074
180 SP R19, R22 and R25 all at 3050+

I'm still looking for even a consistent 50 fps advantage in R17, much less 100-200 fps.

In the 7wsm, I can easily beat the RL17 velocity with a 160gr and RL22..

Same in the 25-06 and 100's.


In my experience, what Alliant lists as a "max" load for RL17, is truely a max load. You go above it, and you have sticky bolt lifts and flat primers.

With their RL15, 19, and 22 loads, you have room to work up before you hit your max. And, when you work up to your max, you meet or pass RL17 velocities.