John:

Nice write-up in Handloader on the much-neglected .284 Winchester. That's always been a cartridge I've been curious about.

Mike

Same here Rev. Not sure why having a couple 280's, a 7x57, 7-08, 7 WSM and Mashburn but it still interests me.

by chance were there any newly introduced powders tested in the article

Hunter and VihtaVouri (N555, N160, N560) are about the newest. IMR4350 and Hybrid 100V were the other two. None of the newer IMRs were in the list.

I often kick myself for passing on a Savage 99 in 284. It was in a local shop for a very modest price. Bore was pristine but the exterior was well used. Not much blueing nor much stock finish. No pits or stock damage. Apparently the former owner used it for everything in Alaska as his only rifle and was quite religious about keeping the bore in good shape, according to the shop owner. Don't know why I passed on it but wish I hadn't.

N555 works great in my 284 with the Speer 160's.

I've always wanted a .284, just never could decide what action to build on.
Anyone ever do a Montana in one?

In about the late '80's I had a Winchester 100 in 284. I sort of wish I had not let that go, but it threw brass and I got tired of looking for the sort of expensive brass. Handy little rifle with a punch. If a guy were a factory ammo only guy, that would be one good way to go, in my opinion. However, besides the brass, the trigger took some getting used too.
I'm sort of heavy on the 7mm's now and prefer bolt or slide actions in my 7mm's. If I were to make up a 284, I think I'd buy a 'surprise' 700 and re-barrel it. I'd avoid a controlled feed action as I think there would be some feeding issues that would have to be done to feed those fat cartridges. But maybe if one were to buy a short fat cartridge rifle in a controlled feed version the re-barrel would be easy.

The 99 I have shoots great with 120 TTSX and IMR 4350. I enjoyed the article also.

About 3 ( or more ? ) years back there was a discussion here about just that.
Might’ve been a 6.5x284 in a LA .

In any event, I believe the consensus was that the ULA/NULA was a more natural “fit”

Let us know what you discover, please.

It’s funny. The 7-08 and the 280 AI get a lot of ink but the 284 splits the difference perfectly. And R17 is tailor made for it. Its one of the best cartridges not in widespread use. And still one of the best among those that are.

My pal loves 7 mags, but inherited a 88-284, and then build a nice bolt gun last fall. He loves it.

Seems it could be long-throated like the 6.5-284 Norma, and loaded to more spirited pressures than the Saami 56K psi.
In the appropriate length bolt action , of course.

338Rules,

One of the things I point out in the article is that CIP (European) pressures for the .284 are considerably more "spirited" than SAAMI's.

The probable reason for the SAAMI maximum average pressure (MAP) is the .284 was originally designed for the Winchester Model 88 lever-action, and the Model 100 semiauto--which I also point out, and that Europe has a distinct lack of 88s and 100s.

I also discuss "long-throating," and bullets seated out further. The advantages of each are vastly exaggerated--and I also explain why in the article.

When a buddy bought a 7mm WSM Montana back in the day I kinda thought about the 284 Winchester as being the same. Though the WSM family was sort of a new thing. This buddy was nuts about weight as he did lots of diy pack hunting. Even shortened his toothbrush handles.

I read JB's article and now am horned up considering a 284 project. Hoping this goes away.

Love a 284. It's about ideal for me. I don't know how many I own but they all look like this group of .284's.

Cream usually rises to the surface, so if the 284 was really a better choice, more people would have chosen it. Of course, the fact that Winchester chose not to catalog the Model 70 in 284 didn't help it any and JOC's treatment of it in THE HUNTING RIFLE couldn't have helped it either.

I still have 8x 284s; 4x Savage 99 and 4x Winchester 88. I've also owned 284s in the BLR, Ruger 77, Winchester 100, and a few bolt action part guns.

For the guy who doesn't reload, the 150 grain Winchester/Olin factory ammo has about the same performance as their 150 grain factory ammo in 308. From my perspective, the 284 with factory ammo is just an expensive to buy and expensive to feed 308. It does win the "cool factor" category, but the average guy has never gone out of his way to own a rifle that requires any extra effort.

Or so it seems to me.

I have an Interarms Mk X in 6-284 that someone put together. I acquired it in a swap about 12 years ago, and it's a good shooter. I don't know what---if anything---was done to the feed rails but it has never given me any feeding problems. I can only get three or four rounds in the magazine, though.

I have liked the 284 W long before I was able to get one. I liked the idea of the 284 performance in a Win 88 action.
I didn't find one that was in good enuff shape OR at a price I felt was reasonable.

I got this one from a Campfire member / Friend. It's a Mauser 98 (standard action) not magnum nor short action.
I also have never had a problem with feeding, extraction or ejection.

Without pushing the limits - Using H 4831 I'm getting 3000 fps with 139 HBTSP -- sounds 270 ish. It works.




Jerry

The .284 was my first deer rifle and the first rifle cartridge I handloaded. The Model 100 was the launching platform and it served me well but, like bugger, I got tired of looking for my brass so it was traded.

John made his brass out of 6.5-284 but both Lapua and Peterson's are now making it. I suppose it's because of the resurgence of interest in the cartridge since a 1000 yard record was set with one in F-Class competition.

Yep. I would have used Peterson brass, except there wasn't any (or Lapua) in stock anywhere I could find on the Internet. Graf & Sons is supposedly the sole seller of Peterson, and of course some did show up on Graf's website AFTER I submitted the article. Now have a 50-round box of it too.

John, in your experience with the cartridge, when loaded up to CIP pressures, what do you see it equivalent to? In the article I think you mentioned that it lags a bit behind the .280 Rem, but at CIP pressure do you see it still lagging, or equaling/exceeding the .280 Rem? If so I can see why Melvin Forbes thought it was ideal for one of his rifles.

Nosler catalogs 6.5-284 Norma brass. I have used it and it seems to be perfectly acceptable. I do prefer Lapua, though.

Enjoyed the article John,

I love this old cartridge. It was way ahead of its time. Minimum body taper, steep shoulder angle and rebated case head. It would be decades before other cartridges showed up with similar characteristics. The 300 RUM comes to mind.

I began my journey with the 284 Win back around 1985. My first and only rifle was a Ruger Tang Safety in 6mm Rem. I wore the barrel out and went to see the late Harry Lawson, here in Tucson, about rebarreling it.

Harry suggested I let him install one of his Remington takeoff barrels in 7 Rem mag, cutting off some of the chamber end, threading and rechambering. It was a perfect fit! The unaltered rifle's magazine was approx 2.950" IIRC and fed the 284 fast or slow. First bullet choice was the 140 Sierra gameking. Killed many coues wt, javelina, jackrabbits, coyotes and even a coati with that original barrel.

As the years went by the loads and powders changed. Original load was a minor variant from what Bob Hutton suggested. He used 57 or 58 gr of IMR 4350 with a 140 Nosler partition. I used same load data for the Sierras.

I acquired other 284s in several platforms, shot them for a while then moved them along. At one point I even had Ron DeWarf's original 284 Win silhouette rifle he used at the Tucson Rifle Club where the first silhouette range in the country was built! Ron was one of the founding fathers of that range. He sold it to me because it admitted it was a bit too much recoil for him and that type of competition.

Around 10 years ago had the mag box lengthened to a more useful 3.050" and even had a custom reamer made to my specs. It requires neck turning for Winchester brass as the necks were not that concentric. I do my own barrel work now.

More recent powder choices were H4350 then on to RL-17 which shines in this cartridge. RL-17 is used with 120 NBT and 168 Berger hunting VLD, the two current bullets used in this rifle, now on its fourth barrel. (current barrel is a 24" Rem takeoff formerly a 7-08)

Last year I acquired a long action Rem 700 long throated 284 with a 29" barrel. It likes H-4831 and 180 Berger target hybrids. Who knows how long I will keep this rifle but one thing is certain I will never part with my first rifle which will continue to be a 284 win.

Sorry, thinking out loud about a reloading project for a buddies bolt action .284 .
He’s finding ammo hard to source. I may end up with the barrel, or the whole gun.

Standard pressure factory loads are underpowered for this platform.
Seating bullets out with appropriate long throating would help to distinguish the Rifle loads from 56k psi lever loads.

I noticed in your HL article that OAL was up to 2.899” .
Would you go longer if magazine dimensions ( & throating) permit ?

In the style of 6.5x284 Norma, or 300 PRC,, Mo’ Longer, Mo’ Betta

The 284 was a cool shell made to fit in short actions. Winchester brought it out so people could get 270 performance on game from a lever action, their M88, and then also from their M100 auto loading rifle in 1963.

In any long action however it's an expensive way to get what the 270 and 280 both do, (and do with a bit faster velocities), so unless it's used in a short action it has little reason to exist in my opinion.

Some will make a lot of noise about a few FPS, mostly because of wanting to justify their expenditure. But if you use a long action and you were concerned about a few FPS in a 7MM bore it's hard for me to justify spending a lot of money when you could simply get a 280 or a 7MM Mag for that matter.

The 284 was cool and filled the bill for what it was designed for. Short actions, and specifically lever actions.

Usually, but not necessarily. While all cartridges are made up of the same four components, just in different proportions, the most balanced are not always the best sellers or even recognized as such my the average shooter. We all know it’s a confluence of factors that make or break a cartridges popularity, but some of the most important of which are the initial rifles it’s offered in.

Edit: because hand loading is of course required to reach its potential due to originally so-chambered rifles, it will remain in commercial ammo variety- and availability-limbo..

Dang Hanco that's a down right good looking Buck there. It has my favorite shape of whitetail antlers what I call the rocking chair main beams.

+1!

Despite what many people say, I personally believe the 284 Winchester was the cartridge design that inspired the WSM line of cartridges.

I may have started the thread several years ago about the 284 in a Kimber. Or I at least asked the question on someone else's thread. If I recall correctly, the concern was the fat case didn't leave enough metal in the barrel-action junction.

I have one in a Ruger Tanger that has never been out of the box except to show and tell. Back on the day, Ruger put a decent hunk of walnut on their rifles. The rifle was given to me by one of my older hunting buddies because of our shared fondness for Rugers.

If you are correct in remembering that, then Kimber nixed the idea on the basis of extra expense in machining/production to produce an almost perfect combination of platform and cartridge. And I think it would have sold well had they done so. This, generally, is one weakness of some American gun manufacturers as I see it. Too much of “Let them eat cake” (what we give ‘me) so to speak.

For example, what kind of attitude is Kimber expressing when they say “we will never offer a left hand version”?

It takes a small shops like NULA and Rifles Inc. to bring a SA, lightweight rifle together with a longer than standard box, correct throat, etc. for a cartridge like the 284. It’s not brain surgery to do it right and do it well.

Brownells carries the Peterson brass

Found the 284 thread.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...957293/Board/29/page/1/fpart/all/gonew/1

What case did Rick Jamison base his Short Fat magnums on ?
These were certainly the direct ancestors, but the 284 Win dated from the mid ‘50s , So of course it was inspirational.

With a rebated rim, fairly minimal taper, and 35 degree shoulder, all point to this inheritance.

Ibelieve that in his first experimentations Rick Jamison used the .425 Westely Richards rebated rimless case as the base for his short magnums. If memory serves he published his developments in different articles, could have been in Guns and Ammo but I am not sure as it was time ago and I do not keep the magazines with me.

Correction 284 Win was created in 1963

People say they were not chambered in the model 70 but I have one in my safe and know of three more in the local area. Were they a special run done for a distributor?

About the time of the 284 win. folks discovered short , fat cartridges were a little more accurate. Think PPC against the old favorite triple deuce. I tried the 6mm and 25 version of the 284. Both were outstanding in the short action 700 I had.
Hasbeen

I seem to recall that Winchester cataloged a Model 70 with a detachable magazine and a synthetic stock sometime in the 1980's or 1990's, but I've never seen one.

What vintage is your Model 70 in 284? Is it made by Winchester or USRA?

yes winchester put it in its 70 dbm set up for one year I think....they bring big money and i heard less than 300 were made

Seems I'm behind the curve. I have always admired the 284, but just recently getting around to filling that hole. Colt Light Rifle barreled and stocked by Melvin Forbes. Glass was a Christmas present, so shooting it should follow when the weather breaks.

What bullet do you plan to use?

300 units made years after most of the people who cared about the 284 in 1963 had moved on couldn't have helped anyone except for Winchester/Olin, since rifles need ammo and only Winchester/Olin makes 284 factory ammo.

The PPC rounds didn't appear until the 1980s.

P.O. Ackley's book on wildcats lists a couple of short, fat beltless "magnums" virtually identical to the .300 WSM made by turning the rims off .348 Winchester brass and cutting an extractor groove. They appeared in the early 1950s, if I recall correctly, and were designed to fit in the 722 Remington action.

Mine is a DBM as are all the ones I've seen but with wood stocks 24" tubes.It's funny so many of them ended up here in this area if they are that limited production. I bought it in the early 90's I think 93 or 94 so it would be USRA.

I don't understand all the angst over how other people feel about things or why they feel the need to advocate so passionately, all too often in a rude and disrespectfull manner, for the things that they prefer. If you feel that you have found a good way to accomplish something and want to share it, then share it, but expect some contradictory feedback from folks who disagree, 'cause somebody is sure to disagree with you.

I've come very close to "duping" a short action M70 SS Classic Fwt and having it chambered for .284Win but so far I've been able to resist the urge.

Do it. That be a unique build!

140 or 150gr. I've had good luck with Noslers and Hornady bullets. If I ever draw a moose tag I might look at heavier bullets and some Barnes bullets

Creedmoor Sports now carry Peterson Brass
just in case (pun intended) the need arises, we now have an additional source to check for availability


Peterson brass @ Creedmoor Sports

An easy way to scratch the itch for. 284. Get a 7mm08 and have it punched out. Mine has withstood the test of time. Mine is about thirty years old. Deer have not liked the deep seated Bullets.

Back in January of 1971(50 years ago--almost to the day!!!) I came across a Ruger M77 in .284 Winchester at a small town store in Idaho. The man behind the counter said they'd had it in the store for over a year and lots of guys had looked at it but quickly lost interest when they saw it was a 284 Winchester.
He said he didn't think they could give it away. It was priced at, IIRC, $134.99. When I offered him $100.00, he said "YES!" almost before the words left my mouth.

That rifle and 150 Nosler Partitions has accounted for a great many deer, several elk, bear and antelope. As I remember it, all were one shot kills.
Best $100.00 I've ever spent.

I have had a 284 Winchester for probably 15 years. It was always an interesting cartridge to me for some reason... I started out with a Browning BLR then added a Winchester 100 and later a Ruger Model 77 with the tang safety. The Ruger was what I wanted all along but the Browning and the Winchester showed up first and both shoot great. While I've shot them some at the range, I've never hunted with any of them. Probably going to change that this year.

Getting the ammo has always been a bit of a problem. I sent a box to someone on the Fire a few years ago that couldn't find any during one of the shortages. Shortly after that I decided that if they were going to be that hard to find, I'd add the 284Win to the cartridges that I load. I bought some of the 6.5X284 cases and I've taken to calling them my wildcats in 7X6.5X284. I've never been one to buy a standard cartridge and then try to make a magnum out of it, so they are fun to shoot.

After seeing those Savage 99's in 284 Win, I might have to see how much space I have in the gun safe and if I can squeeze in one more rifle.

I've had at least one rifle chambered in 284 WIN for over 40 years. It seems to me that the 284 WIN's 2.17", or 55mm, is a little long for Remington short actions due to magazine COAL limits. Most people think of the 284 WIN as primarily a short action cartridge despite its case length, while few people would ever think of the 6.5x55 as being a short action cartridge because of its case length. Same case length, same COAL issues in Remington short actions, very different perspectives.

I went down the 284 based wildcat rabbit hole some years back and did them in 6-284, 25-284, 6.5-284, 30-284, 338-284, 35-284, and 44-284. Some worked better than others for me, so I've kept some of the rifles chambered in 6-284, 25-284, 6.5-284, and 338-284. I screwed the barrels off the others and used the actions for other projects.

Different folk, different strokes, but I've come to the conclusion that for the guy who wants a short action 0.284" bore rifle, the 7mm-08 fits in Remington short actions without the same COAL issues that you're likely to run into with the 284.

I keep considering building one on a Tikka, with all the room for long bullets that would be needed. I keep thinking, by stop there, go for the .280 or 280 AI.

I've had a 284 in a M 98 action 21" bll for a few years and I LIKE it. Here are a few deer that Hated it.



Antlerless only season and 1st victim. 2017
-----

When buck season opened this is the 1st. victim.



He was trailing 1 of 2 Doe and I said "hey", he raised his head for the last time.
His left antler was broken short and i didn't know it.



And this guy was walking straight away from me and I shot him the back of the neck. Bulged his eyeballs.



The rifle is accurate and 139 HBTSP s work nicely.

Jerry