No the Rem 760 was NEVER offered in 284Win.The 35/284 would be superior to the 358Win.Because the 284Win holds more powder than the 308Win.The 35/284Win would be a step behind the 35 Whelen ballistics.As it doesn't hold as much powder as the 30/06.
Case Capacity of base cartridges.All would hold somewhat more powder as case taper is reduced in neck up to 35 caliber.
Based on comments received on other Websites and my experimentation since I posted this message, I have decided to stick with a conversion to a 358. A 284-based wildcat will not feed well from the narrow 760 Remington magazine and the chamber walls of a 760 are too thin to accomodate the "fat" 284 case.
I was also told that Grice's Gunshop in Pennsylvania did offer a special run of the 760 Remington in 358 Winchester some years back.
As you have found out, the 284 is a fat case. I built one an a Savage 110 action and to play and open the rails to allow it to feed correctly. If you intend to ever build a 35-284 I will tell you this. My rifle will shoot 3/4 inch groups at 100 yds all day with Sierra 225 gr. BT bullets(1 1/4" to 1 3/8" at 200)I have to disagree with Enforcer as to power levels. I fire the 225 gr. at 2700 fps with 53 gr. of 3031. I have actually gotten up to 2840 but the pressure gets up there too. The 284 case has a short fat powder column which the gun companies are now using in all the new beltless magnums. This approach was used in the PPC cartridges some time ago that kept winning all the compitition. Almost all the magazine writers found something to complain about in the 284 and no one wanted to buy what is in reality a VERY fine cartridge with a rebated rim. Today, if you dont have a beltless cartridge of magnum diameter and a rebated rim, you just aren't with it. Go figure. I think that if you do want a 35-284 and build one it just might become your favorite gun, it is mine.
Very impressive ballistics.My quote on the ballistics of the 35/284 Win being behind the 35Whelen.Was based on the fact that the 284win does not hold as much powder as the 30/06.Hence one would think the 35/284Win would not hold as much powder as the 35 Whelen.And of course they would be correct!
That being said you show 53.ogrs of IMR 3031 for 2700fps(up to 2840fps with hotter loads).The 35 Whelen uses the same IMR 3031,but 56.5 grs of it for only 2500fps out of 24in barrel.Go figure,more grains of the same powder,longer barrel and 300fps slower.WOW!
The numbers throw me off a little.But then again there are many secerts to getting more velocity out of a cartridge.Different powder,exceed COL,longer barrel,exceed SAAMI pressure for said cartridge .the problem is you have none of that going for you or the 35/284 you have.
So good luck and good shooting.I use a 416-284 McPherson in Savage M99R with 26in barrel.It will send a 350gr Barnes Solid at 2400fps-4475fpe,at 60,000psi with COL of 2.825.
If you are willing to open up the bolt face, you might want to look at 358 WSM. It will duplicate the 358 Norma, and the efficient case handles reduced loads very well. Your 35 Whelen duplication loads would average about 42,000 CUP and recoil would go down due to the use of smaller doses of faster powder than comparable Whelen loads.
I have one of the new Browning BLR '81 Lightweight lever action rifles chambered in .358 Winchester. Since this newer BLR is also chambered in .270, 7MM and .300 WSM it seems like it would make an excellent platform for a .358 wildcat.
Although the receiver is machined from aircraft-grade aluminium (I think the alloy is 7075 and the hardness is T6) the lock-up is steel-to-steel via six large lugs into the barrel extension (see attachment).
No one mentioned the 350 Remington Magnum! Ballistics are identical to the 35/284 and the latter of the two seems to be far more accurate. I have rebarreled alot of the Browning Micro Light models to the 35/284 and everyone seems to be more than pleased with them....
By the way, the load data appears to be the same between rounds, at least from mine and my customers experiances....
Nitro I think your on the right track. I was wondering if the barrel shank on the 358 BLR is thisck enough to remove enough steel to rechamber to 35 WSM. Just swap the bolt head and the magazine from a WSM BLR and then a simple rechamber. Shouldn't be to expensive. Ballistics sholud exceed the 350 Rem. easily.
I am looking at both my old and new BLR's in 358 Win and there appears to be enough "meat" in the barrel shank to rechamber the New BLR '81 LW to 35 WSM or 350 RM but not the older BLR.
Based on the "Loads from a Disk" program you won't gain very much muzzle velocity by burning more powder in the BLR's 20"
barrel. The 358 Win is so efficient that the only way to gain any big improvement is to burn all of that extra powder from the 35 WSM and the 350 RM in a longer barrel.
However, The 358 Win in a 26" barrel can hold it's own. I am certain that most will agree with that especially "Enforcer". He has been getting some impressive ballistics from the 358 Win in 26"/28" barrels.
Dang may just have to get me a BLR soon as I find someone to do the work. I am certain that I can get substantial increases over the 358 Win. Nice a round as it is it can't compete. The expansion ration in the 35's makes the 350 and the 35WSM work pretty well. I get 2675fps with 225 Nosler partitions and 2550fps with the 250 Partition in my 600 in 350 Rem. and it's just an 18" barrel. Some initial reports on the 35WSM look pretty impressive if thy are to be believed.
A forum community dedicated to Sport shooters, owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hand casting bullets, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!