350 Remington Magnum

medvedqc

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
266   0   2
Location
Whitehorse, YT
what do you think about it and why it didn't work well on the commercial side.

a very good cartridge for the few examples I've seen use.

I still have some brass and a stock for a project that ended before started.

any hints and tips.

Phil
 
I think it's a cool round, one of the original short mags. I think two words can sum up why it didn't work.... "poor sales".
 
The 35s have never been popular in the Americas. But there's enough of them still out there that they won't die out. Maybe once the Magnum short fat phase dies they will be the new thing.

Great thumper it is
 
The 35s have never been popular in the Americas. But there's enough of them still out there that they won't die out. Maybe once the Magnum short fat phase dies they will be the new thing.

Great thumper it is

The .350 Rem Mag is a Magnum short fat, the original!
 
I've owned a few over the years , I just traded a Ruger M 77 in 350 RM for a Marlin 45/70 . It's a great round , but is a bit of a kicker with heavier bullets . Add that to the fact that there weren't a lot of rifles chambered for it and limited ammo availability pretty much explains it's lack of popularity . My brother has used the same rifle in 350 RM for over thirty years , A REM Model 700 , to take more animals than I can remember. He's always used 250 gr bullets loaded to about 2400 fps on everything , as far as I can remember, he's never needed more than one shot . I used the Nosler 225 gr partitions along with Hornady 250 gr SP's , both worked perfectly on moose , elk and deer . The 225 do give a bit more range than the 250's and , in my experience , don't give up any penetration or " knock down " ability to the heavier bullet .

That being said , my next 35 will probably be a 35 Whelen . It's a lot easier to form your own brass , trust me I had to make my own 350 brass when Remington dropped production a while back . They have resumed production , but I won't be surprised when they drop it again . Ballistically , they're identical , and I can fit four rounds in a magazine with the Whelen . Other than that , I'd use either round on anything in this part of the world with complete confidence . I hope this helps , but if you do decide on one , you won't be disappointed with it's performance on game .

A2
 
The aspect of this cartridge that appeals to me most is big power in a short action, specifically the model Seven or 600.
Was hooked on the 350RM from the first time I ever shot a large mule deer with it...terminal performance was stunning.
I have started making my own brass by running 300WM or sometimes 7mm through an RCBS trim die than outside neck turning...endless range pick-up brass. Really not that time consuming. I'm on 2nd firing on my first batch that I never even bothered to anneal and have no neck splitting problems as of yet.
Something else worth noting is that I almost always can find .358 bullets to shoot. The gunstore shelves can be deviod of .284 and other popular bullets but it seems there is always .35cal available, they fly just under the radar.

200gr TSX's pushing 2850 with a stiff load of TAC really blow the "woods" cartridge only theory out of the water.
I have been practicing banging the 12" gong out to 400yds this winter and it is easy and repeatable.
My current 350 project had me modifying a Brown Precision Model Seven FS stock. Serious amount of inletting but I got it done. It's currently awaiting paint.
It's still under seven pounds all-up with a full size scope and no talleys and really not that bad for recoil, even off the bench. I have the option of easily going lighter but can't quite say that I will just yet. I shoot 200-225gr bullets only, and don't feel undergunned for anything in North America with four legs and a heartbeat.
Fantastic cartridge!


IMG_8951_zps5d32a2b4.jpg
 
Last edited:
one of my top two picks along with 223 _Rem. does anything and doesn't need to be balls to the wall to be effective. easy to make brass with a form/trim . accurate too!
 
what do you think about it and why it didn't work well on the commercial side.

a very good cartridge for the few examples I've seen use.

I still have some brass and a stock for a project that ended before started.

any hints and tips.

Phil

Lets hear about your project you're thinking of. What action would you look to build on? What is the stock inletted for?
"Project ended before they started" if I only had a nickel for each one of those... :p
 
I find this cartridge interesting. Epps had some model 7's in stock a few months ago chambered in it and I'm still kicking myself for not picking one up when I could.
 
Lets hear about your project you're thinking of. What action would you look to build on? What is the stock inletted for?
"Project ended before they started" if I only had a nickel for each one of those... :p

the project was or will be again on a winchester 70 or MRC 1999 in left hand action. the stock is a wooden winchester fwt left hand action.
 
what do you think about it and why it didn't work well on the commercial side.

a very good cartridge for the few examples I've seen use.

I still have some brass and a stock for a project that ended before started.

any hints and tips.

Phil
There were too many 35s already that didn't do very well commercially for the 350 to excel. 358Win and 35Whelen for starters. Anything over 30cal seems to be scary for most shooters as well. They already have the 30/06, so why bother. They do have a point.

I'd personally prefer a 358Win in a short action. The 350Rem does offer a bit of velocity over the 358W, but offers one less in the mag and hard to find brass.
 
In the early '70s the .350 was the first "MAGNUM" rifle I owned. In those years there was lots of positive press around medium capacity mid bores, and the .350 was a factory chambered cartridge whereas the .35 Whelen was a custom gig. What really caught my imagination was the picture of a hunter with a polar bear he had just shot, and a little Remington 600 carbine was leaned up against the bear. By the time I decided this was a the rifle I wanted, they were getting hard to find, there was a 700 Remington BDL in .350 magnum collecting dust on the rack at a local gun emporium I haunted regularly. I wanted a low power scope with lots of field of view, so chose a 2.75X Redfield.

This was the version of the 700 Remington with the slim forend and the pressed checkering. Apparently there was a reason that thing was collecting dust on the rack, and apparently there was some logic to the laminated stock that Remington used on the magnum version of the 600 carbine. After a 100 rounds of pretty hot handloads I discovered that stock split right through to the center of the checkering in the forend and behind the tang right through the pistol grip! I bet that crack appeared with the first shot out of that damn rifle. About that time I was wishing I had bought a M-70 in .338 or a MK-V in .340. If that wasn't enough, the scope, it was the wide view version with the TV screen ocular, began to leak and fog up whenever the temperature crossed the dew point. No Redfield optic has ever again darkened my doorway.

I was right about one thing though, the .350 Magnum cartridge is an excellent cartridge for a light weight rifle for use on medium and large game. It would be over 30 years until I once again carried one, and C-FBMI's M-7 KS proved to be a very different animal than that old 700.
 
There were too many 35s already that didn't do very well commercially for the 350 to excel. 358Win and 35Whelen for starters. Anything over 30cal seems to be scary for most shooters as well. They already have the 30/06, so why bother. They do have a point.

I'd personally prefer a 358Win in a short action. The 350Rem does offer a bit of velocity over the 358W, but offers one less in the mag and hard to find brass.

It offers quite a bit over the .358 Win, roughly 450fps in some cases. And brass is just as easy as the .358.
The only real competition it has is the Whelen, and being nearly twins. And Whelen brass is a touch easier to procure.
 
I like my 350rm (left) and just finished a matching 358win for my father (right). I am curious to see the real difference in velocity between my 20", and his 22" barrel.
image_zps50d8c4c4.jpg
 
Last edited:
It offers quite a bit over the .358 Win, roughly 450fps in some cases. And brass is just as easy as the .358.
The only real competition it has is the Whelen, and being nearly twins. And Whelen brass is a touch easier to procure.

Having shot both, and seen both used on game quite a bit, I would be interested in hearing more about this. The greatest difference I ever saw, in rifles with identical barrel lengths, was less than 100 fps.

As far as brass goes, they are both as easy to procure as 308 and 30-06 brass is available. ;)

Ted
 
Horree choot! That should've said 350!....
Anyhow. In a 22" barrel I have personally used book loads to get 3000fps with the .350, and using the same 200gr TSX 2650fps was the max we could accomplish in a 22" tubed .358 with a few favorite powders without getting bizarre. Still great hunting.
Anything one can do in a Whelen can be done in a .350 and likewise.
I found that 2800fps with a 225 isn't much of a trick with the .350 either, but 2500 was the ceiling again for the .358.
 
Horree choot! That should've said 350!....
Anyhow. In a 22" barrel I have personally used book loads to get 3000fps with the .350, and using the same 200gr TSX 2650fps was the max we could accomplish in a 22" tubed .358 with a few favorite powders without getting bizarre. Still great hunting.
Anything one can do in a Whelen can be done in a .350 and likewise.
I found that 2800fps with a 225 isn't much of a trick with the .350 either, but 2500 was the ceiling again for the .358.

I was just out shooting my 350RM this morning and got an average of 2915FPS over the chrony with a 200gr TSX and 63grs of Ramshot TAC.
I have been up to 64grs of powder but that was really standing on it.
That's out of the 20" Model Seven barrel. I have no experience loading for the 358win, I'm just backing-up rem338win's numbers.
 
Back
Top Bottom