Met a new hunting buddy this year who showed up with a neat old Rem 600 in .350 Rem mag. Still in the original laminated stock and never has had a scope mounted on it. It's a serious deer & elk rifle thumper.

Any idea how many of these brutes were made and what one is worth? It's been on many hunting trips over the years, and shows some wear & tear, but hasn't been abused. Thanks, Guy

Take a gander at Autcion Arms web site a few are listed from time to time on there,going price seems to be in the 700-900 dollars range

Thanks!

Sob I can remember standing in a gunshop back in the '80's holding a 600 in 350 RMag, and thinking, "man, if I just didn't have a car payment due this week". $250.00 was marked on the tag

R-WEST

Cheer up R-West, Remington is introducing an New rifle next spring, they are calling it the Model 673 and it is going to be chambered in the 350 Mag. It has a laminated stock and even a vent rib, just like the old 600's. Heck they have even put the shark fin styled front sight on it... Even though I have a Classic chambered in 350 I am getting a real urge to get one of these 673's. Shooting Times, January 2003 issue has quite an article on this new rifle...

I see Remington is bringing out a new version of the 600 called the 673 based on the model seven chambered for the 350 Rem Mag and the 300 short action ultra mag. It even has a laminated stock and a vent rib on a 20" barrel.Remington will issue a traditional 200gr core lokt load at 2775 fps.For more info read the Jan 2003 Guns & Ammo magazine.

A big problem with the Remington M600 and M660 .350 Mags was the magazine box length. That parameter required heavier bullets to intrude into the powder space.

Jeff Cooper liked the cartridge for its power in a carbine length firearm. John Gannaway made one up for him on a standard length Mauser action, and loaded some ammunition using the 250 grain Swift bullet seated out. Jeff called it his .360 Mag.

Remington has continued to offer the .350 Mag from their custom shop(the Model 7 KS).

jim dodd

I have a Model 7 KS in .350 Rem. Mag. It is ultra light, very accurate and even has some type of treatment on the barrel like Parkerizing? I have a Leupold 1.5x5 on it. As to bullets being seated too deeply, I got 2600 fps from Barnes X's that at 225 grains are really long. There was plenty of room for powder with only slight compacting. I got 60+ grains of IMR 4320 in the case with little trouble. The load really wore out some pretty tough African animals. The new Remington 673 should be a winner.

We finally have an over the counter 350 Rem mag reintroduced and Remington designs it for failure with this configuration. Moreover, I�ll bet at a future Monday morning business meeting one of their geniuses will proclaim that he knew that the shooting public would not buy a 35. Hey Remington, build it in stainless with iron sights and a decent synthetic stock before you pass judgment.

The Whelen and the 350 mag. are great northern woods calibers for black bears and the big deer. Because of the inevitable cold wet weather encountered during hunting season in the northern woods and topography that can pitch you for a dandy tumble, the iron sights are a prudent back-up option to have on a rifle in this country. For my purposes, hunting in North Idaho and northwest Montana, a 350 Rem mag in a short fast-handling unitarian rifle would be a good effective lash-up. I have a little personal experience with Whelens, and I am convinced that .35s delivery killing effectiveness that cannot be illustrated by ballistic tables. CP.

[ 11-28-2002, 23:40: Message edited by: CP ]

I couldn't agree more on the stainless / synthetic / iron sights issue. I don't have a single piece in my cabinet that doesn't have irons, and I've passed up a lot of very nice rifles (including stainless Model 7's) because of the naked barrels.

It won't sell. Big .35's in light rifles kick too hard and have shorter range. Besides the Remingtons don't have CRF and in general look like tinker toys.

The 600's and 660's didn't sell either.

I agree that .35's hit harder however.

If Winchester comes out with a .358 WSM I will buy it.

i think remington and winchester should open a public forum to announce a pending new firearm. let us know what there plans are and ask for feedback BEFORE production. bean counters dont hunt and advertising is into buzz words and numbers.
let us decide what gets built. we are buying it.
give us a platform to speak and maybe some options that we could opt for on the firearms.
maybe 3 or 4 different scenario's i.e. laminated, walnut, syn. sights, scout style options, or just smooth. stainless, blued etc.
they take the 2 most popular combinations and build them. simple.
also, maybe they could include orders through the custom shop if you they are not offering your particular combination. just like new cars. you pick the options and your rifle arrives in 8-10 weeks. cost a few extra bucks but i bet they would sell more. you could have a somewhat unique gun for a little extra money.
your choices would be finish, metal, stock material and sights if not offered.
i hope they bring the 350 out in a adl version also. that would be the cheap way into it let people choose what they want to do. lord knows there are enough used 700 parts flying around you could dress one up pretty cheap.
i hope it doesn't die out like the 600 and 660. why are they so nostalgic when it comes to repeating faliures? build it on the 700!! duh!! good grief, ask the consumer!
whew. all done.
adios
woofer

I lived through the age of the 6.5 Remington mag and the .350 Rem mag cartridge introduction, and the Remington 600 and 660 rifles. The gun writers all wrote how the American public did not buy 6.5 mm rifles, and how the .350 was hampered by having bullets seated too deeply.

They will trot out more of the same articles for the Rem M673, which is at least a more interesting name.

If they say it and write it enough times, you will hear shooters at the rifle range saying the same thing. "So let it be written, so let it be done."

I have a Steyr ProHunter in .376 Steyr with the 20" barrel. I understand the virtues of a handy rifle firing a cartridge with real punch. It is especially good in the African bush veld where most shots are 75 to 175 yards.

jim dodd

Jim Dodd,

You have a genuine need for what you have as dangerous game must abound in Africa. This is not so in North America except maybe some area of Alaska. So what happens here in NA is that cartridges suitable for long range win out.

I use .358 Winchesters for woods hunting but I am a real rifle afficiando and make a big deal out of it. Here a .308 Win would be much easier and just about as good. This is why I don't think the .350 whatever with catch on in a short light rifle.

Don,

I mostly carry my Steyr Scout in .308 Win when I go hunting in North America; I grok what you write with respect to a light rifle with a .350 or larger cartridge in the market here.

Like you I love rifles too, but I sold my Savage M99F .358 Win to a friend who hunts with it for eastern woods whitetail and black bear. I still have my Mauser M98.35 Whelen though.

I will be interested to see what marketing Remington does, and what the gun rag writers write in response. I will have to buy some of those magazines I usually ignore.

jim dodd

Too bad Big Green isn't introducing a .35 on the SAUM brass - it fits better with current marketing and the extra powder room wouldn't hurt.

After reading one article, I mailed Art Wheaton a letter and suggested a they give us a .25 and a .35 on the new brass, and (if memory serves me correctly) suggested they use the M700 as the launching platform.

That's not to slight the .350, which has always garnered acclaim from those who actually used it on game. Too many writers concentrated on what they thought the 6.5 & .350 RM's wouldn't do rather than what they would do.

Having said that, Remington screwed up, in the case of the 6.5, especially; if they had introduced it in the M700 with a 24" barrel, it probably would have sold like hot coffee at a December Packers game. Same with the .350.

The M600 version could have come later, if at all. The 6.5 RM in an 18.5 inch barrel is not much different than a 25-06 carbine; how many of those have you seen around??

BigIron

[ 11-30-2002, 04:47: Message edited by: BigIron ]

The M600/660 suffered from and the new 673 will suffer in the market place due to their looks, but more so from some fallacies that most hunters/shooter cling to tenaciously.

Many more shooters think they need a very flat shooting round, than actually need or can utillize one. Most game is actually taken at modest ranges, and the long range rifle is actually a specilized niche tool.

Writers will write and readers will believe that the .350 RM is terribly handicapped by the short COL required by these actions, but even in the dual short (action and barrel) M600 it produces adequate power for all animals (Brownies in cover being perhaps a special case) in the Western Hemisphere. Admitedly, the round can do more given more room, but this should be viewed as added versatility rather than an inherent flaw.

Enough about what will hamper the new rifle or is wrong with the old carbines. Some good things are: The .350 RM will be supported by Remington at least a bit longer. Much of the pent up demand for .350s is for working rifles and looks will not matter much to or can be modified (literal plastic surgery -- many M600s have been under the knife) by these buyers.

A medium powered medium bore like the .350 RM in a handy carabine is a very useful and reliable hunting tool that if you do not allow the fallacies and misconceptions thrown at them to distract you, you will find to be one of the most used rifles in your safe.

Fireplug
ps: M700 fans I will take a M600 action over a M700 any day for short cartridges, but of course M70s are always the better choice.

[ 12-01-2002, 04:08: Message edited by: Fireplug ]

The afoementioned article in Shooting times also mentioned that the 673 will be offered in 300 SAUM. I don't really need a 350 RM, I wouldn't mind having one in 300 SAUM. I think it's a nice looking rifle except for the exagerrated shark fin front sight. I guess Remington tried to recreate the 600 front sight writ larger. It will also have a vent rib, albeit in metal this time. The rifle is certainly distinctive.

[ 12-02-2002, 01:14: Message edited by: br6ppc ]

Guys,

I had one of the originals, used it on deer and bear, never shot either with more then one shot. Recoil was stiff, but it was a killer. I've located and bought a Mod700 in .350RemMag but when the new Mod673 arrives, I'll buy one to replace the original I sold years ago. The original was one of those guns I wish I had never sold.

Joe

after shooting a deer opening morning this year i am still amazed at the power of this little gem. knocked that deer off all four feet at 100 yards. never even twitched.
225 nosler bt. clean through both shoulders. there is no need for a 35wsm or a saum in the 35. the original has all you need.
i am bummed though it did not arrive in the 700. can you imagine what an all around rifle they would have in a titanium/kevlar 350 mag? 5.5 pound do anything, go anywhere rifle under $1000.
yes, i know it would kick. i shot a flyweight in 350 mag. it popped pretty good. no worse than a 300 win or a stw though. it's not like your going to sit down at the bench and shoot 100 rounds.
i say to remington------ bring it on!!!
the new one is a love/hate gun. i would buy and adl version before i bought that one.
eeccchhhhh.
woofer

I think the 350 Remington was a bad choice for Remington. The rifle looked odd and let's face it, the gun was not a pleasure to shoot either. The only thing it had going for it was it's weight. Now as a dangerous game gun, Ruger and Winchester come to my mind quickly. They are control fed action, big claw extractor and 3 position safety. Remington is just not in the same league, besides what if I forget my key to unlock the gun? The .338 caliber is all one needs in a medium bore as my eyes see things.

Fireplug,

Why the preference for M600 over M700 for short action cartridges?

BigIron

The vent rib, if it is stout, will be a great place to attach a scout-style scope mount, something that makes mucho sense on a 350 RM short rifle.

Well I am glad they are going to bring back the factory ammo but I couldn't give a hoot about any of their Rifles. Last week I decided that I was going to order another barrel for my Encore and I had it narrowed down to either the .35 Whelen or the .350 Rem Mag. Either will do all I need but I think I will go with the .350 just so I can buy a few boxes of brand new ammo to go with the brass I will buy. Sean

BigIron, the 600 is shorter and lighter then the 700 . - Dan

Big Iron,

What Dan Belisle said about shorter and lighter.

Fireplug

For what it is worth: I saw a Rem 600 or 660 (?) in .350 for sale at the Cabela's store in Dundee, Michigan a month ago. Had the controversial laminated stock. Price was in the $700 range I think, maybe with a scope included. I can't imagine there are too many of these for sale these days.

Is the M700 short action magazine length greater than that of the M600?

I located a January Shooting Times. The article mentions the 673 having a 22" barrel and having a very well designed stock from a recoil perspective. L. Simpson said the new 673 was more comfortable to shoot than the M600 in 350 RM.

Clearly, Remington is going for the retro effect as the 673 has the vent rib and shark fin front sight so reminiscent of the M600. My personal opinion is, however, that if they are really trying to breathe life into the SAUM cartridge family, they should have introduced a new .35 on the SAUM brass.

In theory, they are trying to popularize a family of cartridges built on the SAUM brass. As good as the 350 RM cartridge is, reintroducing it doesn't make sense in light of the SAUM cartridges.

I do hope that everyone who ever said "I wish I'd bought an M600 in 350" buys a 673; nothing wrong with helping Remington stay in business.

What I really want to know is when is Remington going to come out with the new "Short Magnums" in the regular model 700's???
It is nutty that they are only available in model 7's.

Controversial laminated stock? Price in the $700 range? Sounds kinda cheap, must not have been in real good shape! I have seen them go for upwards of 1200.00 for mint condition, not all that bad for a 149.00 rifle when it sold new... I kinda hope in one way that the 673 doesn't sell all that well cause it will only increase the value of the ones that were sold...

BIGIRON, I understand what you are saying about the SAUM cartridges, but with the costs involved with R&D and prototyping etc. bringing back the .350 is definitely the less expensive way to go for Remington. Personally, I am glad that they are bringing back the .350 because that will make it easier to get ammo for my new Encore barrel.
Also, think of all the good wildcats that could be built with that action, and the .350 brass. I have seen chamber reamer lists for .338-.350 Rem Mags, .375-350 Rem Mag, and of course the .416 Lockhart (Ken Waters 416 Express). These cartridges should interest people that don't necessarily have to have the biggest and fastest, but want something with more power than the typical Short Action cartridges. If the .350 Rem Mag meets or exceeds .35 Whelen velocities then a .375-350 Rem Mag should do the same with the .375 Whelen. Heck, people could have there .400 Whelen in a short action without the headspace concerns because of the belted case. Sean

Bruce they've been out for some time now

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

[ 12-07-2002, 10:22: Message edited by: Mark R Dobrenski ]

Mark, where are you getting the information that the Remington Short Magnums are available in the model 700 line?
I just went back to the Remington website but can only find the model 7 short magnums.

Bruce on the rack at the sports shop I work in we have a 700/7saum in stainless and plastic. That tis where I am gleaning my info from.

Let me know if I can help you into one.

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

Having whined a whole bunch ["Care for some cheese with that whine? No thanks, a good whine stands on its own"] about Remington reintroducing the 350 RM instead of a 350 SAUM, I think I now understand why they did it. I had no idea the originals were trading for G-note money. Remington is clearly trying to cash in on the high resale value of the originals by offering an improved retro model. Fair enough.

And, I will fess up that the belted brass is handy if you want to wildcat a cartridge whose bullet diameter leaves little shoulder area for headspacing.

I am glad that they did not hamper the 673 with a carbine-length barrel. 22" is about right.

Now, a question: did they give the barrel a quick enough twist rate to stabilize the 270 NorthFork and 280 Swift A-Frame? Maybe even the 310 Woodleigh? The 350 RM will do anything the justly acclaimed 9.3x62 will do when loaded with quality, high sectional density bullets.

That would be wondermous if they did.

Mr. Gordon, I too have been wondering when the SAUMs would appear in the M700. Looks like they are making it to the shelves prior to official announcement, according to Mr. Dobrenski.

BigIron

[ 12-08-2002, 01:18: Message edited by: BigIron ]

Mark,
What I am waiting for is a model 700 short magnum in the low dollar configuration like you can buy at Wal-Mart ($375). Just want the action for a custom target rifle. No reason to waste all the money when all I will be keeping is the receiver and bolt.
I want it to be a factory short magnum so that it will reliably feed thru the magazine. The gunsmith I use mentioned that a 308 bolt face could be modified to work, but that there still might be some feeding issues on rapid fire. My intention is to do a switch barrel setup. Perhaps one barrel in 7mm Remington short magnum to use the high BC 7mm bullets for 1000 yard competition and a second barrel in the new Winchester super short magnum in either 6mm WSSM or a wildcat 6.5mm WSSM.