OK guys, for those who think most action coversions are simple. Well some are not, for example.

I just finished converting a Dakota M76 short action to 284 Win for a customer.

This required that the magazine box be lengthened by .200". The width increased by .030", and the taper of the box changed so the cartidges would lay in it properly.

Because of the design of the bolt stop, and ejector, and rear bridge, and the rail trigger guard. I could only move the box back .125", the rest came out of the bottom of the feed ramp.

The reciever was set up and remachined to fit the box, and the wider new tapered feed rails. I used a carbide end mill with the mill head moved back at a 8 degree angle. This angle is needed for proper feeding, upwards from the magazine.

Then I spent about 6 hours doing the final hand grinding to blend in contours of the feed rails. Once I got it to feed 80 % of the time I could then hand polish the rails smooth as a baby's behind.

However it would still only feed 80% of the time. Quess what the magazine spring was from a 223 Rem M 700. Otherwise it is to weak, for this conversion. So I dug out some other springs and found one that would work. Now I got it to feed 4 rounds from the magazine without a hitch. Luckly the factory follower worked fine.

I spent about 9 hours doing all this work to get those rounds to feed the way they should.

The reason for this post is to remind you guys that some coversions are simple. While others require a lot of THOUGHT and WORK. I have worked on several 284" in the past. So I had a good idea of what to expect, regarding the feed rails and the spring. Also having a full machine shop, and the ability to make any type of part I need, never hurts.

Using this forum to exchange imformation such as this is something many of us older gunsmiths/gunmakers never had the opportunity to do. We learned it in the School of Hard Knocks.

Careful planning before starting any project is the FIRST requirement

Great post Jim---

Your post is much better than my "wouldn't have a 284 under any circumstances" attempts at saying the same thing.

I was just out in the shop rummaging around for a scrap action for an experiment and ran across the first try at a 500 Jeffery....WOW! I'm sure I didn't get paid for all that work, if I had I could retire now.

Jack, my 6mm/.284 on a Browning (FN Mauser) action feeds perfectly, and always has. It was barreled in 1964 by a gunsmith in Fairbanks, AK, and he never mentioned having to alter the action in any way to make it feed. Nor was I charged for such work. Examining it, I can't tell if it was altered, since I have no other such action to compare it to. Do you think it must have been, from your comments above??

[ 05-12-2003, 19:02: Message edited by: eldeguello ]

eldeguello----

In my experience a 284 WILL feed through an unaltered M-98 but it's a LOOOONG way from perfect. I sure wouldn't put my name on one.

Jack, thanks for the info.

I have a good friend with a custom .25-284 built on an FN in 1969. The gunsmith who did the work actually suggested the caliber as an alternative to the .25-06, which at the time had a reputation for pressure excursions ("Secondary Explosion Effect" with surplus 4831). This gun feeds and functions perfectly. I don't know how much, if any, work was done to the magazine/rails, but the smith didn't charge any more for the .25-284 than he quoted the .25-06.

Obviously, some actions convert to the "short-fats" more readily than others. Remember that the early factory Remingtons and Winchesters were notoriously poor feeders in RUMs and WSMs. I think that J Wisner's point is that anyone who desires an action to function properly with a cartridge for which it was not designed should appreciate and be prepared to pay for the work, and I wholeheartedly agree with him.

Since we are on the subject, I thinking of having a 6.5 X 55 swede on a Rem 700 long action put together. Will we have any potential gremlins with this rebarrel job?

The 1994 Remington Classic (the annual "special production in a specific calibre) was in 6.5 X 55.

My Classic works just fine. And it looks no different (follower, etc) than any other 700 in the rack.

You will like it. Try to avoid a real long throat if your bullet weights are in the 100 to 140 range. 1 X 8 twist, of course.

J. Wisner --
If you had to remove .075" from the feed ramp, how much steel was left between the lug seat and the feed ramp? Just trying to get a grip on how much metal that is as a % of the original design.
Academic, maybe, but I'm still curious.
-- Doc

TBS-

I just had that done. The rifle started life as a 7x57 Long Action and had a new Pac-Nor 6.5x55 barrel fitted. I doesn't appear that any changes were made to the feeding of the rifle.

I haven't had a chance to take it to the range yet, but the dummy rounds cycle without any problems. Have to see if recoil moves the rounds within the mag box and causes any problems. The Rem mag box is awfully long - about 3.7" and my loaded rounds are only about 3.2" with the bullet seated fairly long to keep from crowding the powder space.

Brian

Yup. I built a 6.5-284 on a 1909 Argentine. Jack is right it did feed but not worth a crap. Took me forever to get it too feed the way I wanted to. But thats because I didnt know what I was doing. I still dont think I know what Im doing but hey...thats part of the fun!

bjdoerr

Believe it or not this action did not require much metal to come out from the bottom of the feed ramp. This was due to the way Dakota had machined the ramp to start with. Moving the box forward .075" just cleaned up the bottom of the ramp in the center.

How the ramp was machined at Dakota, they came in from the bottom of the action with a end mill about 5/8" in dia. They plunged in from the bottom center upward toward the lug recess. So now you have a feed ramp like a Rem. 700. However due to the old box location, the bottom center of the ramp was now slightly in front of the box when it was assembled.

By moving it forward only .075" I was able to just clean up the bottom center of the ramp, to blend in with the inside of the box. The metal that was removed is to the sides and the raised section of the receiver bottom, this allowed the box forward. The feed ramp now looks more like a Pre 64 M 70, you have the center section I did not alter. You have the sides which the ball nose end mill blends in to the bottom center of the ramp. The magazine box thickness is only .050"

After a lot of measuring this is why I only moved the box forward .075". This just cleaned up the base of the old ramp with a minimum of metal removed.

Jim,
thanks for posting this... My first (and not only) 500 jeffe on an enfield was an excerise in cut, polish, cuss, try again... it feeds like berries in a goose, but *I* aint happy about the final look. Lots of things i could do better, having done it once..
btw, it's nothing like making the changes to get a mag to feed in a std action...

jeffe

As a rule of thumb, I would say that most Mausers will feed cartridges based upon, or close to, the original M88 7,8X57mm round. That is, the 6mm Rem./6X57mm Mauser, .257 Roberts, 6.5X57 Mauser, 7x57, 8X57, 9X57, 9.5X57, etc., without much problem. Other, very similar rounds, such as the .243, 260 Rem, 6.5X55, 7mm/08, .308, .338/08, .358 Win., will also work pretty well, but sometimes their shortness can be a problem.

Jim,
Thanks for sharing details! Last time you mentioned this (on phone) you were in the middle of feeding issues - Glad to hear it worked out so well.

Jeff Pfeifer