+P+ 35rem loads for a 760 pump?

[mogwai]

Most of the hot loads I've seen for the 35rem were developed in Marlin lever guns and (I think) are <40,000cup.  The 760 and 7600 are chambered for 35 caliber rounds exceeding 50,000 cup.  Has anyone tested the limits of the 35 Remington in a strong action. like the modern Remington pump?

[R.W.Dale]

 This kind of thinking pops up periodically and always leaves me asking? Why didn't you just buy the 35 Whelen? Treat the 35 rem like a 35rem and buy a bigger cartridge if you want  more horsepower. There's no point in wading uncharted handloading waters in the pursuit of another 75 FPS.

[mogwai]

This kind of thinking pops up periodically and always leaves me asking? Why didn't you just buy the 35 Whelen? Treat the 35 rem like a 35rem and buy a bigger cartridge if you want  more horsepower. There's no point in wading uncharted handloading waters in the pursuit of another 75 FPS.

Because I found a good deal on this combo and I forgot to ask for your blessing before I bought it.   I asked if anyone had "waded uncharted waters," as you put it.  I didn't ask for a lecture

[Dave in WV]

35 Rem brass isn't designed for that much pressure. Yes, the rifle can handle that much pressure but a ruptured case may damage it.

[35Rem]

Has anyone tested the limits of the 35 Remington

SAAMI has. That's why the published data is what it is. Brass isn't really designed for the higher pressures.

Push the 35 Rem bullets much faster you won't like the results, and will likely claim the cartridge is no good cuz the bullets blow up. The 35 Rem is where it needs to be. Go use it on some game before you try to make it something it's not. You may be surprised. It kills plenty good for what it's intended for.

Krochus' point was they make better cartridges to push 35 cal bullets faster. They also make the bullets tougher for the faster velocities the 358 Win and 35 Whelen produce.
Stick with the 200 grain CoreLoct bullet, it's why the 35 is so good.

[Siskiyou]

If I recall correctly I read on these pages that Gander Mtn.  was rechambering M760's in .35 Remington to .358 Winchester.  The modified rifle used .308 magazines.   

The .35 Remington is rated at a very mild 35,000 cup.  A +p+ load maybe the listed maximum in some handloading manual.  As an example the 38 +P+ loads issued to law enforcement officer back in the DAY, did not set the barn on fire or come near the more powerful .357 magnum.  In fact they were rather disappointing.  I was told and read the +P+ loads used heavier brass.

I load for the .300 Savage in a bolt action rifle that is stronger then early Savage M99's.  I loaded at or near the publish maximum for the cartridge.  I mark each round +P+ as a warning to somebody who might try to use my load in another arm.  I also have a warning in my log book. The bottom line is that none of my loads exceed publish maximum in a number of reloading manuals.

I just found a major error in my Hornaday Handbook 7th edition regarding the .35 Remington.  I did an online check and Hornaday has published a correction.  http://www.hornady.com/media/7th_errata2.pdf

[The Gamemaster]

I bought an old (1965) Remington 760 Gamemaster back in 1992 off a disabled hunter that probably bought it new in Clearfield PA.

I bought dies and powder and had Lot's of brass.

I reloaded this round just as hot as it would go.

I used IMR 4064 and IMR 3031 powder.

I found that about the only component bullet that I could find was a 200 grain bullet and as you increased powder beyond max load, the accuracy dropped like a rock.  The gun made a bigger bang and where the bullet struck the target was hit or miss at best.

A .35 Remington is a very fair comparison to a 30/30 Winchester and in my opinion was designed to compete against it on a fair playing field.

Their ballistics and trajectory and velocity are almost identical.

The advantage of a .35 Remington over a 30/30 is that you can shoot pointed rounds in the .35 because it does not have a tubular magazine.  The 760 used a clip and could be unloaded faster than a lever action rifle and was safer.

[Lone Star]

How about answering the OP's question?     Handloader Magazine published an article (July-August 1982) on loading the .35 Remington, and it included high pressure loads for the M760.  Surprisingly, the action did not split open and all cases survived just fine.  The author mentions using these loads at 250 yards so I assume that accuracy was not a problem.

The velocity increases over factory level loads were substantial - I will not list the loads but here are some of the velocities recorded in the M760's 22" barrel:
250 Hornady........2061 fps
200 Rem RN........2373
200 Sierra...........2366
200 Hornady.......2395
200 Rem SP........2380
180 Speer...........2420
150 Remington....2543


* As an aside, Speer listed the following loads as safe in their #5 Manual.  They did not use pressure testing equipment then, and current loads are milder - but these proved safe in Speer's test rifle and brass.

220 SP....1985 fps
180 SP....2361

.

[mogwai]

How about answering the OP's question?     Handloader Magazine published an article (July-August 1982) on loading the .35 Remington, and it included high pressure loads for the M760.  Surprisingly, the action did not split open and all cases survived just fine.  The author mentions using these loads at 250 yards so I assume that accuracy was not a problem.

The velocity increases over factory level loads were substantial - I will not list the loads but here are some of the velocities recorded in the M760's 22" barrel:
250 Hornady........2061 fps
200 Rem RN........2373
200 Sierra...........2366
200 Hornady.......2395
200 Rem SP........2380
180 Speer...........2420
150 Remington....2543


* As an aside, Speer listed the following loads as safe in their #5 Manual.  They did not use pressure testing equipment then, and current loads are milder - but these proved safe in Speer's test rifle and brass.

220 SP....1985 fps
180 SP....2361

.

Thank You!

I'll look for that issue.  Or sneak up on those results with my own work. 

[Graybeard]

I think the concern over weak cases these days is grossly over stated. I cannot and do not believe any US manufacturer at least is going to make cases for one chambering like the .35 Remington weaker than the average .30-06 or .270 Winchester case due to liability concerns. Even the often touted as weak .30-30 case I dare say is likely as strong as the average case.

Only cases that are super old and thin to fit the SAAMI chamber specs like the old .38-40 and .44-40 and the Hornet are weaker and only then because to fit the chamber and hold the proper diameter bullet they must be rather thin as they were originally designed to be. That and that alone is a modern reason for one case to be weaker than the rest.

Now it might be the old .30-30 and .35 Remington are a wee bit thinner in the walls or even case head than more modern rounds originally designed with 65,000 psi loads in mind. By how much I cannot say and without sectioning a case neither can anyone.

Now all that is not to say you should run pressures on such old rounds up way beyond SAAMI specs as that's never a real smart idea in my opinion as much because of lack of pressure tested data tho as to weakness of the case. How much one can safely up the performance of such rounds is not something that has an easy answer and trying to make a .358 Winchester of a .35 Remington by reloading hotter rather than rechambering is not wise and is to be discouraged.

I guess I question the experience with the round of anyone who thinks upping the velocity another 200 fps or so is going to make it something it isn't already anyway. It works just fine as is and 200 more fps is not gonna significantly increase its effectiveness or extent the range it is effective at by any appreciable amount. We've become a nation obssessed with speed and for the most part have forgotten how effective such old and mundane rounds really are.

If you want or need a .358 Winchester rechamber to get it.

[The Gamemaster]

Like Greybeard and I both said.

Just because it is faster - doesn't mean that it is better.

I can also tell you that I had several long discussions with a engineer at Sierra Bullets about producing component bullets in the 150 - 180 gr range and they refused to even take a second look.

I live in deer country and one of the better gun shops on the east coast is only 40 miles from my house and I couldn't get anything lighter than 200 Gr bullets for reloading.

I guess if you wanted to, you could use bullets for a .357 because they are both the same diameter.

But I like spitzer bullets and refuse to shoot blunt nosed.

[Lone Star]

Pointed bullets, eh?  One of the best .35 Remington bullets is the 150 SP CoreLokt - still a top seller for Remington.  Midway used to have Remington make up runs of 50,000 to 100,000 component bullets and they always sold out.   A few years ago a private citizen paid Remington to make a run of 50,000 and he sold them on line.  I got 300 of them and they are great bullets in the .35.  They are 'pointed', but they are perfectly safe in a tubular magazine.  The gun writers in the slicks almost always demean these bullets, apparently just re-writing what others wrote before them rather than ever finding out the truth.  Those who have actually used the bullet on deer-sized game have posted glowing reports.   

Does anyone find it odd that Speer has continuously produced their 180-grain .358" bullet for over 45 years?  BTW it is designed for the .35 Remington.  It obviously sells - does that infer it also works?  I've used it on Kodial Island deer with great success in my 14" .35 Remington Contender, it and the 150 CoreLokt worked very well.  The 180 was pushed to 2120 fps and the 150 to 2330 fps.  Safe loads that extract easily in my barrel - after 30+ years shooting Contenders I can usually spot overloads - check the Sierra Manual if you're worried for me.

I have had so many erroneous responses from Sierra - their "experts" are mostly just experienced shooters who do not even work full time for Sierra - that I have given up on contacting them for any technical information. 

For a well-documented test report on many different .35 Remington bullets and loads, go here:

http://www.marlinowners.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=7180&highlight=

http://www.marlinowners.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=5522&highlight=


GB hit the nail on the case-head again - re: cases supposedly 'designed' only for low pressure.  If that was the case, then the .45-70 (with factory ammo loaded to under 20,000 cup) would not be safe in Marlin or Ruger-level loads.  The fact that these cases are considered perfectly safe for up to 50,000 cup - over twice their supposed 'design pressure' - puts the lie to that theory.


.

[506th]

Try Hornady's Lever-evolution ammo in .35 Remington. Though I haven't chrono'd them, they supposedly are about 200 fps faster than other 200 grain factory offerings. 

[NYHunter]

If you're looking to get more out of your .35 Rem. with a heavier bullet try the Hornady ammo. I did and was very happy with it. Very accurate on paper, have not tried it on game yet.

[NYH1]

I have a Marlin 336 35 Rem.  I use 200 gr. Remington Core Lokt ammo.  On deer it works GREAT!  I'll be using this rifle on wild boar and was wondering if I should use something a little heavier.  I looked at Buffalo Bore Ammo before but have never used it.  I don't know if the Hornady 200 gr. LEVERevolution ammo will work any better then the Core Lokts on boar.  What do you guys think?   

[35Rem]

I'll try to ignore the "roll tide" thing in your signature (6 in a row... )

I can't imagine needing anything heavier than the 200 gr Remington ammo for hogs. I surely doubt the BB ammo is worth the $2 a pop, unless talking Moose in thick stuff, but even then...

The Hornady stuff is hotter, no doubt, but the Remington stuff should do just fine. It's been working for over 100 years now.

[Oldtimer]

I tried the heavy loads listed in the 1982 article and have come back to using factory ammo.  The loads worked just fine, but I could not see any difference on game than factory loads.  If you have one of the weaker actions, then you will have to be sure that you do not mix up which load goes in which rifle.  I hope to add another .35 to the collection, particularly a haf magazine Marlin and have no interest in straining a perfectly good weapon.  Also, you will have to resight your rifle if you end up having to resupply in beautiful downtown Back o' Beyond. 

[NYH1]

I'll try to ignore the "roll tide" thing in your signature (6 in a row... )

Don't try to ignore it.  Bama's a better team this season then they were last season, they'll be even better next season!  Anyway's Bama still leads the series 38-33-1.

I can't imagine needing anything heavier than the 200 gr Remington ammo for hogs. I surely doubt the BB ammo is worth the $2 a pop, unless talking Moose in thick stuff, but even then...

The Hornady stuff is hotter, no doubt, but the Remington stuff should do just fine. It's been working for over 100 years now.

Thanks for the info.  Over the last few years wild boars have established herds in Central New York.  They have escaped from game preserves and are now in the wild.  There is a big push by the DEC and local farmers to hunt as many as we can.  There is no season or bag limit.  There have been some 300 to 400 lbs boar taken in this area.  I thought I might need something a little heavier then the 200 gr. Core Lokts.  I'd like to find a 7600 in 35 Whelen.  That isn't going to happen any times soon though.  I've also never hunted boar before so I don't know to much about them.  I want to hunt them in the warmer weather.  Congrats on the "six in a row".

[The Gamemaster]

Remington never made a weaker action Model 760 Gamemaster!

The very first ones were just as good as the last one made - some where around 1980!

Like I have said before and I will say it again, there is no use trying to make a 35 Remington into something that it is not!

For all practical purposes, 2000 fps is as slow as you would like to have the bullet travel, so that limits it to a range of less than 200 yards.  It's ballistics are almost identical to a 30/30 Winchester and so it should be put into the same category and also be treated the same for all practical purposes.

Not matter how you cook it, it is still a 35 Remington and should be though of as that, you cannot make a 300 Winchester Magnum out of a 35 Remington and no matter how much powder you dump into the case - you will not get it to shoot any better by just picking up velocity.

A school bus has a higher Coefficient Drag number than a Corvette, but the massive frontal area of the school bus makes it like as if trying to push a brick down the road when it comes to performance.

Just because a number looks good on paper, doesn't mean that it will translate the same way in the real world.

Truthfully, I don't even like a 35 Wheelen, because it is nothing more than a 30/06 that has it's neck enlarged and shoulder moved forward to hold a little more powder.  There is no advantage to putting a larger bullet into a case.  Where as there are significant gains to be made by necking down a cartridge - such as a .270 Winchester, 25/06,  308 Winchester, 243 Winchester, etc....

[mogwai]

Truthfully, I don't even like a 35 Whelen, because it is nothing more than a 30/06 that has it's neck enlarged and shoulder moved forward to hold a little more powder.  There is no advantage to putting a larger bullet into a case.  Where as there are significant gains to be made by necking down a cartridge - such as a .270 Winchester, 25/06,  308 Winchester, 243 Winchester, etc....

Well, everyone has an opinion.