Rem 673

[CJ]

Anyone seen one yet? Sounds like a winner to me if they are available.

[Zachary]

If we are talking about the "new" Remington rifle that has the vented rib, then I agree with Questor.  

I see nothing exciting about this new gun.  Can anyone tell me, with a straight face, what the practical purpose is of that stupid vented rib?

Zachary

[Zachary]

Questor, don't worry, I didn't take your post as critical. :grin:   It's just that I don't understand the practical purpose of those vented ribs.  What was Remington thinking?  :?

Zachary

[Mikey]

Zac:  Wind shear?  Mikey.

[Zachary]

Yea, I guess. :-D

Maybe it'll make the gun more aerodynamic when you're getting ready to shoot.  I bet it'll shave off an extra .00054342 seconds before you acquire your shot.  :-D

I wonder if the Remington folks are reading this post?  They must be sitting back saying "What the hay were we thinking?" :-D

Zachary

[CJ]

I'll give you the vent rib, just something to hang up on brush, the front sight is for field dressing your animal. Seriously though, I'm a .35 fan, .35rem, .35whelen, and .358win are in the safe, and one of them is what I wind up taking every year when the season rolls around.  The idea of a compact 350mag appeals to me a lot. Probably a little nostalgia too. What I'd really like to see is the compact Ruger77 in .350 or even .358win without doing a rebarrel.

[Zachary]

I don't mind the cartridge.  Actually, I think it would be great for use on hogs and black bear inside 100 yards.  But that design has got to go.  Why couldn't they just chamber it in the BDL or BDL SS?

Zachary

[Dutch4122]

I like the idea of bringing the .350 Rem Mag back in a rifle that is close to the size of the original.  I think the estimated MSRP (over $700.00?) is too high.  I believe that the vent rib can be removed and that would serve to eliminate a few ounces from the overall weight; this would also allow for a compact scope to be mounted as close to the bore as possible.  I'm one of those ".35 Nuts" that Advocate mentioned so I'd be happy to overlook the vent rib and shark fin front sight til I could have it removed, no matter how ridiculous they look.  As for the price, I think that should be re-evaluated by Remington and their distributors. :?

[jhm]

thats not a vented rib on the barrel its a tuning fork to remove harmonic distortion .   :-D     JIM

[Hogger]

I have a Remington Model 7 in .350 from the custom shop. The 673 appears to be the same thing with the exception of the addition of the gaff hook front sight and vent rib. I couldn't get enough velocity out of my 7 to stabilize 250 gr. bullets with the factory 1-16 twist. I wasn't getting full keyholing at 100 yds but the bullet holes were oblong enough to tell me what was going on. I have since sent it to Pac-Nor for rebarreling with a tube with a 1-14 twist. I should have it back in a couple of weeks. :biggun:

[S.B.]

Some of the comments here, sound like what was in print when the 600's first came out. Your either a lover of 600's or a hater. I like them. The extra 1 1/2 pound will help with the recoil end. The front sight isn't exactly the same as the sharks fin on the originals, but should serve the purpose. I own a .350 600 and dought I'd sell it for anything. The stock on the new one looks to be more of a iron sight gun stock while the 600's stocks were definately for a scope, at least for me and my build. I can't get my eye down far enough to see the iron sights very well on the originals. I might have found a reason to buy a new rifle, after all, this year.