6.5-284 Norma to .284 Win conversion

woodcr24

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2014
Messages
70
Looking at a 6.5-264 Norma built on a Mauser 98 action. Round count puts the barrel about half-way of expected useful life. The question that I have is whether I can convert this rifle to a standard .284 Win once the current barrel is no longer holding accuracy. Many thanks for your time and replies.

Best,

Chris
 
If you put a new 7mm barrel on it that is chambered for .284 Win., you can. You will want a reputable gunsmith to perform this task.
 
Most custom chambers require new brass.

depends... My 7stw chamber was the first chamber cut with a new Manson reamer and it works fine with brass sized in a standard fl die... I do hear a fair amount of griping about "why won't my new barrel accept brass from my old barrel" though.
 
Then you got lucky, Lefty. I find 85%-90% of the time new brass is needed. #1 either the 'old' brass is work hardened and doesn't want to re-size back to original specs, or #2 the new chamber is so much smaller in dimension that re-sizing is impossible at all. That can and does occur even when a reamers is 'new' and never been used before and even if the same reamer has cut both chambers. As for "necking up",, I'll neck up only as a last resort. I'd much rather neck down. Necking up makes for thin neck walls (which can make for irregular ignition in large capacity cases) , smaller than I like neck diameters (with a bullet seated) and short cartridge case OAL. Custom barrels are usually installed in the quest for better accuracy, only makes sense to start off with fresh brass. With the current brass shortages, this can be a challenge and costly. But if you can afford a new custom barrel the cost of new brass should of little concern. Face it,,, this hobby/activity ain't a cheap one! I just have to laugh to myself when those who think they're going to able to use the brass they have, that was fired in a factory chamber, in a new custom chambered barrel. Seems you can tell 'um half a dozen times and it's like they can't hear you.
 
Who's to say he doesn't have some new 6.5 laying around? But unless you already have the mandrel I'd skip the step and get 284 brass.

I neck up lapua, but my next batch of brass will be stamped 284.
 
My initial thoughts were to go with the 6.5-284 and keep using it until the barrel was no longer performing up to the current level, then make the switch to 284 simply for something new and the ability to play around with some higher BC projectiles than what is available in .264. I have no brass for either chambering.

Many thanks for all of your replies.

Best,

Chris
 
Then you got lucky, Lefty. I find 85%-90% of the time new brass is needed. #1 either the 'old' brass is work hardened and doesn't want to re-size back to original specs, or #2 the new chamber is so much smaller in dimension that re-sizing is impossible at all. That can and does occur even when a reamers is 'new' and never been used before and even if the same reamer has cut both chambers. As for "necking up",, I'll neck up only as a last resort. I'd much rather neck down. Necking up makes for thin neck walls (which can make for irregular ignition in large capacity cases) , smaller than I like neck diameters (with a bullet seated) and short cartridge case OAL. Custom barrels are usually installed in the quest for better accuracy, only makes sense to start off with fresh brass. With the current brass shortages, this can be a challenge and costly. But if you can afford a new custom barrel the cost of new brass should of little concern. Face it,,, this hobby/activity ain't a cheap one! I just have to laugh to myself when those who think they're going to able to use the brass they have, that was fired in a factory chamber, in a new custom chambered barrel. Seems you can tell 'um half a dozen times and it's like they can't hear you.

The Rcbs sizer I'm using actually sizes brass down to .512" just above the belt, which happens to just fit the chamber well; I gave away my Redding 7stw dies as they were looser by .006", and I had issues with poor accuracy due to miss-aligned brass in my old rifle. I saw the rifle go from .5 moa to 1.5 moa based on the difference between new and fl sized brass using the Redding dies. Rcbs dies were equivalent accuracy to new brass.

My last chamber was also a custom, but the headspace was a bit long and I tore the rifle down to save brass life- I wanted shorter headspace by .010". I then found out the 'smith that built that rifle spec'd the barrel shank wrong (standard) when my 'smith refused to put the rifle back together. Too much play in a .030" over trued receiver is a bad thing. It turned out well though, as the rifle is now shooting lights out with leftover ammo from the last two rifles. The last three down the new pipe produced a .51" 200 yard group and it is consistently .5 moa or lower with this load.

As to necking brass, I do not worry unless it causes problems, which it usually doesn't. I like as little neck tension as possible while still holding the bullet. More neck tension isn't always a good thing as it can lead to more variance in bullet pull with any brass irregularity at all.

I'll neck up 30-06 to 35whelen, 7rem to 338win, and 223wssm to 25wssm if I need to. Take it easy on the brass by lubing properly, stage your necking using intermediate steps if necessary, and watch for problems. With the quality of win brass lately (it you can find any)I can see where one would look at 6.5x284 brass. I do like the 375h&h to 7stw conversion better though; you don't have to worry about necks thinning more on one side.
 
The Rcbs sizer I'm using actually sizes brass down to .512" just above the belt, which happens to just fit the chamber well; I gave away my Redding 7stw dies as they were looser by .006", and I had issues with poor accuracy due to miss-aligned brass in my old rifle. I saw the rifle go from .5 moa to 1.5 moa based on the difference between new and fl sized brass using the Redding dies. Rcbs dies were equivalent accuracy to new brass.

that should be .0006", sorry.....
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top