Just finished reading an article on Remingtons New Model 673 and if it turns out as good as it sounds, Remington will finally have gotten back too making "Quality" rifles again )

It looks like a nice rifle, its a remake of the 600 and 660 mohawks, which are great guns i know several people who have them. They should have put the dog leg bolt on them though like the originals. Im sure the 350 rem mag would really knock em down too.

I'm going to buy the first one that comes my way, especially if it's offered in stainless steel.

The biggest buck I ever shot was with a Remington 600 in .350 and it worked every bit as well as you might think. I've owned or used three 600's in .350, had a couple of 660's and at least two Mohawks. All were in .350 or .308. I still have a Mohawk .308 and a 600 in .350.

A couple of points that may be worth considering before you lay your money down...

These are lightweight carbines, not rifles in the traditional sense. They are wonderful short to medium range hunting tools, especially well suited to heavy cover. A real consideration for hunters is the bolt action. The first shot will be right on the money but there may not be a quick second. If you are fond of autoloaders, levers or pumps a 673 may not meet your requirements. If you live in beanfield country or the wide-open west, the .350 may not be a best choice. Back east, this will be a strong performer, if you can live with a bolt gun.

I found the Mohawk to be the most likeable of the three members of the old 600 family. Just personal preference but with good reason. I also found that recoil on the .350 was way over-rated and over-reported, while recoil on a standard 600 in .308 was way under-rated. The .350 had better stocking and a good recoil pad. Add a sling and scope, perhaps a steel trigger guard if you could find one, and the .350 was no problem to shoot. A 600 series factory .308 without recoil pad or scope was flat out no fun to practice with. I suspect that anybody that had range time with a 600 in .308 wanted no part of a .350. Too bad. My son has a lightweight '06 that clearly produces more felt recoil than a .350.

The .350 cartridge performed well for me on deer. Tracking is a skill you won't be needing if the bullet is reasonably well placed. I did not use the 250 grain loads as the 200's were highly effective.

It looks like the lines for the 673 are already starting to form. I plan on being right up front. I'd hate to think that Remington might start this project up and then get cold feet, stopping production as they have done in the past.

This is going to be one great little carbine. I'm still calling it a carbine because the last I read it was going to have a 20 inch barrel. I, for one, hope that is the barrel length available in production guns.

At any rate, just an opinion based on a lot of time in the saddle with 600's.

I am a model seven fan and have two . one 308 win and another in 6mm rem. great guns for woods hunting and especially climbing stand action.
I saw the article and had decided i would not buy another remington cause of the klintoon key. but i will probably be looking for a new bolt shroud to take the lock off. and have one of these little thumpers.
i would much rather have this in 350 rem mag than the 300 rem sa or 7 rem sa. better suited for work in a carbine.

SOUTH ARKANSAS REBEL

I checked Remington's website about 2:00 a.m. New Year's Day and found the 673 listed under new products for '03. Seemed to be good news/bad news in the announcement depending on your tastes. Not that I'm negative about this, as I became a .350 user starting back in '65. It's my caliber of choice and anytime Remington produces guns and ammo in .350 I'm a happy hunter. Nothing I've ever tried has suited me better.

The 673 is announced as having a 22 inch barrel, making it a rifle. My preference would have been for an 18 or 20 inch carbine for use in the woods or from a tree stand. A carbine, I would guess, limits the 673's marketing potential, and as a rifle, may interest more shooters. The possible downside is that the .350 cartridge was designed for carbine use and (reportedly) gains little from a longer barrel. The over 200 yard shooters may opt for better known long range cartridges having superior ballistics. The .350 was available in both Ruger and Remington full sized rifles and they didn't sell well enough to maintain production. Then again, the 6oo series of carbines didn't set the world afire with sales either. Could be what is needed is both a rifle and carbine, as with the old 742 autoloader series. Perhaps the .350 fits a niche that doesn't meet every ones needs, but what it does, it sure does well.

Another point of interest is the vent rib. Back in the 60's, a number of 600 owners unscrewed the vent rib screws, removed the rib and tried to do away with the support posts. Some guys did o.k., some didn't. As I recall, some owners just didn't like the looks of the rib and others said the vents snagged twigs during hunting. Both the 660 and Mohawk were produced without the rib. I wonder if returning to the vent rib is a wise marketing move?

And I'd rather the rifle was available in stainless, as well as blue.

I think I'll wait for a stainless version before I buy. Hunting conditions in my part of the country can be hard on blued guns. Then I'm going to see a good gunsmith and have my new rifle cut back to carbine length. My 600 in .350 is going to get an honored place in my gun safe and they 673 is going straight to work.

I dont reload and was wondering if the 350 rem mag shells hard to get and who loads them?

Bear72, Remington is going to offer 2 factory loads.A 200 gr and a 225 gr.The 200gr velocity is advertised at 2775fps.With handloads i get 2923fps with hornady's 200gr round nose in my rem 700 classic.