35 Whelen or 9.3x62 and why?

[PJGunner]

"I was very happy with it till I got a chronograph and saw the velocities I was getting which was below factory reported levels. The 22" barrel was the problem, and the chamber was sloppy in it."

I had the same problem with my Remington M700 Classic .35 Whelen. However, the problem was not your 22" barrel but Remington itself. When Remington brought out the .35 Whelen in the Classic, they requested that SAAMI state that Maximum Allowable Pressure (MAP) for the .35 Whelen be no greater than that for the 30-06. Loaded to a more proper pressure level the cartridge is a horse of a different color. Remington wanted the pressure to be kept low enough so that they would not be having problems with their pump and semi-auto rifles yet Remington still sells those rifle chambered to the .270 Win. which runs about 10KPSI higher than the 30-06. I haven't heard of any problems with them in the .270. Have you. Has anyone. maybe there are problems and it's just a well guarded secret. FWIW, they did the same thing with the .280 Remington. Loaded to .270 level pressures and there's no need for the .280 AI. Currently. I'm running a 160 gr. Speer Grand Slam at 2910 FPS. That's not a weak load. The same for the .35 Whelen. I run a 225 gr. TSX a little over 2700 FPS and it has the same trajectory as a 180 gr. from the 30-06. Oh my!

I wrote RIFLE magazine about the disparity in velocity between advertised and actual speeds and I got a rather terse letter back written by the now late gun writer Al Miller. Enough said on that.

I reach the load I use in the .35W by working up slowly and with the use of a chronograph. Once I found a load I liked, several times i'd shoot that load reloading the cases and checking closely including the condition of the primer, case head expansion, case stretch and more runs over the chronograph.
Paul B.

 

[Johnly]

Wouldn't that be equal to the Brown Whelen Idaho? One may get away without having to FF your brass though.....

Actually a Brown Whelen is really close to a 9.3x62 case necked to 35 caliber. Just a different shoulder angle and being .010" larger at the shoulder.
I haven't has any issue making 9.3x62 cases from the 30-06 brass I had on hand. Prime a 30-06 case, put 5-7 gr. of Bullseye inside, followed by corn meal and topped with a wad of toilet paper. Bang and your done.
A case full of Rl-17 and a 250 gr. AccuBond makes the 9.3x62 a beast to be reckoned with.

 

[truck driver]

"I was very happy with it till I got a chronograph and saw the velocities I was getting which was below factory reported levels. The 22" barrel was the problem, and the chamber was sloppy in it."

I had the same problem with my Remington M700 Classic .35 Whelen. However, the problem was not your 22" barrel but Remington itself. When Remington brought out the .35 Whelen in the Classic, they requested that SAAMI state that Maximum Allowable Pressure (MAP) for the .35 Whelen be no greater than that for the 30-06. Loaded to a more proper pressure level the cartridge is a horse of a different color. Remington wanted the pressure to be kept low enough so that they would not be having problems with their pump and semi-auto rifles yet Remington still sells those rifle chambered to the .270 Win. which runs about 10KPSI higher than the 30-06. I haven't heard of any problems with them in the .270. Have you. Has anyone. maybe there are problems and it's just a well guarded secret. FWIW, they did the same thing with the .280 Remington. Loaded to .270 level pressures and there's no need for the .280 AI. Currently. I'm running a 160 gr. Speer Grand Slam at 2910 FPS. That's not a weak load. The same for the .35 Whelen. I run a 225 gr. TSX a little over 2700 FPS and it has the same trajectory as a 180 gr. from the 30-06. Oh my!

I wrote RIFLE magazine about the disparity in velocity between advertised and actual speeds and I got a rather terse letter back written by the now late gun writer Al Miller. Enough said on that.

I reach the load I use in the .35W by working up slowly and with the use of a chronograph. Once I found a load I liked, several times i'd shoot that load reloading the cases and checking closely including the condition of the primer, case head expansion, case stretch and more runs over the chronograph.
Paul B.

Hi Paul, I only shot reloads in my M700 classic and was accused of trying to turn it into a magnum. I had managed to get 3000fps out of it with a 200gr AB but was felling heavy bolt lift and backed it off till the heavy lift stopped and was still getting over 2900fps out of it.
My 35 Whelen AI is built on a M70 CRPF action and J.E.S cut a 4 lands and grooves 12" twist to handle the long heavy bullets and is crazy accurate. I could have loaded it to 70Kpsi but settled on 62Kpsi to save my rifle and brass. P.O. Ackley use to blow rifles up just to see how much pressure they could stand from his cartridge designs and at 70Kpsi the bolt worked as smooth as cutting through a stick of butter with a hot knife and the casings would practically fall out of the chamber from just the weight of the bolt.
It was a great adventure find out what it would do in a well fitted barrel and tight cut chamber with a longer than factory throat about the same as a 300Bee so I can seat the bullets way out to achieve max case capacity.

 

[wvbuckbuster]

35 Whelen simple as it comes

200 TTSX 61 gr TAC 2850 fps .69" at 100

Different bullet and rifle but same powder. Tac seems to do well in the 35whelen.

 

[wvbuckbuster]

It's a Rem 700 CDL

 

[8MMX57JS]

9.3x62 for me. Personally like the metrics in general, the history they come with. The Mauser 98's and clones. Used 285gr PPU bullets during my 2014 season. Did great on moose, deer, and bear. Great penetration.

 

[Aussie Wanderer]

It seems to be an American debate. The whelen really doesn’t mean too much this side of the lake. The 9.3x62 would be more common with factory loads and good quality brass available. By saying more common, it is still relatively obscure compared to a whole bunch of other cartridges that do similar things.

I have the old 9.3x62 in a Ruger African. Really not sure why I bought it now, have had it for probably close on a couple of decades I suspect. My observations are that it is an inherently accurate cartridge and very easy to make accurate loads with it. Like someone noted above, the 250 AccuBond is a wonderful projectile and at 2,500fps or thereabouts shoots reasonably flat and makes big holes. It is super efficient and doesn’t kick the snot out of you. I did read somewhere many years ago that the full copper projectiles in 250 grain actually outperformed the 286 grains which were prone to tumbling in game. The tests were actually conducted ona large dead African game, I want to say elephant but can’t be sure.

If I was travelling outside of the USA I would take the 9.3x62.

 

[Blkram]

While the Nosler 250 gr AB load is rated for 2550 fps, I have yet to actually chronograph it in my Sako with its factory barrel which is just under 24". It should be close to that. I am happy with its ability to produce 0.674" groups at 100 yards.

 

[Hunter26]

I have zero experience with either and like it has been mentioned multiple times before, they are extremely similar. Personally I'd go with the 9.3x62 if it was me, just for something a touch more unique and a little bigger bullet. Hell, you can't go wrong with either.

 

[SJB358]

35 Whelen simple as it comes

200 TTSX 61 gr TAC 2850 fps .69" at 100

The 7600 I got from you years ago now still hunts and makes meat fairly often when I just have to get on a buck. I have a smaller 7600 carbine for long walk days but the Whelen is just a great cartridge.













This poor buck was an 8pt before the Whelen got him

He just decided to spite me and ran into the tree….

I have an excellent shooting Ruger M77 tanger 35 Whelen as well thanks to an excellent gentleman that was willing to swap me.

 

[SJB358]

It's a Rem 700 CDL

I’ve heard of that rifle…. Has some good mojo.

 

[SJB358]

And a I have to admit to a 9.3x62 as well that does shoot pretty well.

 

[wvbuckbuster]

I’ve heard of that rifle…. Has some good mojo.

I like it. Thanks Scotty.

 

[JD338]

Scotty
The ol' 35 Whelen knocked the horns off that buck!

JD338

 

[SJB358]

I like it. Thanks Scotty.

I’m glad it stayed in the “family”.

 

[SJB358]

Scotty
The ol' 35 Whelen knocked the horns off that buck!

JD338

Anybody that says a 243, 7-08, 308, 30-06, etc pounds deer like a Whelen or similar hasn’t shot enough. While they aren’t needed to take deer, the Whelen and similar seems to wallop them mighty hard.

 

[1100 Remington Man]

What are you going to use it on ? Me 35 Whelen between the two but I don’t know what it will do that a 30-06 won’t.

 

[JD338]

Anybody that says a 243, 7-08, 308, 30-06, etc pounds deer like a Whelen or similar hasn’t shot enough. While they aren’t needed to take deer, the Whelen and similar seems to wallop them mighty hard.

I concur. I've shot quite a few deer with the 35 Whelen, almost all of them were DRT like this buck a few seasons ago. All this Whelen talk is making me think it's time to put mine in the rotation this fall

JD338

 

[Seabreeze]

Flip a coin, they are both great cartridges. I was thinking about a Whelen but I’ve been reading on the 9.3 and really like it also. If going out of the country I say the 9.3 plus I believe in Africa you can buy the ammo over the counter if it gets lost on the trip.

 

[PJGunner]

"I don't have one of either. Which do you prefer and why?"
I chose the Whelen because of Elmer Keith's adventures with some big nasty bears that he wrote about. I decided I would like to have one but didn't want to mess with a wildcat. Even after Remington legitimized the cartridge waited until I found a Ruger M77 at a gun show reasonably priced. The seller didn't like the kick.

"I don’t think a .358 - 250 grain premium bullet gives up much if anything to a .366/9.3 - 286 grain premium bullet but there is the 36 grain difference. Either works well with even standard cup and core bullets due to their relatively low muzzle velocities (2100-2400 fps)."

At one time, Hornady made a 275 gr. round nose .35 Caliber bullet. It was shown in Hornady's first load manual circa 1966 IIRC, but already discontinued. About the only data still usable would be with 4350. Back then I believe it would be IMR 4350 and not H4350. That's the way I treat data in manuals showing a number but no "H" or "I" to designate whose powder they used. The only one I seriously shied away from in those older manuals is 4895 due to the large disparity in charges. back then one could buy 4895 in paper bags with remarks like, "Use 3031 data" or it might be 4064 data or 4320 data. It wasn't until later the Hodgden blended all those different lots into one lot and produced really usable data. Then DuPont started making 4895 according to the original formula and it was faster burning that Hodgden's blended 4895. Oh, what fun.
Anyw ay, one can push those Hornady 275 gr. bullets to about the same velocity as the 285 gr. 9.3 bullets which in my not very humble opinion makes them very very close to being equal provided they constructed the same. I'm also surprised Hornady hasn't brought that bullet back out with modern data now that the Whelen no long is a wildcat cartridge. I do have about 80 or so of those original Hornady 275 gr. RNs. I wouldn't complain if I found some more.
Paul B.