Which one of the two....and why

Now if you've already got a 30-06, which one of the two...

9.3 cuzz it's enough bigger to make a difference.

The advantages of moving up to a bore larger than .30 are really only apparent when you start moving bullets over 250gr, and with bullets of that weight and above the 9.3x62 is the superior round.

Now, if all you wanted to do is shoot 210gr Nosler Partitions (which isn't a bad plan, really) then the 338-06 deserves a look.

The 35 Whelen is the way to go.....with all of these calibers, you won't be going to a gas station or Wal-Mart to pick up a box of ammo if you loose your shells.

I have them both, but my vote would be the 9.3.

I think it would depend on what a person wanted to hunt with those particular cartridges. While both are excellent rounds with distinct advantages and disadvantages, I would base the cartridge on animal I'm hunting and terrain I am hunting in. Bullet selection is much better in .338 than .366 In this regard I agree with Oregon45 if shooting longer distances with a 210 partition the 338-06 would be the way to go or the 200gr Accubond. It would be a great open country elk load. But when getting up in bullet weight there's no comparison. The 9.3 shines over the 338-06 in 250 and above weight bullets. For the bigger animals like moose and browns the 9.3 is my choice. One other thing to consider is finding a rifle you like in your choice of cartridges. CZ makes a wonderful 9.3 either in American style or shorter mannlicher. For 338-06 I think Weatherby might be the only commercial maker. There's always the custom route too. Either way both cartridges are proven performers.

The 9.3 is nice and that is what I wanted when I was building a stillhunting rifle.

I got the 338-06 instead.

The bullet selection is so much greater in .338 compared to 9.3.

That is a point for the 338-06. Bullets are available from 160 to 300 grains in .338 with several of each brand at 250gr or larger.

Most bullets in 9.3 are 286gr. The euros have a couple lighter and a couple heavier but mostly 286gr.

These two cartridges are so similar that it really comes down to what you'd rather have stamped on your barrel.

Personally I think both are good rounds, and basically what one will do the other will do.

The 33's heavy is gonna be the 275 SAF and or 300 Woodleigh but I think the 275's it's best heavy. The 9.3's heavy is (I think) the 286 and I really don't think there's a hill of beans diff tween the two.

The 9.3's got a bit more weight but I feel that push comes to shove the 275/33 will give a bit more penetration.

Long ago I ran a 9.3x64 and liked it and think it's fairly close to the 375 H&H.

Lastly, I've used the 338/06 quite a bit and have only shot the 9.3x62 at the range so take that for what it's worth.

Dober

35 Whelen.

The 9.3 doesn't get you any more and the 338-06 gets you less, any way you slice it.

The 338/358/366 arguments seem worse than the 270 v. 280 ones since brass availability, headstamps and bullet selection are a lot more defined and easier to decipher....

The problem with the 35 cals is bullet availability... the BC/SD of those available, I mean.

The 9.3 has the 320 gr Woodleigh, but the 286s have a great combination of BC/SD/KO.

They are all three awesome rounds though.

I have a 338-06 that I love but intend to pick up a 9.3x62 someday (have a 9.3x57 currently).

Depends a lot on what you're hunting. If you're going after elk and deer and might have a little longer shot the 338 would be my choice, while the possibility of big bears or africa would favor the 9.3 in my mind.

Only in my mind though. I think at the end of the day, as far as the game is concerned, HawkI's final analysis is correct.

Personal taste is probably the biggest factor in answer your question.

In 6mm, 6.5, and 7mm, I like having bullet options, paper, varmints, deer, etc.

On mid bore, I found w/338/06 I used 2. 200 BT for deer, and 225 PT on elk.

For a 350RM, I used 2 for hunting. 225 Sierra deer, 225 PT on elk.

Plinking sometimes done w/cheaper 158s and 200 CLs.

My Point is, bullet selection is nice, but when I am using a mid bore, the rifle is predominantly loaded for big stuff. ONE good bullet will do the job. Well, if you place it

Choice? I like both, flip a coin and ENJOY, it's small potatoes IMHO.

Never understood the 'There are 14,587 bullets for caliber X but only 87 for caliber Y stance'


Bullets are like women, you don't need a 1,000 different ones just one good one.


Since it weren't asked I didn't say but I'm with Hawk, 35 Whelen all the way.

My 9.3 RWS factor ammo gets 3842ft/lbs at the muzzle, without raising a pressure sweat!

The 9.3 has history & proven throughout the world. So 9.3 for me, unless I can have a 338WM. Even then, I would need to think it over a few whiskeys

The 9.3X62 has been the easiest cartridge to work up accurate, full velocity loads for I have ever worked with.

I started out to build a Mauser based 35 Whelen, but I ended up being able to get a much better deal on a good barrel by going with a Lothar-Walther in 9.3x62.

I shot a buffalo with the 338-06 and a moose with the 9.3. I will take the 9.3 every time. Ammo is actually more available in 9.3 and bullet selection in loaded ammunition is a lot better. The brass is better and the bullets much heavier.

Ruger(HE) should of chambered the 9.3x62 instead of the 35 Whelen.

Me thinks Ruger might end up doing a 9.3x62 in their future HE lineup. Tipping sales will keep it going for a few years too.

I don't own either but 338's in general make me myopic,sleepy.....

If I wanted something like that it would be the 9.3 for sure.If you're gonna go above 30 caliber,might as well get some bore diameter working for you.....I just never understood what a 210 gr-338 does that a 200 gr-30 cal does not....

Dude??

WTF?

You feeling okay?

You didn't buy any rings lately did you? Any other stupid schitt we need to know about, like a fresh little jungle cracker coming into the world?

I own and hunt all three using 210's in the 338, 225's in the Whelen and 250's in the 9.3 and see no reason to settle on one. All have performed equally on the same or similar sized game.

I have owned a 338/06. I loved the caliber, just not the rifle, but I have most of the stuff to build another. I have a whelen, and love it, won't be gettin rid of it. And I have a Mark X mauser tucked away for a 9.3x62. Do I need all 3? nope. Does it matter? nope.........

Nice Sock O

I own a T3 Lite Stainless in 9.3x62 and was sold on the cartridge early on.
I don't think you can really even compare it to 338/06.
There's approaching 30 thou difference in calibre and meplat means a lot on a big animal.
You'll get flatter shooting from a 338-06 as lighter bullets are available but if you want to go down that route you may as well get a 30-06 or a 338 Win Mag.
I really like the fact that in 1904,the same time the US was cooking up the '06 as a service round, Otto Bock, a German designer, was developing the 9.3x62 as an all-round rifle for German farmers in Africa and there that means dangerous game too.
And the approach was not in pursuit of speed but as a stopper for all game.
The weakness, if the 9.3x62 has one, is that the range of bullets for the non-European hunter is less wide and more expensive.
I use 270gr Speer Semi-Points and am very pleased with them.
But I wouldn't mind using Norma 232gr Oryxs, if only they didn't cost a mint.
But the other guys are right about ammo.
Lapua also make great cases for 9.3x62 and they're quite affordable.
Besides 9.3x62 is cooler because it's metric.

You guys do know that there are a ton of .338 bullets that are heavier than 210 grains don't you?

There are many 250 grain .338's including some from all the major US bullet manufacturers.

There are also match bullets that sport a .670 BC for a 250 grain .338 and an astonishing 300 grain SMK with a BC in excess of .760!

The SD of a 250 grain .338 is also a bit higher than a 286 grain .366 bullet.

Because ultra common and ultra cheap 30-06 brass is often necked up and used for the 338-06 you have your choice of ANY brand of brass you choose and can form it in a single pass.

The 9.3x62 is a venerable old and truly great cartridge but to minimize the 338-06 is a mistake since it is much more versatile than the bullet limited 9.3.

A 300gr SMK at 2200 fps doesn't interest me.

Exactly. Instead of getting a 338 I should have gotten 220gr bullets for the ought six barrel it wore.

A 220 grain roundnose at 2500 out of a 30-06 doesn't interest me.

A 250 grain spitzer at 2600 out of a 338-06 has some interest however.

A 180 grain NAB at 3000 out of a 338-06 is also interesting.

Only need 1 good bullet.

By this reasoning you only need 1 good rifle!

Sure am glad they make a whole bunch more than 1!

I like having a lot of choices in rifles, cartridges, and bullets.

That rational is flawed but I ain't surprised. Guessing you head afield with a bandoleer stuffed with 160's to 300gr bullets for every occasion. Of course you'll need turrets and 47 different cards to dupe drop. I only hunt with ONE bullet, but I'm kind of silly that way.

No, I like to tailor my load to the game (or target) I'm pursuing.

For whitetail the 180 NAB, 200 NBT, or the 185 TSX, works well and provides a trajectory advantage.

For moose or Elk I'd load the 225 NAB, 225 TSX, or 250 SGK.

For punching paper or steel at long range any of the 225-250 BT's work well.

I guess I'm kind of silly in that I like to load, experiment, and shoot alot of different cartridges, loads, and bullets.

I rebarreled a new Sav 111 Lam from .30-06 to .338-06 back in the day. It is still a great shooter. If I had the option of the .338 Fed or the .325 WSM back then, I probably would have went with one of them in a short action. I do not feel that it is comparable to the 9.3x62. I usually never disagree with HawkI, but I do believe that the 9.3x62 is a stronger cartridge than the .35 Whelen. I don't have either, but the 9.3x62 has a very strong track record in Africa. I have always wanted it in the CZ 550 full stock. Good luck.

Cant comment on the 9.3x62

I built a 338-06 Ackley Improved on a Sako m75 Greywolf rifle...love it. Shoots 225gr Accubonds and TTSX's. Might try some 210gr Sirocco's. I'm partial to the Accubonds from the performance on big game and at the range out of my 300WM and 270WSM. I too am a one-bullet guy for my calibers.

Weatherby has factory ammo for a 338-06AS.

Tempted to build a 330 Dakota...something different again.

MP just do a 340 and make life easy...

Dober

225 vs 210 yields a very small diff in trajectory, more energy and SD/BC. Now a 250 is great, but out yonder it falls faster, how far do you need to shoot.

For me, a good 225 PT/TSX, or 230 FS is a great all around bullet.

Steelhead has it right. You can only shoot one rifle, and if you have ONE good bullet, it WILL handle all duties from Deer to Grizzly IMHO. Choices are fine, a 200 BT/NAB will shoot flat at 2900, more than the 225 at 2670, but I'd keep the light stuff for deer in this round and prefer the extra payload of a 225 on big stuff, 250s would be find up to say 300 yds or so, as would a well loaded 350 RM or Whelen.

Not played with a 9.3 yet so no opinion on 'go to' wt. but I could be happy with either round on a big game hunt. I believe the 338 I feel has a tad more reach, if one truly needs it.

They ALL will kill just fine when steered properly.

A CZ 9.3 might be a solid choice given economics if money is tight as most 338/06 are custom. A rebored Sako pre-G '06 might be an option to consider.

Good point - does anyone sell a 338-06 in a production rifle?

Weatherby was the only one I remember did or still does. Plus they make factroy ammo for the caliber if reloading is not an option

Maybe it was a 340 I was thinking about...I'll have to look back at my info I was saving.

I picked up a CZ american 9.3x62, thing shoots very large bug holes.

I did have to put a lighter stock on it.. it's a nice rifle.

9.3 has over 100 years of success behind it. I don't consider it a long range cartridge but for a black timber elk cartridge it has few peers. Especially when teamed up with a "three shots quick" Merkel SR-1 and a Trijicon.

Cooper do

Boy this pains me to say, as I am a pretty big 338-06 fan.

Since you already have a 30-06, I think the 9.3x62 is the way to go in your situation.
Woodleigh does make a 320gr soft/solid.

Not that it matters, but I also have a couple of 9.3x64's and a stable of 270's with no 30 caliber anything.

Skip the 338-06 and go either .35 Whelen, 9.3x62 or .375 Ruger.

Yep!

I would like to know what your load is for doing that. You've got 125 fps on a Nosler factory load and 100 fps over the A-square load.

The extra 30 grains and 100 fps isn't enough for me to bother with the 338-06 again. I'll go straight to 9.3.

I've found at least 10 250gr loads that run from 2569 to 2645 so it is doable.

Rifle #105 has 6 loads in that range.

Hornady 5th has 2.

Reloadersnest has 2.

Handloader #184 has 1.

I don't get 2600 with my current 19" 338-06 but 59gr of IMR4350 under a 250SPBT gets me over 2500 with no pressure signs. 60gr H4350, same bullet, gets me just under 2500.

The highlighted portion of your post is where we differ. I don't use, nor like, any .30 caliber so the jump from my .284 to my .338 is .054" which is similar to the gap from .308 to .366.

Is there something wrong with owning both?

Absolutely not, I heartily recommend it!

There is something to be said for those century old+ cartridges.

nsaquam,

The only problem with your comparison is that there are just about as many sources that credit the .30-06 220 with 2600 fps. Nosler's manual, for instance, lists 2602 for the 220 .30-06--and that's sticking to the SAAMI pressure maximum for the .30-06. In my experience it's easy to get 2650 or so out of a 220 in a 24" barreled .30-06.

Plus, many shooters think that roundnose bullets drop like a rock. The Nosler 220 Partition, however, has a BC of about .350, which in my experience is pretty close to reality. Plus, out to 300-400 yards muzzle velocity has a greater effect on trajectory than BC.

Let's compare a 220 .30 Partition and a 250 .338 Partition, both started at 2600 fps. Sight them both in 2" high at 100 and they're both close to dead-on at 200. At 300 the .338 is an inch or two lower than the .30 caliber, and at 400 around 4-5" lower. This doesn't amount to any practical difference in the field.

Yeah, you've got another 30 grains of bullet weight in the .338, but penetration will be similar. In fact I'd bet the .30 220 would win a penetration contest. It wouldn't be by much, but then 30 grains (and 1/32nd of an inch in diameter) isn't much either.

If somebody already has a .30 caliber of whatever variety, I haven't found all that much difference in going up to .338. This is based on plenty of experience with the .30-06, several .300 magnums, the .338-06 and the .338 Winchester Magnum. I'm not even all the sure that going up to .35 or 9.3 makes all that much difference, 95% of the time.

The reasons most hunters see some difference in field performance between, say, a .30-06 and a .35 Whelen are (1) they tend to use 180's, at most, in a .30-06, and (2) they're easily convinced by one or two animals that there is a real difference. Otherwise why did they buy a "bigger" rifle?

But if they simply loaded 220's (or even 200's) in a .30-06 they would probably be amazed at what it can do. However, there's no real fun in simply buying another box of bullets instead of another rifle, especially when we can make believe that the new rifle is A Really Big Rifle.

Unless you're one of those hunters who simply has to have a rifle to fill every little gap in the picket fence (which sort of resembles me) it makes more sense to step up significantly in bullet diameter and weight. To me that means 9.3x62--or a .375 H&H.

Excellent post JB and much appreciated.

I agree with each of your points and since the OP stated he already has a 30-06 then your 200+ grain .30 caliber bullet recommendation is supremely valid and logical.

In my instance however, since I don't own any .30 caliber rifle, the diameter and weight difference between my beloved .277's and my .338 is sizable and useful.

That doesn't mean I'm not still hoping for a 9.3x62 in addition to my 338-06!

Toldjaso

Yep.

Some folks try to make more outta Steelys Quick Replys; oft times its all there already....

FWIW Swift makes a 280 A-Frame and Woodleigh makes 310 softs and solids for a properly twisted Whelen. If a bullet need be bigger than a 225 TSX in NA, I can't see going up in weight and one caliber to make anything deader; A 250 Partition doesn't seem to have any mystic over it, but its a grand bullet as well. Pick one and know its path.

It was designed as a "cheaper" big bore for heavy game and DG in NA, much like the 9.3 was for use in Africa.

I'm still in the Whelen camp, even though some Africa regular will prolly tell me a .423 kills better than a .416...

Time to build that 375 Whelen; it must have it all over the 30-06. 338-6, 35 and 9.3......but I'm skeptical.

No one has considered the 370Sako aka 9.3x66, 250gr bullets @2700+fps and 286's @ 2550 fps. I have been a long time 35whelen hunter/shooter and from field experience the 370sako is a bit more than the whelen, especially in the ranging dept, using 250gr Accubonds. its on an 06 case that is a bit longer '2.6' inches as opposed to 2.5". Its easy shooting and is accurate in a M85. Dies and brass are expensive though, dies 150+ and 200 brass cases 400+ dollars, i am set up for the rest of my days with this caliber, i use a 3006 for everything else, using a 200gr AB in that.

If I already had an 06, I would get the 9.3. If I didn't have an 06, I would go with the 338-06 if I wanted to use it in semi-open country or for smaller game. If the rifle was dedicated to larger game & close cover I would go with the 9.3.

Lou

I'd still like to know what a 9.3 with it's 286 or whatever will do that the 338/06 with the 275 won't do? Plus I feel it'll penetrate just as far or further...think..grin

Dober

370 Sako basically equals the 9.3x64 Brenneke.


If I was to ever get rid of my 338-06's, they would be replaced with a 30 caliber something. Say a 30-06, or maybe even one of those fancy new WSM's.

JB,

"But if they simply loaded 220's (or even 200's) in a .30-06 they would probably be amazed at what it can do."

Can you really see the difference between a 180 and 200/220gr bullets?

I can't imagine using 250gr bullets out of my 338-06's for anything. Just like I can't imagine 220gr 30 caliber bullets for anything. There are better choices for both cartridges and calibers.

I am currently trying to sell some Hornady 250gr RN and FMJ in the classifieds, because I will never need them. If I ever needed to use them, it would be on what? Polar/Brown bear? Cape Buffalo? If that day ever comes, I have better cartridge choices and bullet selection to choose from.

I'd imagine the 280 358 begs the same question.....if using an SD and frontal expansion basis.

Spotshooter, concerning the 338-06 and 9.3 x 62.

"Now if you've already got a 30-06, which one of the two..."


Soundls like you already have the donor materials to do a re-bore for a 35 Whelen. <Big Grin>

I always hear this from guys who don't hunt the 35's about,
"problem with the 35's is bullet availability...."

Seriously..?
Everything from 125gr Hornady XTP's to 310 Woodleighs is available.

"Pistol bullets are not acceptable..?"
Okay then, so let's just stick with everything from 150 Remmy's up through 310 woodleighs...

I think the "bullet inavailability" arguement went out for the 35's a long time ago...

As far as choosing "between" the 338-06 and the 366 Euro, I would do just that, "choose between" them, and go with the 35 Whelen.

Steelie and others have said it well, all you need is one good bullet.
I have used two good bullets with unbeatable success out of my 35 Whelen (a couple others out of my 358 WSM)


I have found that the 225gr TSX would be that "one good bullet" for everything in NA that one would want to eat, from 100lb whitetail, to 1200lb Moose.


But the beauty is, we are NOT limited to just one good bullet in the 35's.


Now the little 338 RCM is growing on me in it's Compact rifle.
And the 9.3 x 62 is...well.., it's ok.

If I were to choose "between" the 338-06 and the 9.3....
I'd go with the 35 Whelen, and never look back.

CRS,

The difference between the 180's and 200/220's in the .30-06 lies in penetration--but unless you're shooting something REALLY big you'll never know the difference.

I tend to think that the easiest solution to this "problem" (if you really want to think of it that way) is to have one of each.

I'm working on that...

I have a Springfield 1903A3 that has a VERY long throat and is delivering extremely anemic velocities as a result. I can't think of anything that screams " REBORE TO WHELEN!!!!!!!!!!" louder than a Springfield.

The 9.3x62 will have to be a fine Mauser, of course... most likely a Husky...

One of the things that often gets tossed around in these discussions is bullet selection. Aside from the fact that we can only shoot animals with one bullet at at time, unless we like to fill them really full of holes (or feel the need for a soft and a solid), bullet selection should be adequate for the purpose of the cartridge chosen.

I just looked through the latest Midway catalog, at the A-Square, Barnes, Hornady, Lapua, Nosler, Norma, Swift, Sierra, Speer and Woodleigh bullets that can be ordered in .338, .358 and 9.3mm. I broke them down into weights, without trying to further break down the types of expanding bullets, only noting those companies that made solids.

I also didn't count handgun bullets in .35. That advantage of .35's has always escaped me, since I prefer to shoot handgun bullets out of handguns, but here we are talking about big game anyway.

The leader, of course, is .338 caliber, with 34 weights of rifle bullets available from 160 to 300 grains.

There were only 18 weights of .35's, partly because two companies (the European firms of Lapua and Norma) don't make any. Weighst ranged from 180 to 310 grains.

There were 15 weights of 9.3's. Here Sierra doesn't make one. They ranged from 232 to 320 grains.

But now let's look at this a little differently. Generally we want a necked-up .30-06 because we want to shoot heavier bullets.

In .338 caliber there are 4 bullets of 270 grains and over,
but half of those are match bullets, which some hunters may or may not want to use (or might not be able to, because they're both very long 300's). There's only one solid, the 250-grain A-Square. On the other hand, everybody makes a 250-grain except Norma.

In .35 there are 2 bullets of 270 grains or more, one a solid, the 275-grain A-Square. Only 5 of the 10 companies even make a 250-grain, though A-Square makes a 275, Swift a 280, and Woodleigh a 310.

In 9.3 there are 9 bullets of over 270 grains available, including 7 286's. There are also 4 solids, all 286's except the 320 Woodleigh. Four companies also make a 250, but only one makes any bullet under 250 grains, the Norma 232 Oryx.

In general, the .338-06 gets the least velocity in any given bullet weight, by reason of it's smaller bore. On the other hand, .338 bullets also tend to have the highest BC's of any of the three diameters.

The .35 Whelen can get a little more zip out of the same bullet weights, but in the lighter weights (under 225 grains) BC is so poor that none of the bullet have any advantage for longer-range shooting.

The 9.3x62 gains about 5% over the .338-06 with the same weight bullets, and 2% over the .35 Whelen. This is both because of the extra diameter of the bullets and because the 9.3 case has a little more powder room, since the shoulder is further forward than on the .30-06 case. This doesn't show up in manual data because of the lower factory pressures, but the 9.3 will safely get 2700+ fps out of a 250-grain bullet, and 2500 fps or so out of a 286.

So if we get rational about all this, here's what we find:

1) The .338-06 is the best choice for somebody who wants to use both .30-06-weight and heavier bullets.

2) The .35 Whelen is the least versatile big game cartridge of the three, since it's lighter bullets simply don't keep up. However, handgun bullets can also be used, if that's important to you.

3) The 9.3 has a far greater selection of truly heavy bullets, but almost nothing under 250 grains. The selection of 286's is quite varied, with something in every price and performance range. It's ballistics are are also the "biggest," and there are far more solids available.

So the 3 rounds cover very similar territory, but there are differences. Somebody who really like to use really cheap bullets for practice would go for the .35 Whelen. Somebody who wants one rifle to span the widest variety of performance in North America would probably go for the .338-06. Somebody who hunts really large or dangerous game, especially in Africa, would probably go for the 9.3. But to try to prove that one is vastly superior than the other two is very much like arguing over the .270, .280 and .30-06. Most of us could hunt the rest of our lives with any of the three and not notice all that much difference.

Norma makes a 250gr Oryx in 35 caliber, I have several boxes cuzz I love the Oryx so.

The .338-06 fairly duplicates the old .333 Jefferies and that was considered a fine "medium" round for elephant. Given that, plus modern bullets and a touch more velocity, I doubt theres any large game in the US that the .338-06 wouldn't cope with..

That said, I went with the 9.3x62mm as it seemed to be more available this side of the Atlantic, and after taking a dozen critters with it, I couldn't be happier...

One has to wonder if the 30-06 hadn't show up what we'd be shooting... some say the 06 came from the 9.3x62.

Now that I'm not so scared of shooting heavys I may have to try a hornady 9.3 given Sierra won't give in and make'em.

I don't think the '06 came from the 9.3x62.
I think rather that both the Americans and Otto Bock were looking at the longest possible cartridge which could fit in a standard Mauser action and ended up with cases that were almost identical.
Hardly suprising.
And the 9.3 has it over the 35 Whelen because it has a shorter neck and slightly more powder space.
The Whelen's shortcomings as an African cartridge stem from the fact it was designed with Nth America in mind, much as American hunters probably feel the heavy 9.3mm bullets limit the '62.
As to the comments on the heavier 338 pills, especially the 300 grainers, remember that bullets that heavy are designed for long range shooting using rounds like 338 Win, 338 RUM, 340 Wby and 338 Lapua.
Even if they are hunting bullet they are not likely to expand as happily at the velocities the 338-06 can push them.
The 9.3x62 OTOH is the most prevalent cartridge in .366" cal and so bullets in this cal are designed with its ballistics in mind.

Actually, at its inception, the 35 Whelen used bullets of 300 grains regularly. Elmer used 300 gr. WTC bullets (It may have even been a 350? I can't recall).

I believe Ken Howell used 275 gr. Hornadys in his Whelen for many years.

Its shortcomings in Africa is that it wasn't used in Africa. Elmer did use the 333 OKH, but had he gone prior to WWII he would have used a 35 or 400 Whelen, perhaps. When Americans went to Africa they generally didn't take 9.3's either.

Of course over recent years bullets for the 338 and 358 have gotten lighter and lighter. The 9.3 offerings really haven't changed since its inception.

Most guys using 338's are using 225 or lighter bullets today.

The Whelens shortcomings are only what we have given it; with modern, lighter bullets that's not much at hunting ranges.

Anyone worried about longer range or lack of power would be carrying a belted magnum of some sort or its equivalent.

JB,
Thanks for the reply.

I agree 100% with your above post. You always have a way of putting things down on paper that make sense.

CRS

Hawk1,

Elmer Keith used the 275-grain Western Tool & Copper Works bullet in the .35 Whelen. Or at least that's what he states in his books BIG GAME RIFLES AND CARTRIDGES (1936) and RIFLES FOR LARGE GAME (1946).

He says in the second book that he asked Fred Barnes--the originator of Barnes bullets--to make a 300-grain .35 but even by then Elmer had moved on to the .333 OKH. After World War two he pretty much abandoned the .35's for the .33's, because the grester sectional density of the .33's provided better penetration at close range and better ballistics at longer ranges.

One of the problems with the .35's has always been the 1-16 twist common to so many older rifles, and still found in some factory rifles. This is what allows .35's to shoot cast handgun bullets so well, but few bullet companies are going to come out with a spitzer over 250 grains when it might not stabilize in many rifles. So the very versatility of the .35's is one of its downfalls, one of the reasons for the limited bullet selection.

Are Barnes Banded 338/250gr considered solids?

Yes

I think it a fair assumption that Otto Bock designed his cartridge to meet the requirements of dropping large African animals. In particular predators after farm animals and herbivores grazing off farmer's crops.

Are the 338-06 or the 35 Whelan up to that requirement? I invite anyone who has used those cartridges in Africa, or seen them used in Africa, to post their observations and opinions.

I'm betting old Otto didn't have the bullets we have today.

Personally I was thinking about an elk rifle so if anyone's got experience with elk & the 9.3x62 that would be interesting as well.

My 06 kill's em so I'm thinking it couldn't do worse that the 06.

Thanks.

I was only going from memory, which stinks, and I don't have my copy of Hell....
I definitely didn't want to glean my old G&A's for such info.

Of note as well, Townsend Whelen found gallery loads/light handgun bullets a tool for shooting grouse at close range when on one of his long hunting excursions.

We generally don't spend a month on a trip today.



Most heavy 35 Whelen bullets are/were round nose in shape, which Dr. Howell and Elmer, for a time, found totally adequate.

Today's hunters find it as inferior, but the Whelen was developed along the same vein as the 9.3, of which now has spitzer bullets like the Partition, but I suspect it earned most of its pedigree with RN or semi-spitzer bullets with similar SD's and BC's of the Whelen bullets of old.

Steelhead,

Of course he didn't.

Probably the North American popular equivalent cartridge for the 1900s into 1950s would the ever popular 30-30 Winchester. To compare the 9.3x62 too the 30-30 would be comparing apples too oranges.

We're trying to compare apples too apples here. Using African hunting as the standard.

What

I'm thinking you need to say 303 Brit v. 30-30....

I like your ability to break things down and give a common sense assessment of the situation.

It's worth mentioning that the 9.3s can be loaded w/ Makorov (.365 cal) pistol bullets... I haven't tried this in my x57, but intend to. Ain't it a shame that we don't "need" this option for "camp meat loads" like they used to on extended excursions? Most of the time I do a hunting trip I'm just finally getting "off the clock" fully (psychologically anyway) when its time to get "back to the grind"!

I still say the Loony answer is to buy all four... although I'd hesitate to suggest that any man ought to limit himself to only one '06... .

I don't use .30 caliber either. I have a 7mm Mauser and a .375 Holland.

Let's not forget that the .350 Rigby Magnum (rimless) was once a popular medium bore in Africa back in the day (prior to World War II).


http://www.kynochammunition.co.uk/

Ballistics:
225 gr bullet (.358") at 2625 fps (24 inch barrel)

That sure is very similar to the current Federal factory loading of a 225 gr bullet at 2600 fps for the .35 Whelen. Also, the 9x57 Mauser (.356" nominal groove diameter) with a 247 gr bullet at around 2300 fps was not that much different from the .35 Whelen with a 250 gr bullet at 2400 fps (factory ammo specs).

From my reading, it seems that the .350 Rigby was never really meant to be regarded as a dangerous game cartridge though there were 225 gr solids available. (Note: a 225 gr .358" bullet is lacking in sectional density compared to the more traditional African dangerous game cartridges and bullet weights.) It seems that the .350 Rigby was regarded as a fine plains game cartridge and so was the 9x57 Mauser. The .35 Whelen fits into the same ballistic niche.

Now, that said, I'm a big fan of the 9.3x62 but I also own a .338 Win Mag, a .35 Whelen, and a .375 H&H. (I must be a medium bore loony! ) I once owned a .338-06 (I never hunted with it) but I sold it when I acquired my 9.3x62. And, I also like my .30-06 especially when loaded when 220 gr bullets.

Just my ramblings....
Cheers!
-Bob F.

I killed a bison with the .338/06 although truth be told I wish I'd used a larger cartridge. The first two shots had little effect, the third hobbled him up good. Bullet was a 250gr partition, the box said 2500 fps. Expansion was picture perfect, although no bone was struck. At that velocity the Partition looks like a really good bullet. Not sure I'd want to shoot a 210 partition from a RUM or anything like that.

For most here it doesn't matter, but try buying a box of 275gr ammunition for a .338 mail order, let alone off a shelf.

I shot a moose three times with the 286 Oryx, including two broadside and one quartering, and recovered no bullets, nor was there any evidence of bullet failure. I was very happy.

That's the thing with either the 9.3x62 or the 338-06. Very few folks, in the US at least, don't own or care to own either of these unless they handload.
I have shot very few factory loaded cartridges out of any of my CF rifles.

Often what makes it "look good" slows it down....

..shot a Moose once with a 225 grain Swift A-Frame...(.358 dia.)
..shot another Moose also "once" with a 250 grain Partition..(.358 dia.)
...shot a crap load of deer "once" with a 225 grain TSX...(.358 dia)

bullets went in, and bullets went out...both Moose, and every deer went in the freezer.


...love that single shot Ruger in 35 Whelen...

Once I start shooting I don't stop until all movement ceases.

From a ballistics standpoint (the only standpoint I have with any of these calibers...) I believe that Dober is right on this. I just went to Woodleigh's website and they do, indeed, make a 300 gr FMJ in .338. So when factoring in roughly equivalent MV's the .338's higher SD and smaller frontal area should theoretically penetrate better (slightly).

That being said, when I read of all the elephant taken by the old timers with the 7x57 and .303, I can't imagine ANYTHING knowing the difference no matter which cartridge you choose. Scratch your itch!!!

9.3 is much more of a great thing. And there are plenty of bullets to choose from. How many do you need?