Thinking about rechambering a .30-06 Husky/FN Mauser 98 in one of these. Which is best and why? Thanks.

I'll stick with the Whelen. Easy to find bullets. Remington factory ammo available if you do not hand load. Those big 250 grain roundnose Hornadys just DROP everything I've shot at...... where they stand. All American History. Metric bullets just lack the availability/ selection here.

9.3x62. It'll do everything the Whelen can, and danged near everything that the .375H&H will as well. What's not to like about that?

I can be more convincing, if necessary... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Euro trash...........

I am fond of the 35, bullets are EASY to get and brass is easy to find or make, plus ammo.

If those aren't factors, then just thumb your nose at the Euro's and go with a good old American classic.

I have a lovely, near mint sporter by Wm. Oschatz of Potsdam made in 1927 in 9.3x62 and it shoots S&B factory ammo into .5" @ 100 M. with it's nearly 80 yr. old scope. I also have a Merkel drilling in 12-9.3x74R, the rimmed version of the old Bock cartridge. These are two of the best using cartridges for my purposes here in B.C. that I have yet to try and I prefer them over anything above .30 caliber, except my beloved .338 Win Mags.

Euro trash?????? Bah Humbug!!!!

I guess I'll cast my vote for the Whelen. I've got the Ackleyized version, so I guess that tells you how MUCH I believe in it? There's just no real difference between the .35 and the 9.3 in the field, and the Whelen's cheaper on brass, easier to find bullets for (though you only need a couple - a deer and a larger game load, though it's fun to play around) and the bullets are often cheaper, and one day you may find it great fun and/or very practical to shoot some pistol bullets in the .35. The history and "romance" and nostalgia factor are not inconsequential factors, either.

Mainly, I build mine because I wanted a "big gun" (at least for Georgia) and of the calibers based on the std. '06 size case head, the Whelen's the one you hear very experienced hunter saying is the effective equivalent of a .375 H&H in the field. JJ Hack's comments on it were the final straw for me in this.

Judging by the reaction of the two does I've taken with it so far, he was right, too! I'd been considering the "book" advantages of the .338/06 in sectional density, etc., and JJ helped me realize that bigger holes in barrels DO have a bearing on what happens when those bullets hit. Trajectory was so close that it was an effectual toss up, so I went with the bigger bore, and I've been glad I did from the moment I decided to now, and I don't expect to change my mind, either.

I think if I did it all over, I'd probably go with the std. version of the Whelen rather than the Ackley. You DO get some additional velocity, and it's a DANG pretty round with that broad, squared off shoulder, but the std. version doesn't need fireforming. I think going with the 9.3 would provide you with enough eventual compromises in increased cost and diminished bullet selection that you'd probably wind up eventually wishing you'd gone with the .35, but you COULD make a LOT worse choices, and I have all faith that you'll love either, really. It's like choosing between two beautiful women. The difference boils down to the "little things."

Oh yeah, and the .358" Rem 200 PSPCL's are $60 per 500. That ain't a bad deal!

Foreigner...........

Thanks for all the replies. I was leaning towards the .35 and now I am pretty sure that's the way I will go. Arguments were pretty good in that direction.

Now, I have a beater pre-64 Win 70 (1952) and a beater Husqvarna/FN Mauser sporter from the same period, both in .30-06 as potential donors. Both are 100% original and have real classic lines. Which one? The Husky is about a pound lighter in weight. Both are very smooth operators with great triggers.

I would opt for the heavier of the two. Either of the cartridges can get your attention if you do much shooting.

My 35 Whelen weighs in at 7.5 pounds all scoped up and ready to hunt. I wouldn't want a lighter one.

I owned both a .338-06 and a .35 Whelen. Both are very good cartridges. But, after I got my 9.3x62 (in a CZ 550) I ended up selling the .338-06 and the .35 Whelen. Some will claim higher handload velocities but the .338-06 and the .35 Whelen both basically push 250 gr bullets at around 2400 fps. The 9.3x62 will push a 286 gr bullet at 2400 fps (handloads) with no problem. (Factory spec is 2360 fps; my handloads average 2390 fps.) The 286 gr 9.3 bullet (.366") has a sectional density of .305; same as the 300 gr .375". The 286 gr 9.3 bullet at 2400 fps per second churns up about 3600 ft lb of energy. Not bad from what is basically a .30-06 size case. The 9.3x62 will also push 250 gr bullets at around 2550-2600 fps which will flatten the trajectory a little.

For a non-magnum medium bore, the 9.3x62 gets my vote. I also own a .338 Win Mag and a .375 H&H so I don't have anything against magnum medium bores. But, I do like my 9.3x62 very much. It's very pleasant to shoot and comes in a rifle that is about the same weight and size as the average .270 Win or .30-06.

Handloading components are no problem for the 9.3x62 either. Graf's carries Graf brand brass, that I have found to be very good, at reasonable prices. They also carry Prvi Partizan 286 gr bullets that make for inexpensive practice and that I have found to be very accurate. Your local gun store may not have ammo, bullets and brass in stock for the 9.3x62 but in today's world, with the Internet and online ordering, that's really no longer a big deal. Plenty of premium 9.3 bullets are also available.

However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the .338-06 or the .35 Whelen.

Choose the one you like, go hunting and be happy.

My two cents.....
-Bob F. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Whatcha using it for? I'm partial to the 35 whelen as a very versatile all arounder.

The 35 whelen has a huge selection of componet bullets, 110 gr pistol up to 310 gr solids for elephants, though you need a fast twist barrel if you go past 250 gr. For s**** and giggles, nothing beats a 150-180 gr pistol bullet over 12 gr unique for ~1200 fps, and ~1" 50 yd groups. Those loads are just plain fun to shoot.

But, if you're looking for a dedicated elk, moose and bear gun, I'd have to give the nod to the 9.3X62.

Yea!.....

TRH;

A question and a revision.

First, the question: that 1952 vintage pre-64 M70: what caliber is it currently?

Second, the revision.

Given that you're keeping the .270 Win. in the pre-64 M70, a match of that to a pre-64 actioned .35 Whelen is a classic pairing, one that's very tough to beat as an all-around duo for North America, and one that's just "right". O'Connor's rifle and Whelen's rifle. Too good. Go with the .35 Whelen, just for nostalgia alone.

Also, when both are loaded to their potential, the trajectories of the .35 Whelen with 200 gr. loads is very similar to the 130 gr. loads for the .270; and the 250s close to the 150 gr. .270 loads. Those two cartridges just kind of form a matched pair; you just need to put the Whelen together.

And, as a bonus, you still have the Mauser-actioned .30-06, to which you can pair a Mauser-actioned .375 H&H later... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

VANimrod, you are a man after my own heart. My thinking exactly matches your own, down the .375 H&H, which I already have in a British-made Whitworth Mark X Mauser Express Rifle. I think that's an awesome foursome, nicely topped off by a Belgian Browning lightweight in .308 Winchester, and a Sako/Browning medium/heavy barreled .243 Winchester. Not to mention quite a few others. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Sounds similar to the foursome that I'm working toward:

Two Ruger #1 RSIs: one in 7x57 and the other in 9.3x62 (need the larger of the two)

Two pre-64 M70s: one in .30-06 and the other in .375H&H.

There will be a pair of Mauser actioned rifles in the battery as well, but calibers and configurations are still wide open... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I like it!!! I acquired my 8x57JS and my 9.3x62 for much the same reasoning of a classic, but still very useful, pair. The .270 Win and the .35 Whelen would make a great pair. The .270 and the .35 Whelen are also from the same era. The .270 Win was introduced in 1925 and the .35 Whelen was introduced in 1922 if I remember correctly. Go for it!!



"In April of 1923 Col. Whelen suggested to Seymour Griffin that he could improve his custom rifles by joining forces with someone who was an accomplished metal worker. The person that Whelen recommended was James V. Howe, who was the foreman of the machine shop at the Frankford Arsenal in Philadelphia, and who had in 1922 designed the .35 Whelen cartridge (a 30-'06 case necked up to accept a .35 caliber bullet). In May of 1923 Seymour Griffin got together with James V. Howe, Col. Townsend Whelen, James M. Holsworth, and James L. Gerry; and Griffin & Howe was born."
http://www.griffinhowe.com/history.cfm

-Bob F.

You all are failing the rifle looney test... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />.

He has a pre-64 Winchester AND a Husqvarna...and he is trying to decide between .35 Whelen and 9.3x62?

This is really easy... build them both! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

There...wasn't that easy? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

muledeer,

According to my thinking, your logic has a flaw it it. Obviously, someone poisoned your mind... I wonder who? ... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Grasshopper

I think I just figured out the Mauser pair... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

One 6.5x55 and one 10.73x73 (.404 Jeffery). That should do. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I'd say so. Would you be using a Swedish 96 Mauser for the 6.5x55? I have a truly beautiful military configured one. It was made when the Swedes were making their rifles like prewar Winchester 70s. All hand fitted and assembled, and perfectly fitted high grade walnut stocks. Even the standard military issue rifles were typically close to MOA.

Likely a Swedish for the 6.5; TBD for the big boomer.

...Foreigner....??????

PIFFLE!!!!!!!!

muledeer is right, build a .35 W on the P-64 AND a 9.3 on the Husky; this simply goes to show the superior intellects and general wisdom of those of us who live in the north-western quarter of the N.A. continent. So, build 'em both and relieve
the awful mental strain associated with making crucial decisions such as this......

But if I build them both, that would leave me without a scopable .30-06, and that's unthinkable. I have a nice Mauser sporter in 06, but it has one of those stocks manufactured before anyone much thought of putting scopes on a hunting rifle, i.e., the shoulder stock slopes dramatically down to put your eye right at the Lyman 48 aperture sight. So, either the Husky or the Winnie has to stay in 06.

I hate to interject a minor piece of practicality here, but the 9.3x62 is legal in SOME (not all) African countries for dangerous game, while the .35 Whelen is not. And dangerous game aside, you have a better than even chance of finding 9.3x62 ammo over there, while .35 Whelen is probably non-existent.

So if you ever decide to travel to Africa with your obscure medium-bore, there it is.

On an impracticla note, my personal vote is for the 9.3, which has a longer, richer world history than the .35 Whelen, and a better selection of really heavy bullets. (Somebody pointed out you can get .35 310-grain Woodleighs. Well you can get 320 Woodleighs in 9.3....)

The Other Mule Deer

Since I already have a Mauser sporter in 9.3 Mauser (not to mention a .416 Rem Mag and a .375 H&H Mag), I will make the Winchester a .35 Whelen for North America.

I'd do a 375 H&H over the 9.3x62 for African use. For NA I'd do a 338-06 over the 9.3x62 and 35 Whelen! I've never liked the 35 Whelen's shoulder! BFaucett rated the 35 Whelen and 338-06 with 250's in the 2400's... that's not been my experience at all. My 338-06 (22" bbl) pushed the 250's at 2,550 with H4350 and my 22" bbl'd 350 RM pushed the 250's just over 2,600 with RL15. The 350 RM is, for all purposes, the clone of the Whelen, but I like it better.

Brad,

I was really basing my comparison between the .35 Whelen and the 9.3x62 upon Remington's 250 gr .35 Whelen load that's rated at 2400 fps. That compares closely with the traditional, standard 9.3x62 load which is a 286 gr bullet at 2360 fps.

Hodgdon is showing data where both the .338-06 and the .35 Whelen will safely exceed 2400 fps with a 250 gr bullet. Nosler Ammunition is also showing that they load their .35 Whelen 250 gr ammo to a stated 2550 fps. And their .338-06 250 gr ammo is loaded to a stated 2475 fps. But, Nosler Ammuntion loads their 286 gr 9.3x62 ammo to a stated 2430 fps so that slightly exceeds the traditional 9.3x62 load at 2360.

In summary, both the .35 Whelen and the 9.3x62 can be loaded to slightly exceed their stated factory ammo standard ballistics. (If Remington's 250 gr load is considered the standard for the .35 Whelen.) I'm not trying to be argumentative; I just wanted to explain the reasoning I had used in my initial comparison.

Cheers,
-Bob F.

http://www.noslerammunition.com/

Thank's for clarifying Bob!

I didn't take your post as argumentative at all and certainly hope you didn't take mine as such!

Best (and cheers!),

Brad

No problem.... I didn't take yours as argumentative either. We're just a group of hunters sitting around the ol' campfire having a friendly chat about cartridges. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

-Bob F.

The "reality" of it, to follow My Other Brother Darrel's lead and interject some, is that no animal on Earth will ever be able to tell the difference between being struck in a vital zone with a .358 diameter 250 gr bullet at 2500+ fps and a .366 diameter 286 gr bullet at 2400+ fps. They will just be suddenly dead.

That being said, I've used the Whelen since 1993 and I like it a lot. When I go to Africa next August, it will partner with my .404 Jeffery to handle the "small stuff" like kudu. My PH thinks it's a really good plan.

If I had bought a 9.3x62 a dozen years ago, I'm betting I would like it equally well.

About the Whelen's shoulder -- I hope I never own a rifle with a chamber sloppy enough that the Whelen's shoulder is an issue! That would be a rifle salvageable only be rebarrelling.
Tales of Whelen headspacing issues are mythic, I think, and if they exist, stem from bad chambering, not any inherent flaw in the cartridge design.

Those tales go hand in hand with the stories that insist the .35 is a 200-yard cartridge, at best. Humbug <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />.

I still think you need them both, regardless of who the donor action is... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />.

Very true, but if you are going on a moose hunt in Alaska, you have a pretty good chance of finding 35 Whelen ammo on the shelf and not 9.3x62, or deer hunting in Florida or......


You get the picture. I would assume the average joe does 1000 days of hunting in the US for every one day abroad, so I would hedge my bets for what you can find here and not on the shelfs in Zimbabwe.

Downunder I would take the 9.3x62 any day. Woodleigh makes a full range of projectiles from 250 to 320 gns, solids or softs, brass is no problem and factroy ammo is available. How versatile is that?!

But in NA I can see a practicle point for the 35 Whelan. Not as versatile though in my books.

I really enjoy the theoretical blather about versatility because of the different kinds and weights of projectiles available in .35 vs .36 and so on. Unfortunately, I occasionally wake up and admit that it is exactly that, theoretical blather, and that in actual hunting use, it only takes 2 or maybe 3 different bullets to get about all the versatility out of any caliber that a hunter needs. Will a 250 grain .35 bullet bounce off an animal where a 286 .36 caliber bullet will whack it dead? If the 250 kills the animal dead, then is the 225 really necessary to ensure some idea of versatility?

I enjoy the mental masturbation, but when it really comes down to making a live animal into a dead animal, there's no significant difference between the two calibers, and the range of available bullets is wider for either than any single individual will use over the course of a dozen years.

Party pooper <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I just read that Speer has recently released a 225 grain Trophy Bonded Bear Claw in .358 caliber with the .35 Whelen in mind.

Yep <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I have four .35 Whelens and no 9.3, so you can figure out my preference. (1) Al Biesen Mauser (2) Townsend Whelen's Springfield 1903 that was built by Jim Howe originally in .400 Whelen and later rebarreled by Culver (3) Remington 7600 pump (4) 1903 Springfield by L.R. Wallack with 19" barrel, have not yet got my nerve up to shoot it.

If you have used both, I think you would go with the 9.3.

I have and I know others who have and only one friend now used the Whelan and only because he regrets selling his Mannlicher Steyer Luxus chambered in 9.3X62. "Regrets" is very understated.

Thats what these forums are all about!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Toss a coin! They are both excellent cartridges and ballistic twins. I guess that, in the final analysis, it will come down to which is easier to buy ammo/components for and, I would suspect, that in the US that would be the Whelan.

I have a .35 Whelan, with a 9.3x62 underconstruction and, when it is finished, the Whelan will be up for sale but only because the Whelan was only ever a 'rough' gun while my 9.3 will be quite 'pretty'. But I know that feeding my 9.3 will be a little harder here in Oz.

Practicality suggest the Whelen, particularly if a 1:12" barrel is used. History (on a Mauser action) suggest the 9.3x62. Either will do essentially the same job. But ... if I was in the States and had your easier access to cases (via Huntingtons) then in Oz, I'd be building a 10.75x68Mauser.
Cheers...
Con

That would be an animal of a different stripe entirely! Not that I wouldn't like to have a 10.75x68 -- but it's a lot more rifle than either the Whelen or the 9.3.

Can you send me some Woodleigh bullets for my .404 <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />?

I've always wanted to have a 375 Whelen. The 35 is not obscure enough now that its a factory cartridge. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />
I picked up a box of 275 gr Barnes originals in a gunshop in Alaska a few years ago. Those will have to do until I find something heavy. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
GWN

muledeer,
But a lovely animal nevertheless. I had one many years ago and the 347gr load at 2200fps was a pussy-cat to shoot, and could be boosted if needed. Looked at building another but case availability is just too limiting. But I miss not having a mild .40 and reckon one day I'll do a 416Taylor and load it right back to match the 10.75.
Cheers...
Con

6.5x57 and 9x57 might be a nice combo, the Mauser version of the 260/358 pair, either pair would be hard to beat in N. America, unless you were shooting a lot of big bears on purpose.

Sycamore

I have two 9x57's, but no 6.5x57... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />. Now I have to think about that. I've been looking for a 7x57 to match up with my Nines...now I have to think about another option...

Oh...the ambiguity...the ambiguity <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />!

(Did I mention that I have a pair of .280's to go with my .35 Whelen? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />)

The-real-hawkeye,

Neither. Try the 376 Steyr (or for the metric minded 9.5x60). It is also a factory load. And it will out perform both the 35 Whelen and 9.3x62.

The 35 bore has premimum bullets in 200 grs, 225, 250 and 270. The 9.3 has good stiff bullets in only 232 gr, 250 and 286. In the 375 bore you have premimums in 210 gr, 235, 250, 260, 270 285, and 300.

The 376 Steyr will do 2950+ FPS with 210 Barnes X, 2850 with 235's, 2750 with 250's, 2700 with 260's, 2600 with 270's, and 2450 with 300's.

The 35 Whelen has trouble breaking 2600 with 250's, and the 9.3 struggles to reach 2450 FPS with 286 grainers.

You bolt face has to be opened very little, and your mag should not require any changes. An overall length of 3.125" works very nicely in a mauser 98

Really any of the rounds mentions 35 Whelen, 9.3x62, and 376 Steyr, are great performers, and the 35 and 9.3 are classic rounds. So if you want class, buy a Whelen or 9.3x62. If you want performance in a small package, try a 376 Steyr.

I've owned all three, 2 Whelens (Ruger and Remington) and a 9.3x62 (Sako). My current 376 Steyr smokes em' both.

Good luck with your choice,

Bob

I always thought I needed a 338/06 to go with my 280!

Sycamore

Then make it so! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />