Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 9.3x62 or 35 Whelen?

John makes a good solid case for the 9.3 and I cannot refute any of his points. The ONLY valid benefit of the Whelen is for the American hunter who does not reload. Whelen ammo is a little bit more available, though that is changing in recent years. The Whelen also has a better selection of bullets and ammunition suited to North American hunting. The 9.3 is undoubtedly a better (very slightly) cartridge with better bullet and ammo selection for heavy game. But most American hunters - myself included and I am an Alaskan hunting guide - will shoot a lot more deer and elk sized game than over 1000lb game. Of course a 3006 or 270 works as well or better for small and medium game, but for the hunter who wants one big game rifle for any purpose and will occasionally hunt very large game, the Whelen is a very good option. Basically a modern 350 Rigby, which is exactly the niche it was intended for.

It's a pretty nifty round. Mine weighs 8 pounds exactly with scope, and since I got it in 2002 it has just about turned my .338 Winchester and .375 H&H Magnums into safe queens--and I hunted a LOT with both during the previous decade. The 9.3x62's recoil is noticeably less, and with 250-grain bullets it's more effective than the .338, and with 286s I can't tell the difference between the 9.3 and the .375 with 300s.

The .35 Whelen has been my go to rifle for North American hunting for the last 30 yrs., bullet selection and the ease of making cases from .30-06 brass were key factors in making my decision. I have taken whitetails with 200 & 225gr. jacketed bullets, always excellent accuracy and terminal bullet performance. Powders that give the best accuracy in my .35 Whelen are IMR 3031 and IMR 4064 though I'm sure there are several others.

Mule deer
Woodleigh Australia makes 275 grain PPSP and 310 grain round nose and solids for the Whelen.
It's a pity that Remington made a 1 in 16 twist instead of a 1 in 12.
I dabbled with the Whelen AI and agree whole heartedly with you as blind the most useless AI around. Looks pretty b it doesn't do much better than the standard and needs more powder to do it.

I'm very happy with the Whelen and have had great fun developing loads for it with newer powders that bring it kicking and screaming into the 21st century..
For general use I use either the 225grain accubonds with your load of 60.5 grains of Varget for 2,850fps or the 225grain woodleigh PPSP with a healthy dose of cfe223 for 2,950fps. Both shoot flat and hit hard out to as far as I need.
This puts it up in 338 win mag territory and no one complains about the 338. The Ads between the 338, the 35 and 9.3 for the same weights don't overly concerned me as I don't hunt dangerous game and every thing I hit with the Whelen falls down if I do my part.
BOB

North 61
I've used my Whelen in Australia in temps from minus 5 celcieus to 42 degrees Celsius without the slightest hint of pressure problem. I Namibia the daily temp was 34 degrees Celsius and the same thing no problems with pressure.
I can assure you if ther was I would immediately back off the load. I did my load development in the middle of an Australian summer and I can assure you it was bloody hot.
Bob

Good to know....stay safe.

Hi John, can you share the details on your 9.3x62? I have an 84L and older 51L that I'm thinking about re-boring to this fine caliber.

Thank you, Scott

I've found that with best handloads, I'm in the ballpark with .375 H&H factory ammo and can duplicate the 9.3 x 64 factory ammo. I have to agree with the late Don Heath (African PH and wildlife biologist), Phil Shoemaker, Master Guide in Alaska, and JB that no observable distinctions of any of those over best premium loads in the 9.3 x 62 has been made.

I like both of Nosler's bullets (250 AB and 286 Partition) in my Tikka. They each shoot sub- MOA with the 250 AB into less than 1/2 MOA. Over 4000 ft-lbs from each is mundane using RL-17. With the heavy 286 Nosler and 320gr Woodleigh it surpasses the .338 Win Mag in KE and momentum. A 320gr at +2400 fps is easy using RL-17 in Hornady brass.

Bob
www.bigbores.ca

In my view the two are close enough in performance that the tie breaker would come down to one thing and one thing only....... which one has the larger selection of factory ammo. That alone would answer my final question ,in my view.

PPU - loads inexpensive and mild 9.3x62mm/285 gr. SP.

Makes both a good transition and woods round, and produces good quality re-loadable brass for higher performance hand-loads.






GR

Question? Is CZ still offering a 9.3 cal gun but in the new 527 model? The 550 action is gone. I ask as I could get one to come up on their web site. Thanks Blue

The 527 is the 223 length straight stack Mauser they make. The 557 is the new one which is their attempt to replace the 550 ( a large step backwards in my opinion)
But I can't say if they chamber a 9.3X62 in the 557 for the American market of not.

Mule Deer's 9.3x62 2650 fps 250 Nosler Accubond shoots amazing out of my 1st Gen Ruger African, no experience on game.

Sako,

Always good to hear.

Am going to start on the next Gun Gack book next winter. (At first we weren't going to call it part of the Gun Gack series, but then Eileen--the CEO of our publishing company) realized how Gun Gack has become a "signature line." This one's going to be The Little Book of Gun Gack: Rifle Handloads that Work. Or something like that.

Have known some gun writers who claim there's no such thing as a handload that will work in most rifles in a certain chambering, but that has not been my experience. Have made many load suggestions to readers who were having problems getting a rifle to shoot, and most of the time they've worked. One recent example was a guy with a .22 Hornet who tried one of the ancient Hornet powders, if I recall H110, with 40-grain bullets, and accuracy was mediocre, certainly not what I've come to expect of several .22 Hornets. I suggested he switch to Hodgdon Li'l Gun instead, and a couple days later he reported his rifle now shot sub-inch groups.

That said, I have found H110 to work very well with lighter bullets in the .22 Hornet, from 30-35 grains. I suspect the difference is in case-fill.

I was checking out the CZ web page only yesterday. All the timber 557 models have the horrible hog back butt. No American classic model any more.

I whole-heartedly agree that some loads just seem to work in different rifles.

Examples:

When working up loads, the first places I look is Gun Gacks. I'll often look at the Nosler manuals next. The loads shown in those sources are usually good in my rifles.

All loads shown below were shot at 100 meters.

In my two 7mm RM's the most accurate load is 140 Grain Nosler Partition with magnum primers (WLRM or 9 1/2M) & 72 grains of RE 26. <.4 MOA in my 700 and <.6 MOA in my 77. (Not sure what I'd shoot the 7mm RM's that would require that accuracy though, haha). But that is the best load for accuracy in those rifles.

In my 700 25-06's 100 grain Hornady with 9 1/2 primers and 56.7 grains of H4831sc shoots the best - in both rifles. ~ .8 MOA or less

In my 300 Weatherby's 200 grain Nosler Partition with 215 primers and 78.2 grains of RE 26 will shoot under .75 MOA (4 shot groups).

I was discussing what was the best load with another shooter for the 204 and we happen to come to the same bullet, powder etc. as the most accurate -- 40 gr V-max, 27 to 27.2 grains of IMR 4895.

Indeed. I had been hanging out with a new friend for a while before we learned, while talking guns, that we both shot .257 Roberts (his a M77, mine a 722). And we both used the identical loads, powder and bullet! Of course, we'd arrived at them independently, but they shot best in both our rifles.
Rex

I feel more comfortable stretching the .358 bore to 400-500 yards (on game) than I do the 9.3.

To me the slick 9.3 bullets seem hard, and the soft 9.3 bullets are not slick.

The 250 9.3 accubond (which shoots into tiny groups and flies very straight)...seems to be a fairly tough bullet. I have not shot anything larger than deer or pigs with it, but below 2000 fps it seemed to only expand *somewhat* in those animals, and expansion is definitely delayed and damage is very underwhelming. Might be a different story on something like a grizz bear that offered a lot of resistance to the bullet.

The "slick" .358 bullets in my experience are a lot softer. The 225gr .358 accubonds seem way softer than the .366 version, and will give a bit of expansion below what Nosler rates them to, down to 1700 fps. At 1700 it is nothing dramatic, but they quickly blow the nose off and you get a jagged 35-40 cal projectile plowing through. The 250 35 cal partitions also seem to have a nice soft front end.

To me this pushes the slider toward the Whelen, at least on game up to elk.