35 Whelen vs 9.3x62

[samu]

I have a 9.3 but would love to have a 35 whelen only so I could load a 225 gr @ 2625 and pretend it’s the great 350 Rigby. Rigbys are not easy to afford...

I can’t say I’ve ever heard a complaint about the old 350.

Load 214gr North Fork and pretend harder?

 

[baxterb]

Load 214gr North Fork and pretend harder?

Ha! I’m stubbornly a one-bullet-per-gun guy, with the exception of solids/softs. I shoot a 286 north fork out of my 9.3 at 2500fps. Good bullets!

 

[WAB]

Where’s Bob??? I can’t believe he hasn’t weighed in on this thread!!!

 

[Clodo Ferreira]

I was asking myself the same ?

 

[gbflyer]

A person needs at least one of each.

 

[Aaron.F]

A person needs at least one of each.

Agreed.

 

[Newboomer]

Bob! Oh, Bob! Wherefore art thou, Bob? I am truly surprised he wasn't the first responder on this thread as rabid a 35 Whelen fan as he is. Must be out hunting.

 

[BeeMaa]

Where’s Bob??? I can’t believe he hasn’t weighed in on this thread!!!

LMAO.
Exactly what I thought when I saw the title of this thread.

 

[bruce moulds]

the loads gien in the o.p. are not apples and apples.
as clodo said, the 9.3x62 has more case capacity, and a greater expansion ratio than the whelen.
yet the load (58gn) for the whelen is bigger than the 9.3(56gn).
thus the 9.3, all things being equal, is not running at the same pressure as the whelen in that example.
bruce.

 

[Aaron.F]

the loads gien in the o.p. are not apples and apples.
as clodo said, the 9.3x62 has more case capacity, and a greater expansion ratio than the whelen.
yet the load (58gn) for the whelen is bigger than the 9.3(56gn).
thus the 9.3, all things being equal, is not running at the same pressure as the whelen in that example.
bruce.

In the information I pulled off the Nosler website the 35 Whelen (63.3 Gr. Water) has more capacity than the 9.3x62 (62.5 Gr Water).

I agree that we do not know at what pressure the loads are, but Nosler data appears to be pretty aggressive from my understanding.

I understand why the 9.3x62 is more popular, I am just saying it is basically apples to apples.

 

[samu]

In the information I pulled off the Nosler website the 35 Whelen (63.3 Gr. Water) has more capacity than the 9.3x62 (62.5 Gr Water).

I agree that we do not know at what pressure the loads are, but Nosler data appears to be pretty aggressive from my understanding.

I understand why the 9.3x62 is more popular, I am just saying it is basically apples to apples.

Default water capacity for 9,3x62 is 78 grains. 35w is 70.6gr.

 

[WAB]

@Bob Nelson 35Whelen where are you? We're beginning to worry!

 

[DG870]

Not a lot of factory rifles in 35W but it’s not hard to find one if you want one. As previously mentioned, Remington made the 700 Classic in 35W and you can still find them for sale. Ruger chambered the 77 in 35W and you can order the 35W in a Nosler 48, Cooper and the Montana Rifle Company made them in 35W (I think they’re not in business any more?).

I just checked Online auctions and found 5 Whelen’s for sale. (1 Remington, 1 Ruger, 1 made on an 03-A3 action and 2 made on Mauser actions.

My Whelen is based on an FN Mauser action and it’s fun to shoot. Had it out yesterday trying some 225 grain Sierras. Recoil is very manageable.

I live in the center of the USA and our big game here is primarily deer. We don’t have to travel too far to hunt elk.
For my location the Whelen is more practical to own than the 9.3x62. You can usually find a box or two of Remington core lock 35W in our local shops and 30-06 brass is plentiful to make your own. I reload for my Whelen and primarily use the Hornady 250 grain Spire Point.

I’ve thought about why the Whelen isn’t more popular and it’s obvious, at least to me, that there are several reasons. There are not many factory rifles chambered for it, it’s not mainstream commonly mentioned rifle in hunting magazines, you don’t really need a 250 grain bullet to kill a deer and there are powerful calibers that have more reach for larger game like elk.

I mainly use mine for hog hunting. . The heavy slow bullets easily defeat the gristle plate for quick clean kills. I own it, not that I really need it (hope my wife doesn’t read this) but I enjoy owning something a little different and like the history of the cartridge that gave American hunters “big” bore capability using commonly available actions and components.

I have no experience with the 9.3x62 but I have no doubt that it is a fine cartridge with an interesting history but the 35 Whelen just works better for my situation and I really doubt that game shot with a properly placed shot from either caliber will be able to tell the difference.

 

[Longwalker]

I have considerable experience with the .35 Whelen and a few years experience with the 9.3x62. I agree that for most hunting situations they are interchangeable without a noticeable difference. In my rifles, the standard Remington factory load 250 gr. velocity is measured on my chronograph at 2400 fps. And the standard Norma 285 gr. 9.3x62 is also at 2400 fps. My Whelen's barrel length is slightly longer, about 3 cm or 1.5". So a slight power advantage to the 9.3.

I like the .35 Whelen very much for hunting our biggest Canadian game. It is very effective on elk, moose, caribou and bears.

But for international travel there is no comparison. It's the 9.3 for me, every time. Much better ammunition selection and availability, usually superior bullets, and the history and reputation favour the 9.3 too.

When i hunted Namibia last year, my PH was very satisfied with my choice of cartridges. He also shot a 9.3 and appreciated that we could use the same ammunition if necessary. And there are 9.3mm factory loads that are suitable for thick skinned dangerous game. Not so for the .35 Whelen.

I enjoy handloading ammunition and understand that both cartridges can be loaded to serve a variety of duties, and with handloads they clearly do overlap in usefulness. But to me this discussion is kinda like the old .280 Rem. vs 7x64 Brenneke comparison. Both the 9.3x62 and 7x64 did it all first, and did it better from the beginning, and continue to do so.

 

[gbflyer]

I’ve built 2 Whelens, gave one away and kept one. Getting parts together for one more, 12 twist barrel for the big Woodleigh bullets on a Mauser. If I didn’t already have components and tooling for the Whelen I would be building the 9.3. Also I have a 9.3x64 Brenneke that is gonna show up here on long term loan this Fall

The availability of components right now for obscure cartridges is better than mainstream by a mile.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Not a lot of factory rifles in 35W but it’s not hard to find one if you want one. As previously mentioned, Remington made the 700 Classic in 35W and you can still find them for sale. Ruger chambered the 77 in 35W and you can order the 35W in a Nosler 48, Cooper and the Montana Rifle Company made them in 35W (I think they’re not in business any more?).

I just checked Online auctions and found 5 Whelen’s for sale. (1 Remington, 1 Ruger, 1 made on an 03-A3 action and 2 made on Mauser actions.

My Whelen is based on an FN Mauser action and it’s fun to shoot. Had it out yesterday trying some 225 grain Sierras. Recoil is very manageable.

I live in the center of the USA and our big game here is primarily deer. We don’t have to travel too far to hunt elk.
For my location the Whelen is more practical to own than the 9.3x62. You can usually find a box or two of Remington core lock 35W in our local shops and 30-06 brass is plentiful to make your own. I reload for my Whelen and primarily use the Hornady 250 grain Spire Point.

I’ve thought about why the Whelen isn’t more popular and it’s obvious, at least to me, that there are several reasons. There are not many factory rifles chambered for it, it’s not mainstream commonly mentioned rifle in hunting magazines, you don’t really need a 250 grain bullet to kill a deer and there are powerful calibers that have more reach for larger game like elk.

I mainly use mine for hog hunting. . The heavy slow bullets easily defeat the gristle plate for quick clean kills. I own it, not that I really need it (hope my wife doesn’t read this) but I enjoy owning something a little different and like the history of the cartridge that gave American hunters “big” bore capability using commonly available actions and components.

I have no experience with the 9.3x62 but I have no doubt that it is a fine cartridge with an interesting history but the 35 Whelen just works better for my situation and I really doubt that game shot with a properly placed shot from either caliber will be able to tell the difference.

@DG870
Mate I don't know about big and slow in the Whelen load the 225s to 2,850 to 2950fps and it becomes a 400 yard elk and moose rifle giving you 4,000 to 4,300fps of muzzle energy. Now that give the338 mag a hell of a shake
No such thing a a short range bush Whelen
Even loaded with a 250grain Speer hotcore at 2,700fps for 4,000fpe ain't a slow load.
Both these loads are out of the nosler and Speer reloading sites.
My Whelen is built on a Stevens 200aka savage 110 with a 25inch barrel and 1 in 12 twist
Loaded properly the Whelen is a better cartridge than the Winchester 338 win mag and the 9.3x62. There ain't no flies on a 275 grain Woodleigh PPSP that can be loaded to almost 2,500fps either.

My savage Whelen
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I was reading through the "If the 9.3x62 became the new legal minimum?" thread and I saw a couple of people talked about the 35 Whelen. I now have rifles in both 35 Whelen and 9.3x62 and am looking closer at them and they are ballistically the same.

I looked at the Nosler reloading information on line, both are shot from 26" barrels, which is longer than most people will use but at least they are the same for comparison.

9.3x62 250 grain, Sectional Density =0.267
56.0 gr of IMR 4064 for 2582 fps, this is a max load and the highest velocity

35 Whelen 250 grain, Sectional Density =0.279
58.0 gr of IMR 4064 for 2637 fps, this is a max load and the highest velocity

The 9.3x62 is .006" in diameter bigger and the 35 Whelen has a 0.012 higher section density and has about a 50 fps advantage. I may be wrong and some loonies are going to correct me, they are essentially the same. I guess I never fully realized this until I took the time to compare.

Anything that can be said about the 9.3x62 can be said about the 35 Whelen and vice versa. Am I missing something?

@Aaron.F
Check the Speer reloading site mate the Whelen can be loaded to 2,700fps plus with a 250grain Speer hotcore.
I have a 25 in 1 in 12 twist barrel and safely get up to 2,950fps with a 225 grain Woodleigh and 2,870 with the 225 grain accubonds
Loaded properly the Whelen is a different kettle of fish
The 275 grain Woodleigh can safely get 2,500 plus fps.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

If you load both to allowable CIP pressures the 9,3x62 has more energy. But does every reloader know the real pressure of its load? Do they have access to a Firing Proof House for example?

In a quality case a primer will not necessarily indicate if you're just above 3900 or 4000 bar. Also velocity of a bullet is not telling you the full story of the pressure curve and maximum pressure. So you might think you have found a very powerful load with no bad signs but pressure might be well above the limits of the specifications.

In Europe for example the 9,3x62 is a standard cartridge and widely available with a lot of different loads. The 35 wheelen is exotic and nearly unknown and not available.

@Christot
Agree to a certain extent mate but t the newer powders like CFE223 and superformance have different pressure curves than the older powders. The older powders have a parabolic pressure curve where as the newer powders have a pressure curve that maintains a lower pressure for a longer period. This allows for greater velocity at LOWER pressure. Take cfe223 for example it will give a velocity of 2,700 fps with a 250grain 35 caliber bullet where's as Varget will give 2,500 fps and H4350 is a bit slow. Cfe223 sits between Varget and H4350 and is eminently suited to the Whelen and gas the type of curve I was talking about.
Bob
Some think I hot rod my Whelen but all my loads are worked up from minimum to max SAFE WORKING loads and I NEVER excede max publicised loads.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I believe the 220-225 grain bullets are listed as breaking 2800 fps for the 35 Whelen.

The 275 grain Whelen bullet is around 2350-2400 fps as well, as i understand it.

My ultimate question is why do people tend to lean towards the 9.3x62 being better, when it doesn't appear to be, its basically the same. My thoughts are that it is regional in all reality, the Whelen just doesn't have as much history, especially in Africa.

@Aaron.F
Hornaday loads the 200 grain superformance to 2,900 fps factory load and Sierra lists loads for the 225grain HPBT game king to 2,900 plus fps.
@Shootist43 loads the 225grain Barnes to close to 2,800fps
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Those are facts, Shootist. Almost no rifle manufacturers do offer one in .35 Whelen. Being equals or no, the 9,3x62 is more popular than ever! And the main European cartridge brands have many modern loads for the 9,3 Mauser. RWS and NORMA the best samples.

@Coldo Ferreira
The Whelen is a reloaders dream where as there are more factory loads for the 9.3. Both are very good cartridges but I personally think the Whelen when loaded correctly out does the 9.3 by a considerable amount.
For the ultimate in penetration both can be l loaded with 300grain plus projectiles.
Bob.