My Latest Purchase 35 Whelen

[D.M.V]

My vintage find came with a very old vx 2 on it. It is a decent cool old scope but seriously looks like it might be from the early 60s I wanted to update it with something new

 

[Rob404]

Too late - did that 30 years ago. At age 70, I can't do 338WM recoil.
The purpose of my question was to go to a 35 Whelen (not braked), IF the recoil will be acceptable.

If you can handle an 06 you can handle a 35 Whelen which is built on an 06 Case just opened up to accept a 35 cal

 

[Rule 303]

Rule 303,

Which Aimpoint and what is the overall weight with the Boyds stock?

I have a Micro on my closet AR and and older (larger) Aimpoint on another rifle. No problem at close to 200M, but my old eyes appreciate magnification.

Thanks,
Joe

Joe I have a CompML2 on the Whelen. Do not know the weight of the stock, it is a thumbhole but rifle would probably go 8 1/2lb loaded. I have replaced all my Rem stocks except one. The replacement stock -rifle in most cases is same weight- are better shaped then the Rems and give less felt recoil. The one I have not replaced a is a crappy plastic ADL stock on my 375H&H. Plenty of give in that stock and the H&H is a delight to shoot.

I know what you mean about aged eye sight. Mine ain't what is use to be.

 

[shootist~]

Interesting. I would have though the Boyds stocks to be on the heavier side.

Rob - Yeah, the '06 with 180s would likely be near my limit, recoil wise. At least for serious practice. The last one I shot was a pussy cat, but I only shot some 150 grain practice loads.

 

[Rob404]

Interesting. I would have though the Boyds stocks to be on the heavier side.

Rob - Yeah, the '06 with 180s would likely be near my limit, recoil wise. At least for serious practice. The last one I shot was a pussy cat, but I only shot some 150 grain practice loads.

Maybe it's because some of the older Remington seem to have a little more drop that makes it a little more comfortable. I also use a slip on recoil pad to give me some addl length of pull as well as absorb some of the recoil

 

[rookhawk]

I've been thinking about this cartridge for quite a few Months,,I don't Know what draws me to these not so common Calibers Maybe I just want something someone else doesn't have or perhaps there are some kind of caliber or a Ballistic gap but the caliber intrigues me,it's a step up from my other wildcat 338-06 and less than my 375HH so It will fill a niche,also the parent cartridge is an 06 that needs to be open up to accept the 35 cal. Anyway after quite a few searches with no results except buying new I decided maybe the typical Savage Barrel swap was the only way to go until I spotted a Ruger in 35 Whelen at a Cabelas in Colorado, but I was a day late and the Ruger was Sold, however the guy in the Gun library said the customer swapped in an old Remington also in 35 Whelen so after looking at a few Pics of the Remington I managed to work out a deal and Bought the Remington. It needs the stock re-finished but thats a project I can do over the cold Minnesota winter, heres a Picture of the old guy which serial# shows built in 1982 I believeView attachment 159596

Congrats, @Rob404 It's a wonderful caliber. I think our delusions of long range shots have taken very practical calibers out of fashion, the close work 35 whelen being an example. (and the 9x57, and the 9.3x57, and the 35 remington, and the 375 winchester)

A nice low power scope would make that 35 whelen a great north american companion for you under most circumstances from 25 yards to 175 yards. The fact that it is no longer a wildcat with properly marked brass available is an extra win.

Thanks for sharing and congrats!

 

[rookhawk]

Now that just put me over the hump.

RECOIL Question (hopefully from actual experience):
I need to cut back on "perceived" recoil by about 20% compared to my 338 Win Mag (sans brake), to meet my personal threshold. Will the 35 Whelen get me there?

The 338 WM is ~8.5 pounds unloaded. Ammo is TTSX 185s at 2,900 fps (3,452 ft lbs); and 210s at 2,781 fps (3,606 ft lbs). (My perceived recoil difference - with and without muzzle brake - on the 338 WM is about 20%).

Anticaped 35 Whelen load is a 225 grain (NP or A-Frame) at 2,550 fps, (3,249 ft lbs). This would be a bushveld load, btw. Target weight for the scoped 35W is 8.5 to 9 pounds. A 200 gr TTSX at ~2,750fps is also a possible.

Free recoil tables seem to indicate my target could be met, but I've never fired a 35 Whelen.

@shootist~ you are on the right track. what you'll need a fellow RSA handloader to suggest is what powder to use to reduce recoil. You just need a powder that uses less grains to achieve equal velocity and the recoil will reduce. Same for your 338. I just don't know which Somchem or other brand of powder that would be in RSA.

In the states for example, people will swap from say H4831 to RL15 / RL19 on compatible recipes to significantly reduce recoil at similar velocities. I don't know the global powder offerings and similar examples to guide you, but your goal is achievable.

 

[Rule 303]

Interesting. I would have though the Boyds stocks to be on the heavier side.

Rob - Yeah, the '06 with 180s would likely be near my limit, recoil wise. At least for serious practice. The last one I shot was a pussy cat, but I only shot some 150 grain practice loads.

Boyds stocks are laminated so use lighter timbers and the fore-end is hollow.
I use 56grains of BM8208 (IMR8208XBR) I use to use AR2206h and AR2208 (Varget or IMR4064) I find the faster powders better suited to the Whelen.

 

[bruce moulds]

the whelen is considered by some to be a short range cartridge, and while it is not a 7mm stw it has a longer point blank range than some would think.
also if brass is not readily available, I pass of 30/06 over an expander will have you shooting.
bruce.

 

[shootist~]

I tried calling Montana Rifle Company late in the business day today (a Friday), but no answer. Guess they were already headed to Happy Hour or the range, ( I don't blame them one bit).

Just wanted to see if a 35 Whelen is a viable option in their Standard American ( and if a slightly heavier contour barrel Vs their #2 could be done to add a little weight). Credit card was Not in hand. LOL

Rookhawk - I know the mass of the powder charge is part of the recoil equation, but no idea how significant it is. Guess I need to look it up. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

[Ridgewalker]

Shootist- plug the numbers in this formula only changing the grains of powder. That will give you an idea of how it changes recoil.

http://www.jbmballistics.com/cgi-bin/jbmrecoil-5.1.cgi

Good luck!

 

[rookhawk]

Rookhawk - I know the mass of the powder charge is part of the recoil equation, but no idea how significant it is. Guess I need to look it up. Thanks for the suggestion.

It’s a variable in the equation, along with weight of gun, bullet weight, and velocity. All other variables being equal, less powder at similar velocities is less recoil.

 

[rookhawk]

Rough math. Same velocity, 4895 with 59.5gr or rl15 with 54.5gr. One pound less recoil with rl15.

 

[shootist~]

Shootist- plug the numbers in this formula only changing the grains of powder. That will give you an idea of how it changes recoil.

http://www.jbmballistics.com/cgi-bin/jbmrecoil-5.1.cgi

Good luck!

Great link! JMB Ballistics - where this amateur ballistition started some years ago.

The biggie is rifle weight. One pound increase [9 lbs Vs 8 lbs] = 3.0 foot pounds, or 12.7% in my scenario.

Then lower bullet weight, even allowing for increased V (200 gr at 2,750 fps Vs 225 at 2,650 fps) = 2.8 ft lbs = 11.8% (8.9 lb rifle

Then Powder Charge (max between IMR4064 VS RL15 [200 Gr TTSX @ 57.5 gr Vs 57.5 gr] = 0.7 ft lbs or 2.8%. 8.5 Lb rifle for both.

But just looking at the Recoil Energy math for going from 338 WM, 185 gr at 2,900 fps - to 35 Whelen 200 gr at 2,750 fps, is only about 2.8 favorable foot pounds, or ~ 10%.

 

[Rule 303]

Great link! JMB Ballistics - where this amateur ballistition started some years ago.

The biggie is rifle weight. One pound increase [9 lbs Vs 8 lbs] = 3.0 foot pounds, or 12.7% in my scenario.

Then lower bullet weight, even allowing for increased V (200 gr at 2,750 fps Vs 225 at 2,650 fps) = 2.8 ft lbs = 11.8% (8.9 lb rifle

Then Powder Charge (max between IMR4064 VS RL15 [200 Gr TTSX @ 57.5 gr Vs 57.5 gr] = 0.7 ft lbs or 2.8%. 8.5 Lb rifle for both.

But just looking at the Recoil Energy math for going from 338 WM, 185 gr at 2,900 fps - to 35 Whelen 200 gr at 2,750 fps, is only about 2.8 favorable foot pounds, or ~ 10%.

Remember the above is a guide only . I maintain stock shape and composition has more to do with felt recoil ( and it is felt recoil we really are talking about) then weight within sensible limits. That is an 8lb rifle compared to 1 or 2 lbs above or below. Sure if you add five pounds then weight alone will make a big difference.

Example. Remington and Ruger factory stocks kick me more than Boyds stocks of the same weight. My Rem 700 ADL 375H&H with a plastic stock kicks way less than my CZ550 in 274H&H that was 2 lb heavier. The plastic stock of the ADL has a lot of give in it. Both shoot as well as each other.

 

[Ridgewalker]

Rule 303, I agree about the composition and shape of the stock. I shot a buddies beautiful Parker Hale in 270 Win once that beat me up every time I pulled the trigger. Another buddy had a 280 in a Winchester Mdl 70 which was an easy recoiler.
Basically the same weight, but the shape of the Parker Hale just made it kick harder IMO.

 

[shootist~]

..........

If I get a favorable response from Montana Rifle Company about availability in their wood stocked American, (sent them an email a couple of days ago), that could be another. They note online that Non Standard Calibers are an option.

No response at all from MRC to an email through their system. No response to a voice mail I left, either. Second (or third?) call and still no human answering the phone. You would think that a simple "Thanks, but no we cannot do a 35 Whelen at this time" would have been a better option.

I shoot my Tikka T3X 6.5 CM really well from the sticks. Thinking at this point that I'll get the T3X "Hunter" version (wood stocked and a little heavier) in 30-06.
Then debate on having it re-bored to 35W (or not) at some point down the line.

 

[Rule 303]

Rule 303, I agree about the composition and shape of the stock. I shot a buddies beautiful Parker Hale in 270 Win once that beat me up every time I pulled the trigger. Another buddy had a 280 in a Winchester Mdl 70 which was an easy recoiler.
Basically the same weight, but the shape of the Parker Hale just made it kick harder IMO.

I believe you. A mate had one of those and he put over a pound of lead into the stock to tame it down a bit. Became a very heavy and unwieldy rifle.

 

[sgt_zim]

No response at all from MRC to an email through their system. No response to a voice mail I left, either. Second (or third?) call and still no human answering the phone. You would think that a simple "Thanks, but no we cannot do a 35 Whelen at this time" would have been a better option.

I shoot my Tikka T3X 6.5 CM really well from the sticks. Thinking at this point that I'll get the T3X "Hunter" version (wood stocked and a little heavier) in 30-06.
Then debate on having it re-bored to 35W (or not) at some point down the line.

As much as I like my T3X in 6.5x55, it would be way easier to rebarrel a Savage (not to mention cheaper). And in any case, you can call their custom shop and see what the upcharge would be. I'm betting it's not more than a couple hundred above MSRP.

As far as MRC, I've corresponded with them on non-standard calibers. I don't recall the exact number, but it seems as though the up-charge for non-standard caliber is only about $250, give or take a little. I'd reach out to Ron directly here @Montana Rifle Company .

Also, hunting season in Montana kicked off about 3 weeks ago. They may be running a little light at the moment considering their location at the edge of a lot of good public hunting in NW Montana.

 

[Wade J VanGinkel]

Just read the entire thread. Great information.
My Whelen is a Ruger Hawkeye with a leupold vx3 3.5x10 set up with a brake and a Boyd's stock.
I'm unable to reload for the foreseeable future and the only factory load I've found that shoots to near moa is the barnes 180ttsx. Also the federal 225tbbc but those can be very difficult to find at times.
For those with experience would the 180ttsx be too light for African plains game? Wildabeest, zebra and such?
I've taken 1 whitetail deer, 1 pronghorn doe, 1 bull moose and.....a Turkey with it.
I also shoot a Sako AV .300 win mag but the current scope is a 6x18 and feel that might be too high magnification for potential closer shots.
And I know the Simms rubber vibration thing is ugly as sin but was trying everything to get better groups.