I did a bit of reviewing of John Taylor's African Rifles And Cartridges (1948) yesterday. He has extremely high praise for the .350 Rigby Magnum as a mediium caliber for plains game and, to a lesser degree, big game.
It has a rather plain, .30-06 looking case. It's loaded with a semi pointed 225 grain .35 caliber soft point @ 2,600 fps.
OOOPs, I just described the .35 Whelen!

Rich Elliott

Rich Elliott

I remember reading an article on the .350 Rigby Magnum a few years ago and the author made cases from .375 H&H brass. After turning the belts off, apparently the case head diameter is very close.

But, today the "poor man's" .350 Rigby is a .35 Whelen. It's strange that Rigby (ICI/Kynoch) never loaded the .350 Rigby Magnum (Rimless) with any bullet heavier than 225 grains.

-Bob F.

Cartridges of the World has a good write-up on the .350 Rigby Magnum. As I recall, at one point you could get 250 grain heads in retail cartridges. Yes, the Rigby Magnum is very similar to the .35 Whelen.
The original was the rimmed 400/350 that used a 310 grain head, deemed of too mortar-like a trajectory as the smokeless powder era advanced. So Rigby put a lighter head in for its new post-turn of the century, double rifles, the .350 Rigby No. 2, a flanged cartridge using the 225 grain head. I've got such a double, made by Gibbs made in the early 1920s and am delighted with it. At about the same time (ca. 1910?) Rigby brought out the bolt version rimless cartridge. It works very well indeed, as Taylor correctly observed, because of the quality of Rigby ammo of the day, likely including good enough sectional density.
Cases are easy to come by now, both rimless and flanged, Ken Stewart in South Africa makes them. So do Bertrams. Believe Kynamco makes loaded ammo. Regards, Tim

I might be wrong, but I'm guessing the .350 Rigby Magnum preceeds the .35 Whelan.

Again a copy of an earlier cartridge.

Yepp,
The .358 Norma Magnum is closer (and a little bit more) to the .350 Rigby than the .35 Whelen are.

Husky

NitroX

Are you referring to some cartridge used by your old mate Hermann

358 Norma is perhaps the easiest 35 caliber to get cases for today since 7mm rem 300 win or 338 win can be reformed.

Dieter Horneber makes brass for 350 Rigby http://www.huelsen-horneber.de/frame_engl.html

Cheers
/ JOHAN

The .358 Norma Mag is probably closer in case capacity to the .350 Rigby. However, the .35 Whelen (or the .350 Rem Mag) matches the original .350 Rigby Mag ballistics of a 225 gr bullet at 2600 fps. Of course, with modern powders, the .350 Rigby could probably be loaded up to higher velocities than it's original ballistics.

-Bob F.

quote:

Originally posted by NitroX:
I might be wrong, but I'm guessing the .350 Rigby Magnum preceeds the .35 Whelan.

Again a copy of an earlier cartridge.

Yep, the .350 Rigby Magnum preceeded the .35 Whelen. No doubt about it! But, the ol' .35 Whelen has been around for a while. BTW: I wonder how many here have heard of the .35 Griffin & Howe Magnum (aka the .350 G&H Magnum).



"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."

"In 1925 Griffin & Howe introduced its .35 Griffin & Howe Magnum caliber, which was based on the Holland & Holland .375 case."

http://www.griffinhowe.com/history.cfm

-Bob F.

Sorry for hijacking your thread guys, but that old .318wr picture got me thinking. (Not good). That .318 had a great reputation as a plains game round. Now I know that the new 325wsm has come in for a fair bit of flack recently, generally under the heading of "what's it good for that my .338wm..(fill in as required)... can't do". This is obviously true.

But if a guy didn't already own a medium magnum, and wanted a step up in power from the .270 / 7mm class of round most of us hunt deer with, then why not a .325wsm? My thoughts are that the .325wsm would make a near perfect plains game round, performing at least as well as that old .318wr

Anyway, that's one mental tangent off my mind for another day.

Regards

Nothing wrong with the .325 WSM ballistically. I'm just not a fan of the short/fat case. Admittedly, I do not own a WSM and I have no first hand experience with one. I've just read too many comments about feeding problems with some of the WSM rifles for me to be interested in one. To each his own....

Going with the standard heavy bullets for each cartridge, the .318 W-R fires a 250 gr bullet at 2400 fps. (BTW: The .318 W-R uses a .330" diameter bullet.) The .325 WSM shoots a 220 gr bullet at a listed 2840 fps. So, the .325 WSM is really closer to a .338 Win Mag (no surprise) than to the .318 W-R or the .338-06 or .35 Whelen.

Now, if the .325 WSM case could handle it (short neck, deep seating, throat, etc.) I'd think about loading up some 250 gr 8mm Woodleighs in the .325 WSM to around 2600-2700 fps (that's a guess). That would make a good plains game load for the bushveld. (250 gr 8mm Woodleigh RN: sectional density = .342; recommended impact velocity 1900-2700 fps)

The 8x60 Mauser, 8x64 Brenneke, and 8x68 have been killing game in Africa for quite some time. The .325 WSM will do the same.

From Woodleigh's 2005 catalog:


http://www.woodleighbullets.com.au/

-Bob F.

I would rather go for the .333 Jeffery.
The WSM case is more or less a copy of the Rimless .333 Jeffery case

Husky

Rich Elliot,

Having used my 35 Whelen on 2 plains game safaris with 225 gr BX, I beleive it to be nearly ideal for an all-around medium bore. Of course no match to the 375 H&H, but no slough either. I feel the 35 Whelen is an excellent balance of bullet velocity, bullet weight,and recoil out to 300 yards.

I'm planning on taking my 35 back to Limpopo province for blue wildebeest and bushbuck come August. Last year I took mountain reedbuck to waterbuck with the rifle and was impressed by its versitility.

If you read a bit further in Taylors work, he mentioned the 350 Rigby was even good for buffalo with the 310 gr bullets at velocitys that can be attained with the 35 Whelen. Again there are better choices for the big stuff, but for plains game it is a good choice.

BigBullet

Why should we be surprised that the .35 Whelen and the .350 Rigby are ballistic siblings? As a ballistics maven, TW was quite familiar with the British calibers and with their propensity to throuw heavy slugs at moderate velocities. In those days of iron sights, 200 yards was a long shot. He and Howe were playing with the .400 and the '06 case when TW went on leave. I would be surprised if TW and JH hadn't discussed other options to mimic British calibers. Given the new powders that had been developed between 1908 (the .350's introduction) and 1922, he and Howe both knew that the .350's ballistics could be duplicated with the '06's slightly lesser case volume. Howe probably got tired of the problems with the .400 and it's diminutive shoulder so decided to make something British-ish with fewer loading problems.

.

ALF,

No argument from me about that. But, as I stated above, the .35 Whelen matches the original .350 Rigby Mag ballistics (ICI/Kynoch loadings) of a 225 gr bullet at 2600 fps. Of course with modern powders the .350 Rigby could probably be loaded up to higher velocities than it's original ballistics.

-Bob F.

.

I suspect that you can get more than that out of the .350 RM. My 35W puts a 250 gr out at a bit more than 2600, so with the greater case capacity, the RM will do better. Does a 35 caliber 250 grain bullet kill better at 2700 than it does at 2600?

A nice little article about the .350 Rigby Magnum:

http://www.sahunt.co.za/sahunter/reload/350magnumrigby.html

Some handloading data included (but only with South African powders).

And there is also a nice safari report right here on Accurate Reloading where a .350 Rigby Magnum was used!!

http://www.accuratereloading.com/frsafari.html


F.R. used his 350 Rigby Magnum, made by Rigby's in 1953. He used a load with the Woodleigh 250 grain soft point bullet, and 70 grains of IMR 4350. This load has a muzzle velocity of 2475 fps.

-Bob F.

ALF,

If I may add another $0.02 here. I believe you may be getting caught up in the magnum mania thing. Besides, that is supposed to be a yank stereotype.

The 350 Rigby was enough (as oppossed to more then enough)for the plains game and all around plains game rifle. If the 350 was enough as loaded in the mid-20th century and unless the animals are more bullet resistent today, similar ballistics and with todays superior bullet design, then these velocities are enough today. That is what we are comparing.

Can you get more out of the 350 Rigby with modern powders?, of course and I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise. But what does that increased velocity (and recoil) really get you on a general plains game hunt with shots within 300 yards. It is my opinion it buys very little. And that is the beauty of the balance and the 35 Whelen caliber it is enough for any plains game without being too much.

If you want additional juice, I would step up to the 375 H&H. Now you can step up to larger game also.

BigBullet

Just thought you fellows that missed these photos of my .350 Rigby on another forum might enjoy them. I've tried to get some history about my rifle from California Rigby, as they have the original ledgers, but, after a year and a half, no joy forthcoming. Alf was able to date the action to, I believe, to 1903 or so.

[url="http://www.hunt101.com/?p=242345&c=500&z=1"] [/url]

[url="http://www.hunt101.com/?p=242342&c=500&z=1"] [/url]

When I had a Dakota 76 LH action and Lilja barrel in .375 H&H mated, my British gunsmith chose to copy a .350 Rigby magnum stock as most suitable. It's my only bolt gun and is truly alive. Recoil is negligible (muzzle blast from the 23 inch barrel is noticeable, but that is so with the .375) and the handling is superb for one of those Peter Paul Mauser inelegant and noisy monstrosities...
Regards, Tim

.

Joe: That is a beautiful rifle. Do you shoot it?

Well now. I read the two articles that BFaucett posted links to. Sure looks like .35 Whelen vewlocities (or less) to me. Probably with one of those loooong British barrels too.

Rich Elliott

I read both articles too.

I always wonder why various writers always declare the old published velocities 'optimistic' when they run 80 year old ammo through their chrony.

Does it never occur to them that the ammo is antique? And perhaps, unlike fine wine, it does not improve with age?


.

quote:

Yep, the .350 Rigby Magnum preceeded the .35 Whelen. No doubt about it! But, the ol' .35 Whelen has been around for a while. BTW: I wonder how many here have heard of the .35 Griffin & Howe Magnum (aka the .350 G&H Magnum).

I have a 350 G & H in my cartridge collection
its to bad it is not chambered today I would shoot it.