Hey all, I probably have asked this before, thought this time I'd do a poll, see what you all thought.

I have a 1917 Rem. in 35 whelen AI, 26" barrel, balance is fantastic, stock ugly but feels great. had a firing issue last time I shot it (AH 5 years ago!). but I am sure that can be worked out. trying to decide though if that action is wasted, I have an extra springfield I could move the barrel to. hmmmm......and a springfield in 308 norma, which seems to go well with 358 as a pair.....

nothing wrong with what I've got, I just sometimes wonder if I'm wasting that nice big action.

Question:
What would you do given the situation, an enfield and a springfield, 35 cal 26" tube.....

Choices:
Stick with the 35 whelen ai on the enfield
Run the enfield out to 358 Norma Mag
Move the barrel to the springfield and leave whelen ai
move the barrel to the springfield and run to 358 norma

 

..do something nice to yourself atleast once in your life..chamber the 1917 in the .350Rigby rimless..

I'm not sure what problem is solved by rechambering your Enfield to the Norma. Both rounds are the same length, so you won't be "using" any more of your big action. You don't describe the "firing problem", but I can't see how it would be solved by rechambering. If you want to utilize the length of your Enfield, you could rechamber to .358 STW, a longer, more powerful round than the Norma (not that the Norma, or for that matter the Whelen AI, is not already amply powerful for most hunting.) But always be aware that chambering for a belted round will require some action work (bolt face, magazine, etc.) which both costs some money and is irreversable.

sorry, should have been more clear, If I edit now it resets the poll. hopefully guys read this before voiting then.

rechambering the enfield to 358 norma would use the barrel length better i think. moving the barrel to the springfield gives me the enfield for something else.

Red

None of the above.

If you are going to the trouble of rechambering the Enfield to a belted cartridge go with the 358 STA. That way you wouldn't be so close to duplicating the Whelen if you moved it's barrel to the Springfield.

If I move the barrel to the springfield I won't build another 35 on the enfield, I'd go something bigger down the road.

Here's my advice:
1. The Remington 1917 should become a .375 H&H.....and it'll do it nicely!

2. Trash the .35 Whelen AI barrel and

3. install a new .30-06 or .280 Remington barrel on the Springfield.

You're now ready for anything on the planet!

I just don't see how a .358 Norma does much more than the Whelen. The Whelen is proven all across the US and Africa wit the exception of the Big 5. And unless I'm mistaken, the .258 Norma just doesn't get the Big 5 either.

Just me, but I wouldn't change it.

Boy I got confused by all those question, but let me ask; have you considered either a 35 whelen or a 358 norma?

Dago Red ----- I have shot and own everything above the .300 Winny up to the .416 Rigby extensively. I always liked the .358 caliber from a distance, then got the opportunity to buy a .358 STA custom built rifle, then another shortly thereafter. This round is truly awesome, you might give it a look if you want to better the .35 Whelan. My son and I have taken them to the Elk mountains for years, as well as Africa, and find it's uses unlimited. It beats the .358 Norma by enough for it to be flat shooting with even the heavy bullets. If you don't like recoil, stay on the porch. Good shooting.

Don't waste money on more work on something that already functions. Spend your money on what ever you want on the Springfield. Unless you are stuck on an H&H length combo the Springfield will do what ever you need.

I like the idea of the .350 Rigby even though it's about the same as the Whelen. A couple weeks back by chance I saw a 1917 Enfield chambered in .350 Rigby for sale on the used rack. I've been thinking about it ever since.

quote:

Originally posted by maddenwh:
Boy I got confused by all those question, but let me ask; have you considered either a 35 whelen or a 358 norma?

How silly of me...

I meant "questions." not "question." Dope