I am not seeking to bash the 9.3x62. I would just like to know what factors got you guys to choose it over say, the 35 Whelen? I want to learn from you decision making process.

I went the other way and chose the Whelen, better bullet selection and brass availability.

I try to look beyond simple ballistics and appreciate what went into the development of a particular cartridge.

The 9.3x62 was the result of a search for the most powerful cartridge that would fit into a standard 98, without having to modify the magazine, rails or bolt face.

The .35 Whelan was the result of trying to use up surplus .30-06 brass and .35 Remington bullets. Not much effort there.

I chose both. The Whelen has a wider assortment of ligheter bullets (180-250), the 9.3 has a better assortment of heavier bullets (250-320). Thus, they can coexist quite peacfully in the same battery. A Whelen with a good quality 225 and a 9.3 with a good quality 286, and , if I may continue, a 338-06 with a good quality 210...

the whelen was actually created to give people an option of a close-to 375H&H performance level in a rifle more affordable to the average hunter. the m70 in 375 pretty much negated the need but up to that point the only rifles available in that round were quite expensive by american sportsmens life styles. as such it was a resounding success and much better on grizzlies, elk, moose and what have you than anything else in the same price range. and the original loads weren't developed w/ 35 remington bullets but - and i believe was in an article by keith i can't find right now - a long obsolete western tool and copper works bullet in either 250 or 275 grains.

9.3x62, Can you give us a little info in the recoil comparison between the 9.3 and the Whelen?
Thanks

I don't have either one, but if I were to choose it would be the 35Whelen for me. Reason is that I don't reload, and Whelen ammo is more
readily available, and cheaper.

For North american hunting I do not see that much difference. For Africa the larger bore, heavier bullet [286 gr], and the higher SD of the 9,3 make it better there.

Thanks for the info!

I'd say both cartridges are pretty much identical but built to suit different markets. The 9.3 is seen as an African type heavy bullet launcher (285/293gr), whilst the Whelen is a lighter bullet (more velocity!!) launcher (200/225/250gr). The 9.3 will throw a 231gr pretty quick, but when was the last time you saw someone ask about reloading this bullet weight on an AR forum? Likewise, how many requests are made for a 300gr load in the Whelen? Remington using a 1:16" twist on their barrels also pretty much cemented the Whelen's image of a lighter bullet cartridge. If I had to choose between the two then the 35Whelen seems more practical, particularly with a 1:12" twist barrel. Having said that, I'm building a 358Win instead, and leaving the heavy bullet chores to the 375H&H. In the coming months though I'll be testing a 35Whelen (Rem BDL) to see if it will stabilise a Woodleigh 300gr, likewise in the 358Win with a 1:14" barrel.
Cheers...
Con

in identical rifles if you can tell the difference in recoil between a whelen and a 9.3x62 you're spending way too much time thinking abt recoil and not enough thinking abt sight picture, aiming, and trigger control. the whelen is likely a little easier to deal with ammo wise but i'd say the 9.3x62 is more "interesting" and probably a shade better ballistically but a dead animal couldn't tell the difference.

the 1st mauser i ever completed (2nd started bu t 1st finished) was a yugo 24/47 in 358 winchester. this was during the great post 68 mauser drought and i desparately wanted a whelen. came into this and was a shock to me to learn not all mausers were standard length. so it ended up a 358 instead. wasn't "exactly what i wanted" and like an idiot sold it. have loooooong regretted that. the 358 win can come pretty close to the original 400/350 rigby. is a way underappreciated ctg.

I have been having this debate with myself for the last couple of months or so. For me, the 9.3x62 has very strong appeal-exotic, images of Africa, etc. However. Practicality reigns, and in my particular instance I can get a good .35 barrel for almost half the price of the 9.3..... That, plus the fact that I'll never go to Africa, made the decision for me. "Need" does not really enter the picture. Got a safe full of perfectly adequate rifles for the type of hunting I do, I just wanted something between the 30's and the 45's.... The current quandry is what barrel length/twist to chose. I -think- I have setteled on 22"/14 twist...

If you have any desire to play with the heavyweight .35 slugs 270 gr and up , get the 1 in 12 twist........

quote:

And in my particular instance I can get a good .35 barrel for almost half the price of the 9.3.....

Where do you buy 35 caliber barrels? Douglas, Pac-nor, Lilja, Lothar-Walther, and Krieger all make 9.3 barrels - I just bought a CM blank from pac-nor for $165. I'm not sure I'd want a barrel that was half that price.

quote:

Originally posted by sdgunslinger:
If you have any desire to play with the heavyweight .35 slugs 270 gr and up , get the 1 in 12 twist........

I've shot plenty of 280 A-frames from a 1-14" and they stabilize just fine. BTW, a 1-14" in 9.3 will also stabilize its range of bullet weights.

quote:

Originally posted by steve4102:
9.3x62, Can you give us a little info in the recoil comparison between the 9.3 and the Whelen?
Thanks

Bot rifles are on the same action and stock. However, I normally shoot 200s and 225 from the Whelen and 250s and 286s from the 9.3. Recoil is a touch more from the 9.3 - noticeable from the bench, but not while hunting.

I have a 35 Whelen and a 338-06 and I like the latter better. I use 210 grain NP in the 338-06 but my next project will be 338-06 AI to better use heavier bullets, probably 250 grain A-frames or maybe 230 grain FailSafes. Just my .02.

I've had them both. They do the same job -- getting more power than a 30-06 or 8x57 into a standard action with a 5-shot magazine. But there is very little 35 Whelen ammo in Africa or Europe and very little 9.3x62 ammo in the US (until recently).

The obvious answer is to have both so you can wallow in the glory that is the medium bore rifle.

Hope this helps, Okie John.

Personally I can't see a reason to choose a .35Whellan over the 9.3x62mm.

Both have cases that can be made from the .30-06 although you do loose a little potential capacity on the 9.3x62mm.

The old excuse that the .35 has a better range of bullets is true, but just how many types of bullets does a caliber need? The 9.3 can be loaded from 231 grn to 320grn; thats versitile indeed!. In its primary loadings of 250 grn to 286grn you have bullets from about 10 major companies including many premium hight quality ones...you can also get proper solids too...With todays use of mail order, I don't think its an issue anymore..

In the US, factory ammo is probably harder to get in the 9.3x62mm, but how many companies currently load for the .35whellen and just how available really is it? Certainly not as common as the 30-06 or .270..

Who currently chambers the .35Whellen in a factory gun? Again I don't think it could be described as "common"..In the US, the 9.3x62 is of course available in the CZ550 and perhaps on special order from one or two other European makers???

Pete , if you like to be able to pick up your compenents over the counter , the .35 is far more practical in the USA . There are also a few boxes of factory ammo sitting on the shelves in most larger gun shops , while I have yet to see one box of 9.3 . In addition , while you CAN make 9.3 cases from 06 , I wouldn't see trying to blow the shoulder forward as a very practical solution . 06 cases go to Whelen with a single pass thru your die .

9.3x62.....have you tried the 310 gr Woodlieghs in your 1 in 14 twist ?
I just don't see the downside to making sure your twist is adequate when you have the chance to pick and choose. Why is the .375 H&H standard at 1 in 12 ?

quote:

Originally posted by KurtC:
The .35 Whelan was the result of trying to use up surplus .30-06 brass and .35 Remington bullets. Not much effort there.

Sir, you are incorrect. The 35 Whelen was a very efficient method of giving American hunters a hard hitting cartridge that would fit in the standard M1903 action w/o modification of any kind at a time when the only other alternative was the 375 H&H in expensive, imported rifles.

You seem to disparage American rifle and ammo developments only because they weren't done by Europeans.

SD:

I've shot the 320 Woodleighs RN from a 14" and they worked just fine. Why anyone would bother with this bullet in a 9.3 is a bit puzzling to me, but nevertheless... I've also shot 280 A-frames from a 1-16" Whelen, and they also worked just fine. Most 416s are 14" or 15", and many 458s and 460s are 16".

I think people often look only at SD to determine twist, but this does not appear to be correct. The 107 243 has an SD of about 0.260 and that NEEDS an 8" twist. Yet, a 1-16" twist 460 WM will stabilize a 600 gr barnes with SD of about 0.410. I think a more direct measure the ratio of bullet length to bullet diameter (LD ratio). Based on this measure, it seems more clear how twist and caliber may relate, here are a few figures:

107gr Sierra 243 (8" twist)
SD = 0.260, LD = 5.55

195 Barnes 7mm (10" twist)
SD = .345, LD = 4.8

320 Woodleigh 9.3mm (14" twist)
SD = 0.345, LD = 3.75

600 Barnes 458 (16" twist)
SD = 0.410, LD = 3.77

and so on...

I can't think of any reason not to go with a Whelen. Especially on a Mauser action!!

NO NO NO... (shaking head)...

Whelen on an '03 Springfield, 9.3x62 on a mauser. That's the correct etiquette.

Though I should hardly talk, one of my 9.3x62s is on a PF action with a stainless barrel and a plastic stock! That is true blasphemy...

I really like the idea of a mid range cartridge for use in heavier woods. So when I started looking for a less expensive rifle the two choices were going to be .35 Whelen and the 9.3x62.

Happened into a 9.3x62 at an amazing price, so I bought that. It went to RSA and took Impala, Warthog, Blue Wildebeast, Kudu, and Zebra. Very, very effective ... all pass throughs. Has worked equally well on deer and pigs. That rifle has earned a permanent home.

Would a .35 Whelen have done the job as well. I really don't doubt it. Is a choice between the two easy? Depends on how you look at it. It's easy in that you can't screw up! Both are great cartridges. It's tough if you want to work exhaust of the comparative logic. That probably isn't worth it.

I'd probably limit the comparison to a couple of issues:

1) a) Cost ... what can I afford?
b) What is available at lesser cost?
2) Am I going to take heavier game where higher bullet weight might be important?
3) If building, what action will I use? (.35 Whelen would be very appropriate for a Springfield, 9.3 for a Mauser.)

This is a small decision ... make it and enjoy the rifle ... which ever you choose!

For me a 35 Whelen would have to be a custom job, whereas a CZ in 9.3x62 with only a litle work would be fine.

quote:

Originally posted by Old Elk Hunter:
I am not seeking to bash the 9.3x62. I would just like to know what factors got you guys to choose it over say, the 35 Whelen? I want to learn from you decision making process.

Olk Elk Hunter,

The 9.3 x 62 has a glorious and well deserved reputation in Africa for almost a century. The best African (and Australian) hunter I know (not said lightly) states it's his favorite caliber. Why?... It can drive fairly heavy fairly large diameter bullets straight and deep in the world's big Buff. The straight is important here as you have asked the difference between the old "queen" and the newer .35 Whelen. The simple answer is:

The .35 Whelen has a bullet eight thousandths of an inch smaller. (NO REAL DIFFERENCE)

The .35 Whelen almost without exception has too slow a twist! (THIS IS THE DIFFERENCE!

Before anyone tells me about their 1 in 14", 1 in 16"twist .35 Whelen shooting heavy bullets great...... Tell me how straight they go through a Cape Buff or an Asian or Aussie Buff, even one of our own bison (front to back) as the African game laws continue to tighten on smaller calibers...... The real test! The test the 9.3 x 62 cut its teeth on.

Can a .35 Whelen equal a 9.3 x 62 then? If we cut through all the nostalga first; ignore the .008" difference in bullet diameter (not a real factor); use comparable heavy premium bullets 286gr or more in weight; and last and the key difference between the two, use a 1 in 10" TWIST in our .35 Whelen........

Then and only then will the answer be YES!

BigRx

quote:

Before anyone tells me about their 1 in 14", 1 in 16"twist .35 Whelen shooting heavy bullets great...... Tell me how straight they go through a Cape Buff or an Asian or Aussie Buff, even one of our own bison (front to back) as the African game laws continue to tighten on smaller calibers...... The real test! The test the 9.3 x 62 cut its teeth on.

The 9.3x62 "cut its teeth" using a 14" twist. The rep the 9.3x62 earned had far more to do with the superior bullets available for it during its day (even better than the 375 caliber bullets of the day), not a 2" difference in barrel twist.

FWIW the .338-06 IMO is far superior to the .35 Whelen and the 9.3 X 62 is legal for Buff hunting and the .35 Whelen isn't.....
Not to poo poo the .35 Whelen.....but it's just a mis fit.....a truly powerful cartridge that's inched out on both ends.....and hence...not an option for my gun cabinet.

Mine is a Pac-Nor 12" twist

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
FWIW the .338-06 IMO is far superior to the .35 Whelen.

Good Lord, what a crock...

.35whelen, 9.3x62 & the .338-06 are all great rigs for just about any NA hunting. My favorite is the .338-06, great bullets flat shooting enough for easy 300yd shots & big enough bullets for even the bigger bears (in a pinch). No flys on the 9,3, I would go that route for a rifle going to Africa or if I lived & hunted in Alaska. For the lower 48, make mine a .338-06.

quote:

Originally posted by Brad:

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
FWIW the .338-06 IMO is far superior to the .35 Whelen.

Good Lord, what a crock...

you hunt with your crock.....I'll hunt with mine

I've had a 338-06 and currently have a 350 RM... please don't try to tell us with a straight face that the 338-06 is "far superior"... that sort of intellectually dishonest demagoguery doesn't cut it...

Vapo, as good as the .338-06 is it's NOT superior, just diff. I would prefer a .35whelen or 9.3 up close especially w/ bignastbiting things, bigger bullets make bigger holes. The .338-06 is a bit better past the 250yd mark. A better balance, IMO, than either for general hunting in NA. Aren't we lucky here in that we have a choice, we can have all three!

This whole .338-06, .35 Whelen, 9.x62 "debate" reminds me of the ".270 Win vs. .280 Rem vs. .30-06" articles that were so popular in gun magazines in the past for so many years. It's all kind of silly.

All three (.338-06, .35 Whelen, 9.x62) are good cartridges. Each has its pros and cons. I've owned and "played with" the .338-06 and the .35 Whelen. I never did hunt with them. I decided that I liked the 9.3x62 best and sold the other two. I'm taking my 9.3x62 to South Africa this coming August; partly for nostalgic reasons and partly because it will work just fine. (Bushveld; plains game only hunt.)

BTW: The .338-06 with a 250gr bullet duplicates the original ballistics of the .318 Westley Richards (.330" diameter bullet). The .35 Whelen with a 225gr bullet duplicates the original ballistics of the .350 Rigby Magnum. I don't think you'll read much "bad press" about the .318 WR and the .350 Rigby from their prime days in Africa. So, in my book, that makes the .338-06 and the .35 Whelen viable African cartridges also.

Just my two cents worth....
-Bob F.

Amen to that Bob !!
The late Finn Aagaard did point out the same fact that the 35 Whelen with a 225 bullet duplicates the 350 Rigby.
John Taylor touted the 350 Rigby as one of the best of the mediums.
And by the way...... my moose / red stag rifle is a Ruger M77 with Shilen barrel in 35 Whelen

Bob,
Interesting you mentioned the 318WR. Was thinking the other night that a cheap Yugo Mauser, thrown into a synthetic stock, rechambered to 8mm/06 and pushing a 250gr Woodleigh would "cheaply" duplicate the 318WR.
Cheers...
Con

the yugo mausers won't be long enough for an 8mm/06 unless you cut away abt 0.20" of the feed ramp and mod the magazine in same manner as opening a standard length mauser for the 375.