There was a fellow who has an entire sight on the internet dedicated to the .35 rifle calibers. I can't remember the name of it, and my searches are getting me nowhere fast. Anyone know the sight that I am referring to? Thanks for your help. Gary

Gary,
Is it this one?

www.35cal.com/

Cheers...
Con

Con, Thanks! This is the one. Gary

great site! lots of good info, shame it doesnt seem to have been updated in some time however

I just found this one on the 338-06 vs. whelen while doing a search.

http://www.quarterbore.com/lib.../articles/33806.html

33806whelen,

Sorry, I'm not buying it. All things being equal, (preasure, barrel length, bullet weight) the 35whelen wins the race.

Yentna,

At first I thought that also.
For some reason, the manuals I have looked in don't show the 35w being loaded to as high a pressure as the 338-06. Not sure what the saami specs are for each. I would think they should be the same given they are both on the same cartridge.

I think the downrange energy figures can be explained by the Ballistic coefficients of the longer slimmer, more aerodynamic bullets in the 338 caliber. it's not uncommon for a longer slimmer bullet to outlast a bigger slug, energy wise, downrange. It's just physics.

Looking in the barnes #3 manual a 35 whelen sporting a 225 grain slug (bc405)starting out at 2600fps still has 1716 lb.feet of energy left @300yds.

the 338-06 225 flat base (bc 482) @2400 (rounded down 150fps, as there were no loads actually leaving the barrel at 2600, nor was there a 2500 Fps table)still shows the 338-06 with 1800 lbft. energy left @300 yds.

If I had rounded up 50fps, to 2600, the tables show the 338 bullet would still have 2143 lb.feet of energy left @ 300 yds.

Both were flat base bullets, so there was no slight aerodynamic edge to either round there.

The only difference that gave the 338 the edge in my estimation would have been the aero shape of the bullet with the higher BC.

I don't have a ballistics calculator, but I would like to run the numbers through a program.

I'll see if I can find one on their website.

I have to side with Steve on this , but first I would like to make a couple of comments. Just refering to one source may not give you the whole story when comparing two similar calibres.One may have a "fast barrel" the may not. That could change the muzzle vel by 100 fps either way. Take a look at a variety of bullets ,not just one weight. No doubt the 225 gr is kind of a sweet spot for the 338 cal so that may favour the 338/06. also check out the 250 gr bullets and you will find the 35 Whelan handles them very well. The heavier 338 slugs will also start creeping into valuable powder space more than the 35 cal bullets of equal weight. Some of the information contained in "some " comparisons is often quite dated. In several articles I have read concerning the 30-06 Ackley imp and 35 Whelan loads often used military brass. Military brass had thicker case walls and held two or three grains less powder than a Winchester case would hold. So a 30-06 Imp using a military case ends up with approx the same capacity as a std 30-06 Win brand case. No wonder velocities were the same. Like Steve has already said If you use similar components and load to equal pressures the 358 cal will best the 338.

snowman

The data I listed shows winchester brass for the 338 and RP brass for the 35. The winchester is well known for thicker brass. RP brass in the 338 would have attained higher velocities I believe.

yes, the heavier bullet will have more retained energy as long as the B.C. is optimal.

I'll never sell my 35 whelen, I love both cartridges! I have my eye on a NIB original 700 rem classic in 35w right now.

33806 Don't dally too long. I just missed a 700 Classic that was used but in VG cond. They are a nice rifle and you don't find them that often.

In my experiance, 30-06 win cases have always had more vol. than rem. cases

I don't ever remember a winchester case of any kind having more case capacity in any caliber. Winchester brass is the thickest brass you can buy in my experience and most articles I have read. Some people treat it like military brass and load accordingly.

quote:

Originally posted by 33806whelen:
I don't ever remember a Winchester case of any kind having more case capacity in any caliber. Winchester brass is the thickest brass you can buy in my experience and most articles I have read. Some people treat it like military brass and load accordingly.

The November, 2008, issue of Rifle magazine had an article on the 308 cartridge. A sidebar compared cases: Federal, Remington, Winchester and LC. The Remington and Winchester had nearly identical capacities, but the Winchester brass was 10gr. lighter. The Federal was heavier than both but had the least capacity. The LC was heaviest and had the most capacity.

33806whelen,

Well you got me thinking and I had to go check for myself. The only rifle that I use both rem and win brass for is my 35 Brown Whelen. The rem cases are 35 Whelen and the win cases are 30-06. Both were fire formed and resized. The rem case neck was 0.010 longer than the win case.

Rem.
case-198.8 gr dry / 72.7 water

Win.
case-194.9 gr dry / 72.6 water

This shows me that they have the same volume and I had thought for years that the Win. case held 3+gr more.
I've been working with some pretty heavy loads of H4350 in this rifle and have been able to get 2gr more in the Win. case but I can't explain why. I just thought they had a slightly larger volume.
If any one can explain this? I just don't get it.
Thanks guys, it was a fun experiment and I learned something. You got to love this forum.

what are the case dimesnion size differences of the 2 cases? the whelen body blown is longer and has a tighter shoulder.

I am showing a length at the shoulder of 2.032 on the whelen, and 2.111 on the 06. I don't know what the % difference is but I would bet the o6 has even more capacity due to that shapre difference.

The 35 brown Whelen is a cat. The 35 Whelen (Rem. brass) and the 30-06 (Win. brass) are donor cases I use to form my 35 Brown Whelen brass. Once this process is done the cases have the same outside dimensions except the neck length is slightly shorter on the Win. 30-06 cases. What ever their dimensions were before being formed in my chamber really shouldn't matter. I guess if I had used Rem. 30-06 cases rather than 35 Whelen cases the numbers might have been different.
I'll be working up some new loads with 310 woodleighs and 250 nos/par in the next few weeks. Just put a new 24" Douglas on her and I'm starting over.

Many years ago i was spending a lot of time on the Alaska peninsula, Kodiak and surrounding islands hunting brown bear. I wanted to build my self a DG rifle for brush hunting those bears. After a lot of testing i came to compareing the 338-06 to the 350 Rem. Mag. in a Ruger 77... (the 350 Mag. gives same velocity as the Whelen)

Anyway, after shooting several big animals with both over a couple year peroid, it was clear that when using 250 grain and heavier bullets the 338-06 was the winner. That's when both of my 350 Mags went down the road, and i built a second .338-o6...

I settled on the 250 NP and 275 Speer as my most fav bullet... The 275 Speer was matched perfectly to the 06 case, and gave the penetration with good expansion that i wanted on big bears.

Today, there are many more bullet choises in 35 cal. than there were when i did my testing... I think "if" the right choises were made today, i doubt there's much difference between how the cartridges perform on big game...

I just don't understand those light bullets guys are trying to use in bigger calibers today, just to get the velocity up... All that's going to do is get you more wounded big game when they don't give the proper penetration on the bigger animals...

DM

33806whelen,

Ballistic calculator-
http://www.biggameinfo.com/

JD338

JD, thanks!

35 whelen:250 grain bullet
Max Point blank range is 257 yds when zeroed at 218yds

200 -4.6 9 2215 2723 79.10 0.251 3.3 6 1019
338-06: 250 grain bullet

Max Point blank range is 247 yds when zeroed at 210 yds
200 -5.1 10 2136 2533 76.29 0.262 3.1 6 914

yeah, pretty much a dead heat