I have a long action laying around and am considering one of the above stated rounds for my next build. I should point out that this will be mainly for target and fun shooting with whitetail deer being the largest game it will ever hunt. I will also be reloading for whatever round I pick in the end. So far I can see some neat features of each which makes deciding on one difficult. The 338 would have the best bullet selection, the 35 would be able to use some pistol bullets for reduced loads, and the 9.3 would just be darn right cool. That being said, which one would you pick and why?

I already have. The .35 Whelen times three.
Paul B.

Me too... only I bought a ready made CZ in 9.3x62...like a Whelen on steriods...

Get something that uses American brass. Something that bullets aren't $40 + something dollars a hundred. If you want a 35 Whelen on steriods + 358 STA is the answer.

quote:

Originally posted by Jay Johnson:
Get something that uses American brass. Something that bullets aren't $40 + something dollars a hundred. If you want a 35 Whelen on steriods + 358 STA is the answer.

Well then the 9.3x62 is for you. Grafs has their own brass, they an american company. They sell Prvi Partizan bullets for $19 a hundred. Don't let you bias cloud your vision.

My vote would be for either the .338-06 or 9.3x62. I like the 338 bullet selection but like the diameter and mass of the available 9.3 bullets as well as its slightly larger powder capacity. In the end, they are all damn near interchangable in terms of performance.

The 9.3x62 has a little more history, other than that, they are all great rounds. It is one a round that has .30-06 recoil and .375 power. How's that for a combination? I don't understand building a custom rifle and choosing a caliber based on what bullets cost. If that's a deciding factor, go buy a Ruger 77 in .30-06 and hunt with it. This one won't kill any more game, it is all about style.

the only measurable difference in the 3 is the bore diameter.. and if you are going to africa, the 9,3 makes caliber requirements for large heavy game.

all excellent rounds
jeffe

Have you thrown a look at the .375 Hawk?

Here's some loading data:

220 Hornady Alliant RL-15 62.0 2,776

220 Hornady Alliant RL-15 63.0 2,763

235 Speer Hodgdon H-4895 61.0 2,836
235 Speer Alliant RL-15 62.0 2,708
235 Speer Alliant RL-12 59.0 2,606
250 Swift A-Frame Hodgdon H-4895 58.0 2,560
250 Swift A-Frame IMR IMR-4320 58.0 2,690
260 Nosler Partition Accurate Arms AAC-2015 56.0 2,677
Remarks:hot
260 Nosler Partition Accurate Arms AAC-2495 57.0 2,531

270 Hornady roundnose Hodgdon H-4895 57.0 2,529

270 Hornady roundnose Hodgdon H-4895 58.0 2,540 to 2,585

270 Hornady roundnose Accurate Arms AAC-2495 56.0 2,384

270 Hornady SS Hodgdon H-4895 58.0 2,552
270 Hornady SS Accurate Arms AAC-2495 56.0 2,452
270 Hornady SS Alliant RL-15 58.0 2,515

300 Hornady Hodgdon H-4895 56.0 2,385 to 2,420
300 Hornady Accurate Arms AAC-2495 55.0 2,358
300 Hornady IMR IMR-4320 55.0 2,346
300 Hornady Accurate Arms AAC-2015 53.5 2,380

300 Hornady Alliant RL-15 56.0 2,397
Remarks: very good

how bout the 358 hawk for pistol bullets and more powerfull than the 9,3, whelen and 338-06...

of the three you picked the 338-06 gets my vote

I´d say 9.3x62 -it´s a classy and very versatile round, I´ve personally shot everything from a crow to an eland with it and it always works.

Easy decision for me. 338-06, I own three of them.

quote:

I should point out that this will be mainly for target and fun shooting with whitetail deer being the largest game it will ever hunt.

The 338-06 makes a lot of sense if it is mostly for target/deer. Might as well go for the smallest. Mine have worked extremely well on deer. Buy a bunch of cup and jacket 200gr bullets for plinking. Those same bullets will also work great on deer. I've found the controlled expansion bullets (210gr Nosler Part. and Barnes TSX) are too tough for deer size game in the 338 caliber.

I've always felt that if I wanted to shoot pistol bullets, I would shoot a pistol.

If you want bigger, go with the 9.3. With that being said, the 338-06 will take care of anything except buffalo, elephant and rhino. Then I would probably opt for something bigger than 9.3.

Not much of a 35 caliber fan. Don't know why, just doesn't interest me.

There is not as big a selection of bullets in 9.3 as the others but there is all that you need. Here is something that no one else has mentioned: The 9.3 bullets have superior ballistic coeficients to 338 and .35 caliber bullets, with more rtained energy down range. And you can use the big game bullets for small game hunting, if you want to, just fine...Rusty.

Normally I would recommend the .35 Whelen as I am in love with that caliber, BUT, you mentioned TARGET SHOOTING. Therefore, get a .338-06. There are several .338 cal. bullet offerings for target style bullets from Sierra and Hornady.

I would opt for the 9.3. It has the coolness factor and there is just something exciting about trying to get a "hunting accurate" round to shoot target accuracy.

I have a .338-06 so I am partial. As already stated, bullet selection is great for the .338 and I only shoot pistol bullets in my pistols (ok, 300gr in my .404j). The 9.3x62 is a very good round & a good choice if you ever think you may go to Africa some day. The 35Whelen has never gotten my attention but also a good round.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
the only measurable difference in the 3 is the bore diameter.. and if you are going to africa, the 9,3 makes caliber requirements for large heavy game.

all excellent rounds
jeffe

Actually the 9.3 x 62 has a bit more powder capacity.

since I have so many bullets available for my .338's the logical chamber for me was the .338-06 in the Mod. 70
cool pic.

I like the 9.3x62 or the .338 winnie...........I am not one for the .338-06 no reason just think you may as well have the win mag.

9.3x62
If thats not your first choice then reconsider the options and plump for a 9.3x62.

I have all three and love them. I really don't have a preference other than sentimentalism--I have killed more stuff with the Whelen. My two favorite cartridges are it and the 7mm-08. I got the .338-06 because of Elmer's .333OHK, and the 9.3x62 because it is just an awesome round with killing power out of proportion to its size.

The article said, "Calibre Weight SD Velocity Momentum KOV
.35 Whelen 250 gr .279 2,350 83.9 23.4
9.3 x 62 mm 286 gr .305 2,350 96.0 29.3
Percentage better 9.3% 14.4 % 25.2%"

What unmitigated horsepuckey! Even the underloaded Remington factory 250 gr. bullet is closer to 2400 FPS and proper handload easily reach 2500 to 2550 FPS. Hornady used to make a 275 gr. bullet that would reach 2300 FPS, not all that far below what the article said the 286 gr. 9.3 bullet did.I think that with the proper powder, that 275 gr. bullet could easily reach 2350 FPS in safety and then the so call advantage of the 9.3 just might not be all the great. It's too bad Hornady dropped that bullet from production in 1967.
It's too bad the .35 Whelen is so badly handicapped by Remington's idiocy in using too slow a twist, thus preventing the Whelen from handling the heavier bullets above 250 gr. A pox on Ruger for following suit.
Paul B.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul B:
The article said, "Calibre Weight SD Velocity Momentum KOV
.35 Whelen 250 gr .279 2,350 83.9 23.4
9.3 x 62 mm 286 gr .305 2,350 96.0 29.3
Percentage better 9.3% 14.4 % 25.2%"

What unmitigated horsepuckey! Even the underloaded Remington factory 250 gr. bullet is closer to 2400 FPS and proper handload easily reach 2500 to 2550 FPS. Hornady used to make a 275 gr. bullet that would reach 2300 FPS, not all that far below what the article said the 286 gr. 9.3 bullet did.I think that with the proper powder, that 275 gr. bullet could easily reach 2350 FPS in safety and then the so call advantage of the 9.3 just might not be all the great. It's too bad Hornady dropped that bullet from production in 1967.
It's too bad the .35 Whelen is so badly handicapped by Remington's idiocy in using too slow a twist, thus preventing the Whelen from handling the heavier bullets above 250 gr. A pox on Ruger for following suit.
Paul B.

I's too bad you won't accept the fact that the 9.3x62 is better than the Whelen.

quote:

's too bad you won't accept the fact that the 9.3x62 is better than the Whelen. Big Grin

Here's an interesting thread on the 9.3 X 62 as a varmint rifle

I'd build a 35Whelen ... easier all round. Pistol projectiles are great fun on the range when plinking. Just make sure you get a 1:12" twist barrel for the option of shooting the heaviest .35 projectiles.
Cheers...
Con

From the Barnes manual,
With 250 gr:
.338-06 max load at 2448 fps
.35 Whelen max load at 2586 fps
9.3x32 max load at 2644 fps

Personally I picked the .35 Whelen (my custom Whelen on a stainless Ruger M77 II is in the mail as we speak ). Plenty of bullets available, plenty of power for larger North American game and brass are easily available. But if you look at the above numbers, the performance is VERY similar.

Z1R. What I took offense at is if one compare a 250 gr. bullet in one cartridge, vs a 286 gr. bullet in another cartridge, and the declare the cartridge with the heavier bullet the better of the two, then that is out and out bullshit.
Now if that comparison had used either a 275 to 300 gr. bullet in the Whelen, loader properly to it's full potential vs the 9.3x62 loaded likewise, I wouldn't even argue the point. The 9.3 would have the edge, albeit slight. The comparison that was given was like comparion a Ford Escort against a Ford GT, apples and oranges.
My point is, a 275 gr. bullet from the Whelen at 2350 FPS vs a 286 gr. bullet from the 9.3 at what. 2400 something FPS, the difference in energy and bullet diameter wouldn't amount to a hill of beans at where the animal being shot is. Probably at the range most animals would be shot with either would be short enough that gain, not much difference.
I believe that if both cartridges are shooting bullets of near or similar weights at velocities at or near the same, there just isn't enough of a difference to count. I don't belielve in foot pounds of energy, or KO figures or pounds feet. I believe in using the right bullet for the animal in question; one that will penetrate to the vitals and "Tech the life" as the old mountain men used to say. If it penetrates enough to come out the other side, so much the better.
Paul B.

His largest game is deer, and will use it mostly on the range. All 3 rounds will be more than enough powerful, and be as accurate as you can shoot.

If plinking is your game, go with a Whelen and cheap handgun bullets. It is also an American Classic.

If accuracy and longer ranges are your fancy, go with the .338-06 and its selection of match bullets.

Your only reason to go with the 9,3x62 is if you really, really want one, and does not mind its more expensive components.

quote:

Originally posted by oldun:
9.3x62
If thats not your first choice then reconsider the options and plump for a 9.3x62.

Take a 9.3 x 62 and neck it up to .375 (good bullet selection, Barnes Manuel) and push a 250 gr Gameking bullet @ 2,700 fps with no pressure.

Standing broadside shot at 360 yds and bullet exits off side with no problem.

Call it a 375 Scovill!

all three will do what you intend to do. the diferences aren't that big of a deal. a little $$$ here, a little selection there. so.....do the down right cool thing.....9.3x62

Get a .35 Whelen like mine I just got it back two days ago.

Does that stock have a wide forearm? Whats the full details on the rifle? Sweet rig indeed.

Yeah, it kinda does. It's a Hogue pillar bedded stock. The rifle is a Ruger M77 MKII with a 22" Bevan King, 1:14 twist barrel. Went to the range to test some loads today and got .5" 3 shot groups with 250gr Speer HC and GS.

Get a Whelen. There's a bazillion bullets you can shoot in it (.38 Spec./357 Mag). Yeah, and I'm partial (See pictures below and signature.)
BOTH brought to you by a 35 Whelen...

To me this is the foolish 270, 280, 30-06 argument that is often brought up at hunting camps. Certainly all will suffice in journeyman fashion. However I would and did choose the 9.3X62 over the others for the same reason I like the 30-06. It has that little bit extra when and if needed. Bigger hole and heavier bullets if needed.Lighter, faster bullets for most every thing else

If you're NEVER going to Africa and NEVER going to hunt animals that bite back (like bear) ... they're all fine!

If you MIGHT do either of the above two things, the 9,3x62 MIGHT just have a little advantage.

I choose the 9,3x62 as the middle rifle between the .338 Win Mag and the dangerous game calibers (.375 H&H and .416) because it would (and did) go to Africa. The rifle is light and handy and works like the Hammer of Thor. I could not be happier with the results achieved.

I really don't think you can go wrong with any of the three given your expected use. Do what makes you happy and enjoy it!