Will a 14 inch twist actually stabilise those long 310 grain Woodleighs? By Greenhill calculation a .35 cal bullet that long needs a 13 inch twist, but if anyone out there has given them a try, for instance in a Remington 700 .35 Whelen that comes with 14 inch twist, I'd sure like to hear about it.

And yes, I probably would be better served with a 9,3x62 - I just like .35s ! <grin>

I believe the twist used by Remington and Ruger for their rifles chambered in .35 Whelen is 1-16".



I wish they had standardized the twist rate at 1-12" or at least 1-14".

-Bob F.

quote:

I wish they had standardized the twist rate at 1-12" or at least 1-14".

-Bob F.

You and me both. Methinks somebody at Remington likes to keep their head in a warm dark place.
My choice would be 1 in 12".
Paul B.

Dang, another bubble burst... for some reason I had thought Remington did the 14 inch twist thing. Thanks, Bob, for the straight info!

what was the twist of the 350 rigby barrels of old???
the 35 whelen is the modern 350 rigby soooo...relevent question. yes modern loads of the 350 rigby will exceed the 35 whelen so no need to get flustered

Borderline ... maybe yes, maybe no in a 1:16". I've tried it using a friend's Rem700 35Whelen and all looked good at 100m, but there was a noticeable oval shape to some of the projectile holes at 200m. I think a 1:14" would be okay from a Whelen, I'd prefer a 1:12" though. A 1:14" didn't work in a 358Win ... even at 100m. For a slow traditional 35cal like a 400/350NE a 1:12" is definately needed based on what I saw with the 358Win.
Cheers...
Con
PS: Whilst the 1:16" is borderline for the 310gr Woodleigh soft ... I think it'll more than likely fail with the 310gr Woodleigh FMJ which is even longer. With a 1:12" ... the Whelen is the 9.3x62s equal

Yeah, it sucks that Remington decided to use a 1-16" twist when they made the .35 Whelen a standard factory cartridge back in 1988/89. Ruger just copied them when they made rifles in .35 Whelen.

I have a Rem 700 CDL in .35 Whelen and a CZ 550 in 9.3x62. (I'm just a medium bore junkie. ) The CZ in 9.3x62 has a 1-14" twist. I like both cartridges but with the factory standard twist rates, the 9.3x62 has the edge with heavy (high sectional density; SD = .300+) bullets. A .35 Whelen with a 1-12" twist firing a 275 gr bullet at around 2300-2350 (I'm being conservative here) would certainly come very close to the 286 gr 9.3x62 factory ammo. The original Kynoch ammo velocity for the 9.3x62 was 2250 fps with a 286 gr bullet. That, and the original German ammo that ran about 2175 fps IIRC, is what made the 9.3's reputation in Africa.

I always get a kick out of the .35 Whelen versus 9.3x62 arguments. It's kind of like arguing about the .270 Winchester versus the .280 Remington. Personally, I think the .35 Whelen compares more closely to the 9x57 Mauser (.356", 247 gr bullet at 2300 fps) than to the 9.3x62. IMHO, the .35 Whelen sits midway between them though it's a small niche.

I've read a couple of articles by Finn Aagaard where he had trouble getting 300 gr bullets to stabilize in the Remington 700 Classic in .35 Whelen. It, of course, had a 1-16" twist. Finn's personal .35 Whelen was on a Mauser 98 action (I can't remember which "flavor") with a 1-12" twist barrel. It shot 275, 280 and 300 gr bullets just fine.

The 9x57 Mauser
http://www.african-hunter.com/9x57_mauser.htm

The .35 Whelen in Zimbabwe
http://www.african-hunter.com/35_whelen_in_zim.htm

The 9.3x62 Mauser
http://www.african-hunter.com/the_9_3_x_62_mauser.htm


Cheers!
-Bob F.

Bob,
Wouldn't have a scanned copy of the Finn Aagaard articles woudl you??
As you stated ... the 9.3 has the advantage with heavy bullets, but only bacause of the design compromises imposed on us. The best "solution" would be a 275gr RN in the 35cal useable with 1:16". Email Woodleigh and ask for it!!
Cheers...
Con
PS: The 270Win is definately MUCH better

Double Tap Ammo offers a 35 Whelen load that uses the 310-gr. Woodleigh Soft Pt. I've been awfully tempted to buy a box and try them out but my concern is COL. If their ballistics are to be believed (2600 FPS/3641 ft. lbs. at the muzzle), they must be using a very shallow seating depth.

Either way, it sounds like a heck of a load that would be flat-out nasty on big game.

Con,

Sorry... I don't have any of the articles scanned. I don't own a scanner (I know, I know... they're not that expensive nowadays!) but we have some at work. Give me a few days and maybe I can get one or two of the articles scanned. I sure do miss Finn. I really enjoyed and respected his writing.

I would love a 275 gr Woodleigh RN in .35 caliber!! I don't know if it would work in a 1-16" twist barrel though. You Aussies are very fortunate to have access to Woodleigh bullets without having to pay extra for the shipping costs, etc. (I don't know what Woodleighs cost in Australia but I'm guessing they are less expensive than what we have to pay for them here in the States). I've used the following Woodleigh RN bullets on plains game in South Africa and I really like them: .308" 220 gr in a .30-06, the 8mm 220 gr in an 8x57, and the 9.3mm 286 gr in a 9.3x62. American companies make some really good bullets of course but, IMHO, Woodleigh makes some damn fine bullets!

Oh yeah, BTW.... most everyone knows that the .280 Remington is VASTLY superior to the .270 Winchester!!

Cheers!
-Bob F.

Bob,
Would love those articles if they get scanned ... a great writer sadly missed!! Woodleigh's over here are around AUD$52 per 50 for the bigger stuff and I think about AUD$35 per 50 for the smaller stuff. Geoff would produce a 275gr RN if he had enough interest expressed ... email him ... PLEASE!!! Your thoughts on the 7mmExpress???
Cheers...
Con

My 358STA 1:14 will shoot 310gr bullets

I had a very nice factory Ruger 35 Whelen that was great with 225g slugs. (Why not just use a 30-06 at that point? Just my opinion.) Fine with 250gr, if they were shorter like Speers (Which didn't work worth crap on the elk I shot with them.) but marginal with Nosler partitions and hopeless with Barnes X's. Had a few old Speer 275gr. Not enough to load up and use though, totally hopeless, 4 to 6 inch groups. I tried pushing everything faster, better but still not that great, slower, some didn't hit the target at 200... Best compromise was 250gr NP at 2500 fps for consistant 2 inch + groups. Those worked fine on plains game in Namibia and on elk. Still being very anal about accuracy it just drove me nuts I couldn't get 1 inch groups out of it. Yeah, that overdoing it and all but every other rifle I've owned I managed to get to really shoot or it's out the door.

So, I had a 9.3x62 made up (Yes I could have just had the 35 rebarreled but it was worth more to Ruger collectors and I just WANTED a 9.3x62.), very happy, yes it doesn't really do anything that much better than the 35 did unless you count 3 shot groups with 286gr Partitions that average about 1 inch at 100. Haven't tried 320gr Woodleighs, might be fun sometime. I suspect they'll do fine. The nice thing about this rifle is that if the 286gr NP and Woodleighs are dead on at 100 the 232gr Normas are about 2.5 high and 150fps faster for point and shoot out to about 230yds.

we will now hear closing arguments RE the superiority of the 9,3x62 over the 35 Whelen by HunterMontana. Oops, he already made them.

Rich
DRSS
CZ FS 9,3x62 shooter

Rich,
!!
I suppose on the bright side our 35 vs 9.3 "arguement" (notice I placed the 35 first ) has been polite. Unlike those 45/70 DGR threads My friend with the Rem700 35Whelen is now building a 303/35 on a No4 action for use with 225gr projectiles, after which he plans on rechambering the Whelen to 358Norma. If so, it'll be interesting to see if the extra velocity allows the 310gr Woodleigh to stabilise from the 1:16" barrel.
Cheers...
Con

quote:

Originally posted by Con:
Bob,
... Your thoughts on the 7mmExpress???
Cheers...
Con

.280 Remington... 7mm Express Remington...

"What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet"
--- from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet

-Bob F.

Remington has really screwed up on the twist rate, as far as the old Rigby who cares. The proper twist rate should be 1 in 12" but a 1 in 14" will work for about 95% of the bullets out there. My Whelen has the 1 in 14" and my .358 win has a 1 in 12" !!! At least Browning knows how to twist a barrel. The 1 in 16" rate shold only be used for a .35 Rem

Bfaucet

Hawk bullets makes a 275gr as well as a 300gr .358" bullets in several different jacket thicknes

Thanks, one and all! I think I can c z light now, 9.3 times 62 ways...

Sorry ... I cant seem to Edit the above posting ...

Bob,
Your wish is closer to reality ... mate got an email from Woodleigh suggesting they're busy but may consider a 275gr RN in .35cal. Time to send more emails to them. A 275gr RN should stabilise in a 1:16" and give us more ammunition in the 35Whelen vs 9.3x62 debates.
Cheers...
Con

Con,

Cool news! Thanks for passing that info along.

-Bob F.

I contacted woodleigh years back when I was considering using their 310 gr in my 35 whelen ackley, as to barrel twist. Their response was, 1-12 yes, 1-14 maybe, 1-16 no way. I ended up re-chambering the gun to a 350 rigby, but never got around to trying the 310's. I also fealt that perhaps 275 gr was the most practical heavy bullet, too bad hornady doesn't offer a 275 gr rn. The 1-14 will stabalize at 290 gr cast @ 2000 fps.

Paul,
Email Woodleigh about a 275gr or 270gr .35cal projectile. I think you'll find the response rather pleasing We just had our SHOT show over here about a fortnight ago and I dont think the .35s will be ignored any longer.
Cheers...
Con

Use a 1-12 it will! I have one on my 358 and I love 250 round nose hornady with it. I had a 35 Whelen Remington Classic and it did not like 250's, but would shoot the 225's like a house afire.

505ED