There was an good article in Sports Afield about the 35 Whelan. I am thinking of building one on a model 70 action. I am interested in any opinions on this caliber. It sounds like a nice medium bore that can do many things.

Jim

I've got one built on a 1948 model model 70. Shilen barrel, open sights, and QR bases with a 1.5-4.5 Monarch. Nice rifle. Gow tih a 12 or 14" twist, a #3 contour (shilen) with a 1.15" shank. Better yet, get a #2 pac-nor CM (1.15" shank), that would be even better...

I shoot mostly Hornady 200 SP and Nosler 225s BT. Accurate and powerful.

Very good caliber for elk, deer, boar, moose. Recoil isn't excessive and terminal ballistixs are good...

John

quote:

Originally posted by gal:
There was an good article in Sports Afield about the 35 Whelan. I am thinking of building one on a model 70 action. I am interested in any opinions on this caliber. It sounds like a nice medium bore that can do many things.

Jim

A .35 Whelen is an awesome caliber. Mine has two elk to it's blood list. Mine is based on a 1938 CZ-24 Mauser with a cheapey A&B 1/14" twist barrel. I love the caliber, as you can see in my sig. If you are building one, order "at least" a 1/14", but I personally would get a 1/12" twist if given the choice.

Remington's CDL has a 1/16" twist, which is almost usless for HEAVY bullets at extended ranges like a 250 or a slammin' 270 grainer. It's "best" with a 225 grainer.

BTW, before you think that the .35 Whelen is a short range "brush caliber", one of our two elk was bowled over at 275 yards by a 225 gr. Barnes X bullet!!!

Whelen not Whelan.

quote:

Whelen not Whelan.

Build a better cartridge based rifle.. a 338/06.. and then you won't have to worry about someone hassling you about the spelling of your rifle's cartridge... Plus you'll have a better rifle, having better availability of components...

But I am sure you knew that!

cheers
seafire

Jim..the Whelen is an interesting and useful cartridge..I built one on a VZ24 and mine has a cheapo A&B barrel on it too. It shoots really well with the bullets that I have tried from 180gr pistol bullets up thru 250gr Hornady spitzers. Accuracy is excellent.

If you want one go for it! The 338-06 is a good round too, and I built one of them as well in the AI version. So far it has not done anything that I would consider a significant improvement over my Whelen. They both shoot very well, and kill stuff really dead!

Zeeriverrat

Seafire, in addition to Whelen/Whelan there are all the guys who call it a muzzle break rather than a muzzle brake. And Griffen, Grifin, Grifon instead of Griffin (and Howe).

quote:

Originally posted by seafire/B17G:

quote:

Whelen not Whelan.

Build a better cartridge based rifle.. a 338/06.. and then you won't have to worry about someone hassling you about the spelling of your rifle's cartridge... Plus you'll have a better rifle, having better availability of components...

But I am sure you knew that!

cheers
seafire

Yup.....well said

Some people work with their hands and can't spell sometimes. But not all the time.

Gal, I wrote that article in Sports Afield and stand by everything I said. By all means, build a Whelen on a pre-'64 Mod 70 or (even better) a Mauser, and let me know how it goes.

Stuff it, seafire.

Interboat. I too read your article, i think it's one of the best I've seen on the Whelen in one hell of a long time.
Regarding my opinions on the .35 Whelen, well they're farly well known. My remington 700 and Ruger 77 both have that idiotic 1 in 16" twist. What were they thinking, or should it be smoking? My other Whelen is a custom job that I picked up from an estate sale. I has a 1 in 14" twist. Very nice rifle. As I understand it, the guy had it built for his wife and she preferred lighter loads with 200 gr. bullets.
I have a fourth Whelen in the planning stage. Actually, the plans are set, it's the gathering up of the money to put it into the production stage that is the holdup.
The action is a Husqvarna 640 FN Moauser style 98 action, the stock will be a Butler Creek synthetic, scope undecided as yet but will be a 3X with decent eye relief. barrel will be 23" (might as well be different) with a 1 in 12" twist. That last part is non-negotiable.
The Whelen was designed to be a heavy game rifle using bullets ranging from 250 to 300 grains. I still have a few 275 gr. Hornady bullets that were discontinued in 1967. When I contacted Hornady, they were pretty emphatic that they would not make any more. More's the pity.
I have a couple of internet pen pals who use the .35 Whelen for moose and grizzly bear using strictly the 250 gr. Speer Hot-core.
Interboat. I see you're in Arizona. If you get down to Tucson way,let me know and maybe we can share a burger and have a cup or two.
Paul B.

I'm very happy with my 35 Whelen. It worked perfectly in Africa and perferctly on elk or deer.

I will never use Speer 250's again, only time I've had no kidding bullet failure. I'd stick to Nosler Partitions, I prefer the 250s, even in my 1 in 16 twist Ruger. I'm sure the 225s would be fine.

That said I have a 9.3 X 62 for my next trip to Africa. I have a friend that has a 338/06 that works very well.

Either a 338/06, a 35 Whelen or a 9.3 X 62 will serve you very well.

Paul B, will do. I'm in Flagstaff. My email should be in my profile if you're up this way. -Bob

I have been using the .35 Whelen now for about 6 years. I bought my 700 Classic for a plains game hunt in Zim. It was absolutely perfect for the hunt, even the PH said that it was all the .375 H&H was in that context. Eight animals with 8 shots. I went there with 60 rounds of ammo and came home with 48, what with a couple of sighters and letting the PH take a crack at a distant baboon.

Here in N. America, I have used the Whelen on deer, black bear and moose. All of these also just needing one shot. I did have a 225 grain Sierra BT shed its jacket on a small black bear, so no more Sierras for anything bigger than deer for me!

quote:

Either a 338/06, a 35 Whelen or a 9.3 X 62 will serve you very well.

Ditto that thought.

The 35 Whelen is a great cartridge and fits the bill nicely as an all-around rifle.

I read a lot of talk of heavier bullets for this cartridge, and I have tried many of them, but IMO if you try the 225 gr Barnes TSX you will realize that the additional weight bullets are not required.

Good Shooting,
BigBullet

Not for nothin, but the 1903 is the classic 35 whelen action. Mine is on an 1903A3. I did the .338-06 on a persian mauser. That's right, I just ripped that beutiful classic pristine mauser to pieces. The pre-64 model 70 has too high of a price tag for my limited budget. It should make a great rifle that will be loved.


A rose by any other name is still a rose.

quote:

Originally posted by interboat:
Gal, I wrote that article in Sports Afield and stand by everything I said. By all means, build a Whelen on a pre-'64 Mod 70 or (even better) a Mauser, and let me know how it goes.

interboat,

I enjoyed that article very much! I just wish it had been longer! I think you also wrote the "Life Begins at 35" article for The Accurate Rifle magazine. (Note to others: That magazine has since ceased publication.) I enjoyed that one too. In the "Life Begins at 35" article, I think you made some excellent points about the usefulness and utility of the medium bores such as the .35 Whelen, 9.3x62 and the .375 H&H. I own all three of those plus the .338 Win Mag. All are excellent cartridges. Good to see you getting published in Sports Afield. I look forward to more articles by you.

-Bob F.

Hunter Montana? I have had exellent success with the .358 Speer 250 for years? Has Speer
changed the design? New production bullets
that gave you problems?

quote:

Originally posted by gal:
There was an good article in Sports Afield about the 35 Whelan. I am thinking of building one on a model 70 action. I am interested in any opinions on this caliber. It sounds like a nice medium bore that can do many things.

Jim

Jim,

If you want a .35 Whelen then do it! It's a great cartridge that has been getting the job done for a long time. I own both a .35 Whelen and a 9.3x62. I like them both. Many posters here love to debate the .35 Whelen vs. the 9.3x62 and compare the two cartridges. Actually, I think the .35 Whelen compares more closely to the 9x57 Mauser than to the 9.3x62 when comparing the .35 Whelen to the German cartridges. The 9x57 Mauser (also a .35 caliber cartridge) fired a 247 gr bullet at 2296 fps according to my Mauser inter-war catalog reprint. British Kynoch ammo for the 9x57 listed a 245 gr bullet at 2150 fps. The 9x57 appeared before World War I and had a good reputation on game.

Also, the .350 Rigby Magnum had an excellent reputation back in the "good ol' days". It fired a .35 caliber 225 gr bullet at 2625 fps (original Kynoch ballistics). The .35 Whelen easily duplicates those ballistics.

Some articles from African Hunter magazine that you may enjoy reading:

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

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

The 9.3x62 Mauser
http://www.african-hunter.com/the_9_3_x_62_mauser.htm
(The 9.3x62 was not really a Mauser designed cartridge. It was a standard chambering offered by Mauser in their sporter rifles.)

If you want a mild-mannered, non-magnum medium bore then the .338-06, the .35 Whelen and the 9.3x62 are all excellent choices. You really won't go wrong with any of them. If you're partial to the .35 Whelen, then do it!

And, if you like a little history and nostalgia associated with your cartridges as I do, then the .35 Whelen has that also.

From Griffin & Howe's web site:

http://www.griffinhowe.com/history.cfm
In April of 1923 Col. Whelen suggested to Seymour Griffin that he could improve his custom rifles by joining forces with someone who was an accomplished metal worker. The person that Whelen recommended was James V. Howe, who was the foreman of the machine shop at the Frankford Arsenal in Philadelphia, and who had in 1922 designed the .35 Whelen cartridge (a 30-'06 case necked up to accept a .35 caliber bullet). In May of 1923 Seymour Griffin got together with James V. Howe, Col. Townsend Whelen, James M. Holsworth, and James L. Gerry; and Griffin & Howe was born.

My two cents....
-Bob F.

quote:

Stuff it, seafire.

Bob F. - thanks for the compliments. - Bob B.

kk alaska, I bought the box of Speers locally and loaded them up last spring, I have no idea if they were "old production or new production".

Regardin the failure: One of the several shots I stuck into a bull elk at under 75 yards broke the shoulder but failed to penatrate into the rib cage. Upon boning out the bull I found the jacket, and a bit of the core. The last shot, that finally put him away, was fired at about 15 yards straight on into the chest head on. It failed to penatrate completely into the gut and appeared to have disintegrated. Since at similar ranges I've had complete penatration with 250 Nosler Partitions and two killing shots failed to put him away I'd say that the Speers failed.

gal:

I am not a Whelen "Expert", but I have been shooting it since 1970 or 71. I have been using 250 grain Speer Hot Cores, and 225 grain Ballistic tips on elk, here in Arizona. So far my Whelen has taken 6 elk with the bullets posted above, and they have all been one shot kills. The ballistic tip stayed together better than the hotcore, but a dead one shot kill, is a dead one shot kill.

My Whelen is twisted 1/16, and it shoots the 250 grainers into 3 shot groups under an inch, at about 2625fps. The 225 Ballistic tips, are right at 2700fps, and about the same groups as the Speers. What a great cartridge it is!

Now as to our friends Seafire and Vapodog, they are infected with some strange malady, and I haven't figured it out yet. I built a 338-06, and it just could not perform with the Whelen. I had better groups, and higher vels, with equal bullet weights in the Whelen. Guys are carring those 338-06's around with 28" barrels trying to get the same vels I get with a 24".As I said the 338/06 guys have a sickness, it is called envy for their favorite just isn't as good as the venerable, tried and true, Whelen.

Build one!

Regards

Jerry

quote:

In April of 1923 Col. Whelen suggested to Seymour Griffin that he could improve his custom rifles by joining forces with someone who was an accomplished metal worker. The person that Whelen recommended was James V. Howe, who was the foreman of the machine shop at the Frankford Arsenal in Philadelphia, and who had in 1922 designed the .35 Whelen cartridge (a 30-'06 case necked up to accept a .35 caliber bullet). In May of 1923 Seymour Griffin got together with James V. Howe, Col. Townsend Whelen, James M. Holsworth, and James L. Gerry; and Griffin & Howe was born.

All the Whelen cartridges, .375, .400 and .35 were all designed by Whelen.

Townsend Whelen's involvement in the creation of the .35 Whelen cartridge has been debated for years. However, in his book The Hunting Rifle, Townsend Whelen gives sole credit for the creation and development of the .35 Whelen cartridge to James Howe. (When I get home from work, I will look up the quote from the book and post it here.)

The Hunting Rifle
Townsend Whelen
published by Stackpole and Co., Harrisburg, PA, 1940.

I'm not as well versed on the history of the .375 Whelen. However, this is what http://www.reloadbench.com/ says about the cartridge:

"The 375 Whelen, also known as the 375-06, is another cartridge that was not developed by the late Col. Townsend Whelen, but was named in his honor. The cartridge was actually the work of the late gunsmith and writer L.R. "Bob" Wallack in 1951 and is based on the 30-06 case necked up."
http://www.reloadbench.com/cartridges/w375whel.html

-Bob F.

interboat Excellent article on the 35 Whelen. I really enjoyed it. I just wish you had put a side bar article on the rifle shown in the article. What a beauty.

The .375 (.38 Whelen) was developed by Whelen in 1919 with the help of Fred Adolph and A. O. Niedner. The outline of this cartridge is a letter from Whelen to Adolph dated August 23, 1919. (copy in my collection)
I would be happy to scan and send a copy of the letter.
Niedner made rifles in this caliber until Winchester discontinued the 275 grain bullet they were using.

The .400 Whelen was developed by Whelen with the help of both A.O. Niedner and James V. Howe.

The .35 Whelen was developed and introduced to the public by Whelen in an article dated September, 15, 1923 in The American Rifleman. “American Heavy Caliber Rifles for Large Game†“The .35 Whelenâ€.

Speaking about both the .400 & .35 Whelen “I have had lots of pleasure in developing these two cartridges and the rifles for themâ€

Of course Whelen did not do the work himself but he paid people like Niedner and Howe to make the rifles.

I'd love to see the article. Is there a link to it? If not, which SA issue was it in?

The 35 Whelen has been my favorite hunting cartridge foe several years now. I own a 7600 that I bout new in the early 90s chanbered in 35 whelen. And have a MAuser with 23" douglas barrel w/ 1:12 twist being made now.

It truly hits like teh hammer of Thor, dropping almost all game I have shot with it where they stand. And I have never needed more than 1 shot on the deer & black bears I have taken with the round.

Regarding the 35Whelen and heavy projectiles. A few weeks back I ran a quick test using a friend's Rem700 35Whelen (1:16") and the 310gr Woodleigh. The 310gr Woodleigh seated to the cannelure projects into the case and sits even with the base of the shoulder, which is not too bad. It looks impressive! This rifle is sighted for 200gr projectiles and using the 310gr the rifle shot MUCH lower on target at 100m, but it was accurate (1.5MOA and we werent looking for accuracy). Shooting at 200m, one projectile hole in a 5 shot group seemed out of round to me which raised my suspicions regarding the 1:16" twist. When we get back to it, the same rifle and load will be resighted for 200m and then given a run at 275m to see whether the projectile is stabilised. Personally, after playing with the Whelen and 310gr, I have no real desire for a 9.3x62... and certainly not a 338/06
Cheers...
Con
PS: Should add that oddly, the rifle was more comfortable to shoot with the 310gr load then its regular 200gr at 2650fps loading. We guesstimated (Chrony battery was flat) the 310gr Woodleigh (48gr H4895: mild in this rifle) as being somewhere in the 2100fps range...???

I have several 35s, from 358 Win to 358 Norma Mag. All have 1:16 twist bores and I have never had a problem stabilzing 250 spitzers, even in the little 358 Win at less than 2300 fps, which is the only load we hunt with in this rifle.

As far as the Speer 250 spitzer, I have used it a lot on big game for more than 35 years and NEVER had a failure. Moose, both bears, caribou, usually it's just one shot and the work begins.

Ted

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Petrov:
...<snip>......
The .35 Whelen was developed and introduced to the public by Whelen in an article dated September, 15, 1923 in The American Rifleman. “American Heavy Caliber Rifles for Large Game†“The .35 Whelenâ€.

Speaking about both the .400 & .35 Whelen “I have had lots of pleasure in developing these two cartridges and the rifles for themâ€

Of course Whelen did not do the work himself but he paid people like Niedner and Howe to make the rifles.

Michael,

I have read references to the American Rifleman article dated from 1923 in articles about the .35 Whelen by such writers as Ken Waters. However, I have never read the original American Rifleman article myself. Ken Waters gave some extensive background in one of his articles about the history of the .35 Whelen but he never mentioned Townsend's book The Hunting Rifle.

However, 17 years after the American Rifleman article Townsend Whelen stated the following in his book The Hunting Rifle (published by Stackpole and Co., Harrisburg, PA, 1940). I have added highlights to the text.

------------------------------------------
In 1922 Mr. James V. Howe and the writer developed the .400 Whelen cartridge. This cartridge was constructed by taking the .30-06 cartridge before the case had been necked at all and necking it down to .40 caliber, and then utilizing existing 300 and 350 grain bullets. The idea was to produce a cartridge for those lovers of large bores and heavy bullets that could be handled successfully by the existing Springfield, Winchester and Remington bolt actions. As originally developed, with cases necked down very accurately in dies made by Mr. Howe, the cartridge was very effective. But when we came to produce cartridge cases in quantity it was found that the slight shoulder on the case could not be formed with sufficient exactitude in quantity production, and positive and accurate headspacing could not be assured. From the standpoint of quantity production the .400 Whelen cartridge was a failure, and has now become obsolete.

About the time we completed the development of this cartridge I went on a long hunting trip into the Northwest, and when I returned Mr. Howe showed me another cartridge which he had developed by exactly the same means and for the same purpose. The .30-06 cartridge was necked to .35 caliber to use existing .35 caliber bullets of 200, 250 and 275 grains weight, the latter being a special bullet made by the Western Tool & Copper Works and since discontinued. Mr. Howe asked my permission to call this cartridge the “.35 Whelen,†but he alone deserves credit for its development. This cartridge did prove a success from the start, and in a quiet way it has proved successful ever since. At its best it is loaded with one of the 250 gain soft point or open point bullets designed for the .35 Winchester cartridge. A moderate and sensible powder charge is 56 grains of du Pont I.M.R. No. 4064 powder, which in a 24 inch barrel gives a muzzle velocity of approximately 2500 f.s.
------------------------------------------

I will add that Ken Howell, in the Nosler Reloading Guide #5, agrees with the origin of the .35 Whelen as expressed by Townsend Whelen in the text I have quoted above.

Now, I offer this not to be argumentative but in the spirit of a friendly discussion and to exchange information.

Sincerely,
-Bob F.

Bob:

That is a very interesting post, about Whelen and Howe, etc. What is really amazing to me, I have been shooting 56 grains of 4064 since the early 1970's. I had no idea that was Whelen's recommendation, it just turned out to be the most accurate in my rifle. Col Whelen had something though, as my best friends 35 Whelen likes 55.9 grains of 4064. Vels in our rifles though, are over 2600fps.

Jerry

[/QUOTE] Michael,

I have read references to the American Rifleman article dated from 1923 in articles about the .35 Whelen by such writers as Ken Waters. However, I have never read the original American Rifleman article myself. [/QUOTE]

Please check your email, a copy sent.

Michael,

I got the email and attachments. Thanks for sending them! Very interesting.

I guess no one will ever know the exact, complete story about Whelen and Howe and the .35 Whelen. As you know, Whelen himself has made some contraditory statements about his involvement. But, we do know for sure that Whelen and Howe worked together on at least two cartridges and that Howe certainly, at least, played a big part in the development of the .35 Whelen.

BTW: I just ordered your book. I'm looking forward to reading it.

Thanks again,
-Bob F.

Michael,

How did the load testing on your 400 Whelen turn out?

Using H4895, I'm able to get 2500fps with a 300 grain Northfork bullet out of my 40/06

Snapper

I thought the Whelan was a cartridge not a caliber. Its a great one.

Thinking of dumping my 338 mag for one.

quote:

Originally posted by Snapper:
Michael,

How did the load testing on your 400 Whelen turn out?

Using H4895, I'm able to get 2500fps with a 300 grain Northfork bullet out of my 40/06

Snapper

Wonderful, I could not be happier with the results, if you will send me your email I’ll send you a copy of my write-up on it.