Now all we need is a factory rifle and brass.

Those are pretty good looking bullets. They were not in my earlier list of GSC bullets, so excuse my misdirection above about a lack.

Anyway, I would walk the forest with one of those 400's.

Would a .416 Whelen be marketable with the more available & popular .416 size bore (I like the .400s myself & Im doing a .405Win in a Lee Speed) ?

You think .005" on a side is a good shoulder?
Maybe yes, maybe not? (I think it would work with a tight chamber, but I'm not sure I want to go there.)

0.416" diameter is just about the point where a wider body is needed.
Taylor works off of a .511" body base (but has a belt anyway), the Ruger off of .532" (no belt, like the Whelens).

Good point, we are pushing it already by some accounts !

quote:

Originally posted by Sarg:
Would a .416 Whelen be marketable with the more available & popular .416 size bore (I like the .400s myself & Im doing a .405Win in a Lee Speed) ?

Mike McCabe told me that he has observed that .470” base cases are mostly being produced a good bit undersized in recent years. This makes minuscule shoulders even more so. The 9.3x62 and 9.3x66 seem like good options for moving up to .416”. Both have .476” base diameters. If you took a 9.3x62 case and fashioned it to 400 Whelen specs, but with a 006” wider shoulder, you could run 416 bullets with about the same amount of headspace as the 400 Whelen. There is an outfit importing 370 Sako (aka 9.3x66) brass. I think this would be the best performance option for a minimum shouldered 416. All that being said, the 400 Whelen seems too good and practical to bother with anything that improves performance so very little.

I built a 416PDK YEARS ago. Using Norma 280 brass necked up to 416. Shoulder forward. Loaned it to a buddy when he moved to Alaska. I've lost count of number of years he has been using it. Never had an issue with headspace. At the time I went 416 because there wasn't many 410 or 411 bullets. But necking up that far was a pain.

Don't see that the 416 gets you much. If the shoulder is blown out I'm having trouble how a smaller base would effect headspace. Reduce the taper yes.

People have headspaced on the case mouth for years. Since it would be a full custom wildcat have the chamber cut to match the brass.

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
I built a 416PDK YEARS ago. Using Norma 280 brass necked up to 416. Shoulder forward. Loaned it to a buddy when he moved to Alaska. I've lost count of number of years he has been using it. Never had an issue with headspace. At the time I went 416 because there wasn't many 410 or 411 bullets. But necking up that far was a pain.

Don't see that the 416 gets you much. If the shoulder is blown out I'm having trouble how a smaller base would effect headspace. Reduce the taper yes.

People have headspaced on the case mouth for years. Since it would be a full custom wildcat have the chamber cut to match the brass.

Yes, I meant minuscule taper. There is an excellent thread on Nitroexpress about the 10.75x57. It seems that folks who reload for the original guns don’t have the headspace issues that the gun writers have mentioned for years. I guess you just have to be more careful not to bump the shoulder back when resizing or making cases. I want one!

So frustrated. It seems my quest for a 400 Whelen is doomed. My fist rifle was a disaster and I just had Kevin Weaver screw me over on a 400 Sako 85 he built me. Does not feed and the magazine only holds 2 rounds instead of the 5 promised. Another gun smith that does not stand behind his work.

Sorry to hear about your frustrations. Question for all. Would not a 9,3x62 be able to feed a 400 Whelen and thus be the best donor gun to start with?

A 9.3x62 Mauser, should feed 400 Whelen . But, you won't know until you do!
I do know that a CZ550 Medium would be a great action to build a 400 Whelen from.
Tell; that's too bad , how in the world did the Sako end up only holding 2 carts in the mag ??
AHR has a good rep and they know their way around CZs.

quote:

Another gun smith that does not stand behind his work.

Although there are a lot of so called gunsmiths out there that this statement applies to Kevin Weaver is not even close to that description.
I will be able to hear the other side of this story. Pretty easy for Rell to run him down when he's not here to tell the other side, somethings fishy when Rell says the Sako 5 round magazine now only holds 2, I'm not buying it.

I still must ask why would you pick a Sako 85 for a platform for a 400 whelen?
If you wanted a stainless rifle Winchester Model 70's and Rugers abound....

He told me it would make a great conversion and that he had done it before. It’s beyond rediculous that he has delivered a dangerous game rifle that is utterly unreliable. Putting out that shoody work can get someone killed. I’m glad you had a better experience but you don’t know the content of someone’s character until they are faced with a hard decision. He was tested and failed utterly.

quote:

the Sako 5 round magazine now only holds 2

?

Please explain?

The shoulder of the Whelen is wider then on a 30-06. It will physically hold 3 but the third one causes the cartridges to tail dive, noise up and they have no chance at all of feeding.

Shoulder of the original G&H is .458. I did one last week. Plenty.

quote:

Originally posted by Rell:
So frustrated. It seems my quest for a 400 Whelen is doomed. My fist rifle was a disaster and I just had Kevin Weaver screw me over on a 400 Sako 85 he built me. Does not feed and the magazine only holds 2 rounds instead of the 5 promised. Another gun smith that does not stand behind his work.

I know nothing about the Sako M85 other than what Sako notes on their website.

That said, as the M85 has a removable magazine perhaps you would be better served ordering a replacement magazine for the 9.3x62 cartridge. Then at least your cartridge base and shoulder diameters will be approximately equal so however many cartridges the 9,3x62 magazine will hold will also accommodate the same with the 400 Whelen.

Of course the 400 Whelen has larger diameter bullet and cartridge neck area so the magazine likely will need to be altered to accommodate those two dimensions.

Another issues is the heavier bullets in 400 the Whelen. The spring for the 9,3x62 magazine will be good for 300gr bullets but may have issues should you use 400gr bullets. There may be a different Sako spring that will alleviate any nose alignment issues with the heavier bullets. or perhaps a 3rd party spring.

Once your magazine issues are resolved, your other feeding issues may also be resolved.

quote:

Originally posted by Rell:
The shoulder of the Whelen is wider then on a 30-06. It will physically hold 3 but the third one causes the cartridges to tail dive, noise up and they have no chance at all of feeding.

I don't know if their are internal cartridge guides or ridges within the magazine. If so, the case taper and shoulder diameter of the 400 Whelen cartridge would ride nose high in a magazine cut for case taper and shoulder diameter of the 30-06 cartridge.

(See my other quoted post for a potential solution.)

This thread and the 458 Winchester thread must be among the longest of all time for a particular calibre. Yet both calibres would hardly be classed as "excitement" calibre in the big bore area.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike McGuire:
This thread and the 458 Winchester thread must be among the longest of all time for a particular calibre. Yet both calibres would hardly be classed as "excitement" calibre in the big bore area.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it.
I find the 400 Whelen, fascinating on many levels. The history is part of the draw and it is no slouch running a 400 grain bullet at 2150 fps, does the job.
The old 450/400 was lauded as the premier Buff and Elephant cartridge and the Whelen 400 does the same with ease.

quote:

Originally posted by Snellstrom:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike McGuire:
This thread and the 458 Winchester thread must be among the longest of all time for a particular calibre. Yet both calibres would hardly be classed as "excitement" calibre in the big bore area.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it.
I find the 400 Whelen, fascinating on many levels. The history is part of the draw and it is no slouch running a 400 grain bullet at 2150 fps, does the job.
The old 450/400 was lauded as the premier Buff and Elephant cartridge and the Whelen 400 does the same with ease.

There are quite a few in Australia.

Actually the 358 Winchester and the 400 Whelen are two calibres I regret not having when I was an active shooter.

Mike,

Developing a 400 Whelen LongCOL Sixshooter from a .270 WCF M70 Classic was quite rewarding.
So has been the .458 WIN LongCOL Sixshooter on a CZ 550 Magnum.

It is not surprising that you have picked this pair of my pets for your aspersions.
There have been a lot of parallels between the two cartridges.

What is surprising is that you would want a .358 WCF, the one that was brought to market, along with the .243 WCF, 2 or 3 years before the .458 WIN.
The .358 WCF flubbed badly, even got recalled for some manufacturing problem by Winchester, then died.
Sumbuddy who know what that recall of over a thousand .358 WCF rifles was about? I don't, just curious.

Rip ...

Sounds like mine will be done shortly.

Ended up going M70. Just made more sense with stocks and mounting a scope.

Ron,

For some reason the 358 just seemed to have an appeal. As to 35 calibre, well a mate who post on AR as Blair 338RUM probably caused it to be a bit of a religious calibre

But I guess I just never got around to the 358 (Or 400 Whelen) because of other things on the go. Things like 6mm/264 and … well you get the idea

On Australia's biggest Guns/Hunting forum the 358 is popular as is the 400 Whelen. That Australian forum has a 1/4 of the members of AR and a ton higher activity. Guns and related is so dead here. Maybe we can inject life.

As Snellstrom said it has a lot of history and converts a 30/06 into a powerful gun. Some of the blokes in Australia with them have ad factory 35 Whelen brass as the starting point.

quote:

Originally posted by MileHighShooter:

Ended up going M70.

They hand in hand.

It always amazed me that Wby (and I am a Wby fan big time) brought the Ultra Light Mark V out in 338/06 which I think lasted for about 5 minutes.

To me, a bloke who is a 338/06 man and wants to spend a fair bit more than a Rem 700, Ruger etc. is in no way a bloke who would spend it on a Mark V. It would be M70 or some version of M98.

If I had lots and lots of money I would get H&H to do for me a 30/378 and give Ed Weatherby a blank cheque for a Mark V in something like 9.3 X 62 or 404 and in Birds Eye Maple

That's funny, I have a Weatherby Ultra Light in 338/06, it is awesome & can do anything but leans slight to lesser game, with from 160gr to 300grs (I use 275gr A frames) I get incredible velocity's with 185gr Barnes TS, I also ended up with 2 more 338/06 Ultra Light barrels, so maybe Weatherby pulled them or some thing ?

I have 9.3X62's also & these lean more to heavier game !

quote:

Originally posted by Sarg:
That's funny, I have a Weatherby Ultra Light in 338/06, it is awesome & can do anything but leans slight to lesser game, with from 160gr to 300grs (I use 275gr A frames) I get incredible velocity's with 185gr Barnes TS, I also ended up with 2 more 338/06 Ultra Light barrels, so maybe Weatherby pulled them or some thing ?

I have 9.3X62's also & these lean more to heavier game !

I am only guessing but I think with Win, Rem and Wby they are guaranteed enough sales just from collectors for some stuff to pay for itself.

Super easy for Wby to do that rifle in 338/06 when it was already in 30/06. If I remember correctly (but these days that could be an issue ) they had factory ammo in 338/06.

Good that it shoots well for you because the Ultra Lights have not been that great in 30 calibre except for custom shop stuff. Can be fussy to the extreme.

Yes it is in 338/06 A Square, loaded by Norma I think ?

Would have been better for it's survival if loaded by the big names !

Any thoughts on the take off barrels ?

quote:

Originally posted by Sarg:
Yes it is in 338/06 A Square, loaded by Norma I think ?

Would have been better for it's survival if load by the big names !

Any thoughts on the take off barrels ?

I still reckon Weatherby (expensive, image etc.) goes with 338/06.

But phone Weatherby about barrels. Best gun company in the world to deal with.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike McGuire:
... It always amazed me that Wby (and I am a Wby fan big time) brought the Ultra Light Mark V out in 338/06 which I think lasted for about 5 minutes.

Yep, one of those showed up at the local emporium, new from Weatherby. I was amazed, but I passed,
bought the mate right next to it chambered for 270 WCF. The 270 WCF weighs 5.75 pounds bare/empty. So did the .338-'06, eh?

To me, a bloke who is a 338/06 man and wants to spend a fair bit more than a Rem 700, Ruger etc. is in no way a bloke who would spend it on a Mark V. It would be M70 or some version of M98.

I got a bargain at the same emporium on a used .338-'06 Modelo Argentino M98.
I did buy the Weatherby .338-06 ammo. Good stuff.

If I had lots and lots of money I would get H&H to do for me a 30/378 and give Ed Weatherby a blank cheque for a Mark V in something like 9.3 X 62 or 404 and in Birds Eye Maple

quote:

Originally posted by Mike McGuire:
I still reckon Weatherby (expensive, image etc.) goes with 338/06.

Well! Which one is it?
Now I am confused.

Rip ...

A fucking typo

My fresh thought is get a 416 instead

6 year running post, a boat load of information, several guns built, and your response is a simple poo-poo of all 30 pages with "get a 416"? Man you must be bored

Well, a 416x62 does make some sense. I just like the .410 ish projectiles.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
Well, a 416x62 does make some sense. I just like the .410 ish projectiles.

You like anything strange

quote:

Originally posted by MileHighShooter:
6 year running post, a boat load of information, several guns built, and your response is a simple poo-poo of all 30 pages with "get a 416"? Man you must be bored

Definately a fresh thought don’t you think?

Not really I asked if a 416 Whelen was a thought on this page back in May !

But I do like the idea of a .400 Whelen, the power it achieves has been proven on Big Game for a very long time, with lesser bullets !

quote:

Originally posted by MileHighShooter:

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
Well, a 416x62 does make some sense. I just like the .410 ish projectiles.

You like anything strange

Far be it for broomstick to go buy a factory 375 or something and shoot the he'll out of it an kill a barge load of animals with it !!

.411 Ryan between a 375 H&H and 30-06.

quote:

Originally posted by Sarg:
Not really I asked if a 416 Whelen was a thought on this page back in May !

But I do like the idea of a .400 Whelen, the power it achieves has been proven on Big Game for a very long time, with lesser bullets !

The 400 Whelen sounds like a reasonable load, practical and usable for short-range hunting. However, a factory-issued 416 Ruger is available that does it all and gives options for using 20 more grains of powder. So for me this niche of rifle and power is wonderfully covered by relatively inexpensive rifles in 375Ruger (Ruger, Howa, Mossberg ...) and especially 416 Ruger (Ruger Hawkeye African, Ruger Alaskan). There's not a lot that can't be hunted, and hunted well, with a 416 Ruger.

That is true, but it's also true that sometimes the 400 Whelen is just right. By burning much less powder , that in itself decreases recoil. Along with the reduced velocity. If I stumbled onto a used stainless Ruger At a cheap price. I would send it to McGowan and have a 416 Whelan/Petrov stainless 22" barrel put on with a couple lumps to make into the bits. Front sight base. Rear sight base with the underbarrel recoil lug underneath. Probably even one for the sling eye.
As I'm not a 41 mag shooter I would prefer the 416 version over the 411.