Sako brass is longer and pushes the shoulder up, but it really doesn't net any velocity increase at the same COL, similar to a .458 Win Mag vs Lott at same COL.

I've really wanted to do a .411 on a x62 improved case for quite some time, but just haven't gotten around to it. I would add a lot of punch to a light 9.3x62-type rifle, but recoil would be pretty brisk using a 400 @ 2400 fps.

I have a lot of calculated data and drawings if I can scrounge them up for this thread...

Please do.
I thought for a while that a converted 9,3x62 would make a good donor gun for a 400 Whelen project. If a 9,3 could be rebored to 411 than even better. Not sure if anyone is still doing rebore jobs without any quality issues.
A 10,4x62 would be sweet with all the 405 win bullets for most hunting and plinking needs.

The next few posts are QuickDesign and QuickLoad data for the .411x62 Improved cartridge.



Note the shoulder diameter of .465", the 70 degree shoulder angle, and the 0.31" neck length when compared to the 9.3x62 case dimensions of .451" shoulder diameter, 34.5 degree shoulder angle, and 0.31" neck length. Though the neck length is identical, it would have been longer had the case simply been necked up, so this represents an effective neck shortening. Some might debate if the shorter neck has enough tension, but with appropriate sizing, slightly compressed loads (below), and a good crimp, there should be enough tension.

COL of 3.34" and max pressure of 60k psi with a 400 grain Woodleigh.

COL of 3.45" at a max pressure of 60k psi with a 400 grain Woodleigh.

COL of 3.45" at a max pressure of 62k psi with a 400 grain Woodleigh.

Note that the 3.45" 62k psi load with the 400 grain Woodleigh directly above yields over 2400 fps and over 5100 ft-lbs, which will be more than most would want to handle in a 7-8 lb rifle. However, in a CZ550 medium action, one can get five of these cartridges down in this eminently compact action, which represents perhaps nearly the most power-to-weight ratio as is practical in a rifle that can be carried easily all day. Developing a solid bullet load as well would potentially extend the utility of this wildcat to the largest dangerous game.

In experiments in a CZ550 medium in 9.3x62, both Lapua and PPU/Prvi brass can easily handle multiple loadings in the 64k psi neighborhood, so 62k psi should not cause a problem for the brass if annealed properly before/after necking up and fireforming. Also, RL-17 powder likes compression just fine.

If I were to do this, I would want to rebarrel (most 9.3 barrels aren't thick enough for a rebore to .410/.411), fully bed the action, reinforce the stock or replace the stock with a strong composite, and add a little weight in the stock and a scope. 8.5 lbs might be a bit more doable for comfort sake. Also, the straighter cases might cause some minor feeding issues, so magazine follower/action tweaking would no doubt be in order as well.

Though this is all calculations, from matching experimental data from 9.3x62 to QL calculations, I'm confident these numbers aren't too far off what is possible in reality. How much "better" this wildcat is in reality than the .400 Whelen is certainly open for debate. It might be preferable for those in Africa where the Whelen is not as popular... For me, it would simply be preferable because I don't shoot much .30-06, and don't have a Whelen, but I do have plenty of x62 brass to neck up, and plenty of .41 mag bullets.

Finally, going to a 9.3x64 Brenneke case for this .411 wildcat might be the best compromise, both ballistically (think beltless .411 Win Mag) and in magazine capacity (4 down in a CZ), but at that point, why not just get a .416 Ruger?

Hey BC Elliott, that is some impressive work with Quikload and a .411x62.

5000+ foot pounds may be pushing things a bit, but it shows a best-case potential.

You do come back to practicality, too, by mentioning that the 416 Ruger already does all of this right out of the box, in its sleep.

Great stuff!
I feel the 66mm length could add neck length and be a plus for short 300 grain 405 win bullets to max oal. 10,4x66 would be sweet but 10,4x64 just sounds better but 62 brass is easier to find
Any idea how fast the 300 grain bullets would fly? The 300 TSX and 300 hornady?

Very nice work there bcelliott.
The .400 Whelen-B has chamber length of 2.509" before the start of the chamfer down to PSFB diameter of 0.412" and 0.300" PSFB length.
I feel safe in letting the brass grow to 2.500" length,
and now call that the desirable trim length, with 2.500" maximum, 2.500" minimum too.
At that brass length (2.500" or 63.5mm actual) it has an actual case capacity of 82.2 grains of H20, only 0.88 grains shy of yours.
RL-17 was my QuickLOAD topper for the 400-gr/.411" Woodleigh RNSP (bullet length 1.300"),
with a COL of 3.550" in the 3.6"-box of the 7#14oz (dry weight) M70 "featherweight."

As you imply for your proposed wildcat, my .400 Whelen-B sixshooter could also be adequate for knocking snot and enamel on both sides of the rifle.

When I get back to the 'puter with QuickLOAD on it, I will run your numbers and see if my older edition of QuickLOAD still has the same values for RL-17 as yours.
Good to know.

The 8x68S case necked up to .411 is also an interesting one. Starting to move into "tweener" territory dimensionally but still an idea that intrigues me.

https://www.armslist.com/posts...carbine-9-3x62-04153

This rifle is perfect for a donor gun. How hard would it be to get it to feed the slightly wider cart?

Well, bcelliott, my old lot of RL-17 in a previous version of QuickLOAD, shows 2450 fps at 70,923 PSI using your inputs to QuickLOAD,
for your wildcat.
I will keep the old lots in my QuickLOAD for posterity,
and also because my 8 pounds of RL-17 are same age as my version of QuickLOAD.
It is a little disconcerting to see powder lots changing so much.
I think Alliant's ReLoder powders are famous for that.

Rip ...

I keep forgetting stuff.



From a previous thread about "400 Whelen-B Proof Loads, don't try this at home":

RL-17 72.0 grains + 400-grain Woodleigh RNSN >>> MV = 2289 fps

VARGET 67.0 grains + 400-grain Woodleigh RNSN >>> MV = 2313 fps

H4895 67.0 grains + 400-grain Woodleigh RNSN >>> MV = 2391 fps

Witnessed by Rusty McGee who said: "Physics does not allow it."

Fool Physics once, shame on me, fool Physics twice, shame on me again ...

The Woodleigh loads required emergency re-seating after arrival at the range,
because the original 3.550" C.O.L. of the compressed, non-crimped loads had grown too long for the bolt to close.
They were re-seated to 3.450",
then fired quickly before they re-grew.
They need a second cannelure on the bullets and a crimp before the next outing.

My RL-17 lot did slower, lower pressure than QuickLOAD predicted.
My Varget lot did just a little faster than QuickLOAD predicted.
My H4895 lot did a lot faster and obviously higher pressure than QuickLOAD predicted.



That was the 4th shot of a planned 10-shot string when the primer fell out:



Decreasing the seating depth from 3.550" to 3.450" really jacks up the pressure in my 400 Whelen-B.

3.550" COL prediction by QuickLOAD: 2276 fps an 60,336 PSI



3.450" COL prediction by QuickLOAD: 2313 fps and 66,665 PSI, ACTUAL: 2391 fps and probably over 75,000 PSI, 25" barrel.



Gross case capacity of the .400 Whelen-B 2.500" case is 82.2 grains.
A fraction of a grain less than the bcelliott wildcat.
It is very close to his .411/9.3x62mm Improved for internal ballistics.
Take any QuickLOAD results, mine or his, with a grain of saltpeter.

Rip ...

At the same OAL, does not the 10,4x62 improved have a useable case capacity advantage? I am a Whelen fan myself, but this is about “Fresh Thoughts” right? it is a 400 Whelen after the holidays with a little extra padding.

Yes, the shorter and fatter case has lesser bullet seating depth, and so would have an advantage if both are loaded to 3.450" COL.
But if you are going to 3.450" COL, why not allow 3.550" COl for the .400 Whelen-B, giving it a slight advantage in useable case capacity?
Add a cannelure to bullet and crimp it over a 101% load, not a +106% load.

Rip ...

The longer case could be an advantage when shooting the shorter 300 grain 405 win bullets for A usable case capacity gain over the shorter case

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
https://www.armslist.com/posts...carbine-9-3x62-04153

This rifle is perfect for a donor gun. How hard would it be to get it to feed the slightly wider cart?

I know for a fact that with truly minimal mods, almost that exact rifle (with a full stock) has been rechambered to 9.3x64 Brenneke and also rebarreled/rechambered to .375 Ruger (RealGuns). So it doesnt seem too formidable to accomplish.

RIP, very nice work with that .400-B! You've truly maxed out that one. That work with longCOL bullet seating is impressive.

I agree with RIP that the advantage goes to the Whelen-B seated to a longer COL or with lighter bullets. Boom stick, like you suggested before, if you wanted to use a 3.6" action, you could benefit from either the Whelen-B or if you wanted a longer x62 analog, you could use the x66 Sako case.

By the way, sorry for the mixed imperial and metric nomenclature on these wildcats! Your 10.4x62 is more consistent...

Somewhere, I calculated a .411x64 Brenneke improved case the same way as I did for the x62, and the results are even more impressive. Even though that case doesn't need as much "improving," yet according to QL, just that little bit and seating long allows one to go to a slower powder like RL-26, which yields even more gain with heavy bullets. I will try to find that work and post it shortly.

Honestly, if I were to go after some sort of .411 wildcat, besides a bolt gun, I might be tempted to see if I could make it work in a Garand running at slightly lower pressures, as long as first I could cram the slightly fatter cases into the en bloc clip.

I misspoke on the use of RL-26 in the .411 Brenneke Improved...I was confusing some other calculations on a 9.3x64 Brenneke Improved, which I can also include if anyone is interested.

Below are calculations on a .411 Brenneke Improved cartridge. Note that at the same COL of 3.45", it exceeds RIP's .400 Whelen-B at the same COL (and the .411x62 Improved) by about 100 fps, but part of that additional velocity is gained at 64k psi, which is the max listed pressure for the Brenneke case. These calculations represent maxing out the x64 case capacity and performance. Maybe I will mock up .411/.338 Win Mag and .411 Ruger for comparison under the same conditions.

Below is a non-improved .411-.338 Win Mag cartridge under the same conditions as previous calculations. Note that it is simply necked up and operating at max listed pressure. I'm sure we could get slightly more performance if the case were improved, but probably not an appreciable difference over the Brenneke Improved.

Ok, below is the .411 Ruger unimproved. Under the same conditions, it yields only about 30 fps increase over the Brenneke Improved while burning 5 more grains of powder. Not as much as I had thought...

Not shown here, but significant: If I "improve" the Ruger case to the same extent as the Brenneke (it's almost a fully improved case already), I gain 6 fps over the unimproved Ruger while burning 1 grain more powder. Talk about diminishing returns!

What's have I learned from these calculations, the whole of this thread, other experiments, and RIP's Whelen-B data?

1) A .400 Whelen is sexy and has the historical cool factor.

2) A .400 Whelen Petrov, .400 Whelen-B, and a .411x62 Improved can get a .400 Woodleigh seated to a COL of 3.45" going about 2300-2400 fps maxed out, depending upon the case and pressure.

3) A .411 Brenneke Improved, a .411-.338 Win Mag, and a .411 Ruger can get a 400 grain Woodleigh seated to a COL of 3.45" going about 2500 fps maxed out.

4) In a CZ550 medium magazine, you can put 5 Whelens / x62 cartridges down, or 4 Brennekes, or 3 Win Mag / Rugers. Is the tradeoff of 100-200 fps for 1-2 fewer cartridges worth it? Up to the person, I guess.

5) My own opinion here...If I were rebarreling a CZ550 medium for a .411, it would probably be the Brenneke Improved (loss of one cartridge, but 2500 fps with a 400 grain--a good compromise). But it wouldn't make much difference to a game animal if it were a .400 Whelen Petrov or -B or a x62. However, a .411 Ruger is a waste, and best left as a .416.

Necking the 10.75x68mm Mauser down to 10.4mm/.411-cal?
Ungilding the lilly too,
would sure beat a .400 Whelen,
just not worth the fuss.
And there is that .458 WIN.
It beats all.

Rip ...

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
Necking the 10.75x68mm Mauser down to 10.4mm/.411-cal?
Ungilding the lilly too,
would sure beat a .400 Whelen,
just not worth the fuss.
And there is that .458 WIN.
It beats all.

Rip ...

A couple years ago, I asked lawndart to work up some 400 grain data comparing the 416 Taylor and 10.75x68 at similar OAL. The results were quite impressive. It’s a shame that Mauser was restricted by soft 1908 metallurgy/heat treating tech and early smokeless powders, and their annul desire not to open up the standard action the small amount needed to bring performance fully into 400 NE territory. Mausers use of 8x57 length magazines was a joke. Their ‘06 magazines ended up being a little over 3.4” inside length, and they didn’t really hurt the action by opening things up a tiny bit. Once the kids are out of college, I have plans on a custom Oberndorf style 10.75x68 rifle, built with 3.35+” length and 60K psi in mind. However, 400 nitro performance would be sufficient for me, and that performance can be had at quite low pressures given a relatively long OAL. The the 10.75 is not practical, but I like Mausers and history, so hence my taste.

The test of

quote:

just not worth the fuss.

needs to reckon with the 416 Ruger, too.

Nostalgia can cover some ground, but a practical, hard-hitting cartridge still needs consideration.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
The test of

quote:

just not worth the fuss.

needs to reckon with the 416 Ruger, too.

Nostalgia can cover some ground, but a practical, hard-hitting cartridge still needs consideration.

Indeed!

I am sorry, but I do not understand the objective here. Is it a low to medium power .400ish cartridge that will fit in a standard '06 length action? Slim enough to have 5 down in a lot of standard actions?

Isn't it sort of a beltless/rimless 400 H&H?

AT

quote:

Originally posted by Alec Torres:
I am sorry, but I do not understand the objective here. Is it a low to medium power .400ish cartridge that will fit in a standard '06 length action? Slim enough to have 5 down in a lot of standard actions?

Isn't it sort of a beltless/rimless 400 H&H?

AT

This round gets you 405 Winchester to 450-400 Nitro ballistics from a common ‘06 bolt face/brass and action length. Some actions will give you 5 down. Some folks, like RIP, have used model 70 classic actions with the mag block removed to allow long bullet seating for extra powder capacity. I think, ultimately, it amounts to a quite economical custom big bore that is attainable by just about anyone, and can be shot often without a huge hit to one’s pocketbook or shoulder.

I don’t think Coronal Whelen envisioned much use with 400 grain bullets, but it looks like folks these days do, or at least like to have the 400 grain option, either for fun or business.

Basically it's the way to get around4,000 ft lbs from an 06 action . And 06 brass. With a 350 or 400 gr bullet burning 60 gr of powder or less .

quote:

Originally posted by ColoradoMatt:

This round gets you 405 Winchester to 450-400 Nitro ballistics from a common ‘06 bolt face/brass and action length. Some actions will give you 5 down. Some folks, like RIP, have used model 70 classic actions with the mag block removed to allow long bullet seating for extra powder capacity. I think, ultimately, it amounts to a quite economical custom big bore that is attainable by just about anyone, and can be shot often without a huge hit to one’s pocketbook or shoulder.

I don’t think Coronal Whelen envisioned much use with 400 grain bullets, but it looks like folks these days do, or at least like to have to have the 400 grain option, either for fun or business.

I gotcha'. thanks for explianing it - that objective kinda' got lost in the turmoil.

Wouldn't the 411-338 be the already created and produced 411 KDF?

411-10.75x68 would be great if brass wasn't near impossible to get already.

The 411x64 has legs, but im really thinking the QL calculations are a bit enthusiastic. You're running higher fps vs a 416 Ruger wick has more powder behind it already and a wider base to push agaisnt, and they're not running 2500 fps+

The 411 KDF , like the 416 Taylor . Is an improved( 338 Win) case.
That is a mistake some gunsmiths have made.
Iirc the 411 KDF and 416 Taylor hold about 5 gr more powder than the 416/338.
I know that a 416 Taylor won't come close to clambering in a 416/338.

My thanks to Colorado Matt also for his mention of the .405 WCF and the 450/400, both of which have a proven track record for large and dangerous game, but are not usually found in bolt action rifles.

Now maybe I finally understand the reason for this thread (which is now no longer of interest since I shoot both 300 and 400 grain ammo in a .405 double and an Winchester 1895 .405.).
Being neither gun maker nor wildcat cartridge maker, leaves me with nothing to contribute.

A good read for Whelen nerds.

https://alaskaarmsllc.com/blog...whelen-rifle-project

I was thinking that the 9.3 x 66 would make a nice .411

Thanks Boomie.

The 10.75 x 68 is a bastard child that suffered the ignorance of a nation..They used the wrong bullet..I used on in Africa a couple of times and it was light as a feather and killed like my 404 when I used 400 gr. Woodleigh bullets, in fact handloaded to 400 gr, bullet at 2125 FPS it duplicated my 450-400 ballistics, and how can you beat that, plus I got another round in the magazine, the second one I had, I added a two round drop box and could load it on Sunday and shoot until the follow Monday!!

IMO, the 10.75 x 68 is the most overlooked option for hunting Africa these days..

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
The 10.75 x 68 is a bastard child that suffered the ignorance of a nation..They used the wrong bullet..I used on in Africa a couple of times and it was light as a feather and killed like my 404 when I used 400 gr. Woodleigh bullets, in fact handloaded to 400 gr, bullet at 2125 FPS it duplicated my 450-400 ballistics, and how can you beat that, plus I got another round in the magazine, the second one I had, I added a two round drop box and could load it on Sunday and shoot until the follow Monday!!

IMO, the 10.75 x 68 is the most overlooked option for hunting Africa these days..

I’ve been wanting to build one for quite some time. I bought a 10.75mm LW barrel, then traded it off. I bought a case of the most recent batch of RWS ammo. I even bought a bunch of 10.75mm bullets from you. I think that if brass were readily available and not so darn expensive, a lot of folks might give it a try. Loaded to the same overall length and pressure as the the 416 Taylor, the two rounds are practically identical in performance, which equals the old 60g cordite 404 Jeff load. Getting Horneber brass from Germany is incredibly expensive!

I tried to get a group order for at least ten barrels and sets of new dies; only got one order; so, that tells me there is close to zero interest in a 10.75x68 now. So I killed the project.
Now, if you want the same ballistics with 1000% less drama, the 400 G&H Whelen is the way to go. Ballistics of the 450-400 or 404, but none of the "no-one makes brass" and expensive die, situations. And a more diverse bullet selection too, from 41 mag pistol bullets to the 400 grain solid.
It's dead.