quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
It's dead.

I’m still in denial!

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
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.

Or just get a 416 Ruger and load it light.
No pretentious belt. Animal won't know the difference, as they say. Does a hunter really need a 4-5 round magazine? And if so, they may want more than a 400-06.

Since 350 grains at 2600fps is a max load 416 Ruger,
aim at 350 grains at 2450fps.
Or for something more comfortable in a 338~to-375 range of feel: 300 grains at 2450fps and 4000foot-pounds muzzle.

Need a 400 grain bullet? Then 2150fps will be a comfy 4000 foot-pounds, and load up to 2400fps as one feels ones oats/nerves and wants to reach out.

Seems Weatherby is getting into the 6.5 craze. a lengthened 284 case With 35 Degree shoulders. Might make an interesting case to stuff .411” bullets into for a fat Whelen.

That Weatherby case would be pretty close to a 9.3x64 Brenneke case, but with a rebated rim. The .411 would make a great cartridge using either of those two cases.

Alternately, one could run a Weatherby RPM reamer into a 9.3x62 chamber and have Brenneke ballistics without also messing with the bolt, FWIW.

Or ream out a 35 Whelen, but I’d rather see one less 9,3x62
It could make a nice 375 wildcat too. I’m guessing 85-87 grain capacity.

Here is the nearest I could get to case dimensions for the 6.5 WBY RPM from the online information currently available:



The case capacity as drawn above is about 82 grains.


Below is what the 9.3-6.5 WBY RPM would look like as a simple neck up with no other changes (a five grain capacity increase over the 9.3x62):



Case capacity as drawn above is about 87 grains.


Below is what the .375-6.5 WBY RPM would look like as a simple neck up with no other changes:



Case capacity as drawn above is about 88 grains.


Below is what the .411-6.5 WBY RPM would look like. I had to slightly improve the shoulder diameter to give it a minimal 30 thousandths shoulder:



Case capacity as drawn above is about 90 grains.

Great Work!
Handsome carts there.
Anyone have any calculations on excessive bolt thrust?

Looks like a rebated 10.75x68!

Three cute little children there. Are any of them apt to grow up? Be Well. Packy

You guys are all barking up the wrong tree.

9.3x74R necked up for a .410 or .411 bullet in a single shot, or for those that can, a double rifle, is going to do everything a 400 Whelen can with less pressure and a nice rim to headspace off.

Use 41 mag dies and neck size. Or CH4D will make you some 400 Purdey dies that work just fine, just specify which groove barrel you are using.

Use 400 Purdey reamer (essentially a straight taper from the base to the .432 neck). You may need to use a throater as well if you want to load long bullets, but there is enough case capacity that you can seat them deep.

Shoot everything from deer to buffalo.

And it can do something the 400 Whelen cannot: shoot .410 plastic wads stuffed with 000 buck and topped with a 40 cal round ball, which pattern extra tight due to the rifling, and makes a nice "foraging" load for Guinea Fowl, Turkey, Grouse and pests. You can load these by hand, no tools needed other than a primer seater.

In Ken Waters"Pet Loads"volume II 2nd page first column.
The more recent publications appear to have followed one another in claiming James V.Howe of the famous gunmaking firm of Griffin & Howe,developed the 35 Whelen and merely named it in honor of Townsend Whelen.Going back thirty to thirty five years we find references asserting that it was a joint development by the two men.One source,whose author should have known better,went so far as to declare that the 35 Whelen was"developed by Griffon & Howe."
But myths are poor substitutes for facts,so let's go all the way back to 1922 and 1923.Now we find that(1)at that time,Colonel Townsend Whelen was the commanding officer of the Frankford Arsenal,and James V.Howe was a toolmaker in the same establishment.(2)the wildcat .400 Whelen came first,and the old but still interesting pages of a 1923 issue of The American Rifleman,Colonel Whelen referred to is as"the first cartridge I designed"and in that same article stated that"Mr.James V.Howe undertook this work of making dies,reamers,chambering tools,and of chambering the rifles,all in accordance with my design."(the emphasis is mine)This pretty well establishes Whelen as the designer,I think,and Howe as the gunsmith.Now lets go over the second development,the.35 Whelen.
In the very next issue of The American Rifleman,Whelen told of his motivations for developing a .35 cartridge on the 30-06 case.While not mentioning Howe by name in this follow up report,he frequently used the pronoun we,evidently in a generous desire to share much of the credit for the new cartridge.Yet in his final paragraph he said"I have had lots of pleasure in developing these two cartridges and the rifles for them."
So I think it's pretty clear that Whelen was the designer of the cartridge and Howe the maker of the rifles.As such,each played a important role,but their roles should be kept separate,the credit properly assigned.So to set the record straight:Colonel Townsend Whelen actually designed the .35 Whelen;it wasn't just named for him.

Is it safe to say that 1922 is the birth year of both the 35 and 400 Whelen?

I've thought about this ad nauseum. I went to the 300 Roy, lately the 6.5 Weatherby, other bigger cases, and smaller capacity cases as well. I talked at length with Michael Petrov and read his writings concerning his investigations into the 400 Whelen. I agree that he was probably right to find a .458 shoulder on the Whelen. I had cooled off as Michael got ill then subsequently died. It was depressing to lose someone I felt like I knew after losing Dad many years before in a more sudden manner. I could get more velocity, happy face here for most folks, but I find Michael's thoughts to be right on. The 400 Whelen is a finest of medium bore. I really don't care if every one else thinks high velocity is Mo' better. It isn't necessarily so. I have found the slower projectiles per caliber sometimes get more penetration, and better blood trails ( two holes better than one). I have gone with PCP airguns and found it there. 30-30 AIs, 45-70s with a huge bullet at 1250 fps penetrates enough to kill two buffalo/bison. The more speed to the African hunting calibers use, the more technology is used (trick bullets) to keep them working without blowing up. I laud the developers of the monometal bullets. They can be good. But I have seen a trend in slower bullets of good construction at mild velocities killing quite handily. This wasn't as clear as it could be. I don't care about a mathematical theorem being established here. But Elmer Keith wasn't the only guy using long for caliber bullets. And at milder velocities than much of today's cases provide. The 375 H&H doesn't look like a Roy in the charts. I think a soft copper jacket, long for caliber bullet, with proper twist rate, at a medium velocity is what I want. Try it. You might like it. 400 Whelen cases will stack up in a shorter magazine than a 400 based on a Roy or having to get a long action for an H&H. That will need longer AND deeper magazine. The first bullets I will try will be Hawk copper jacketed bullets and probably some WLN cast. The limiting factor on the caliber will be the action length in my case. Good luck with your magnum based cases, getting brass, finding harder bullets, using Magnum primers, burning more powder, perhaps more expensive dies. It all seems like a race that can not be won. The 400 Whelen for me. Good luck, and Be Well, Packy.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
Is it safe to say that 1922 is the birth year of both the 35 and 400 Whelen?

Maybe.
Prototypes of all Whelen calibers may go back to 1919.
The .35 Whelen was not announced in publication until 1923, following demise of the .38 Whelen.

The .38 Whelen was under way in 1919, chambered briefly by Griffin & Howe in 1923, but discontinued after April 1, 1923,
according to Michael Petrov.

The .400 Whelen was surely under way, 4 rifles being under construction, by mid 1922.
The .35 Whelen is not of 1922 vintage by reference to Michael Petrov: 1923 was the very good year.

I am as guilty as any of dating the .400 Whelen to 1923, because of that seminal TAR article, reproduced below. I apologize. It was indeed 1922 when the .400 Whelen was born.
I cannot say the same about the .35 Whelen.

(I also wish to stress the date of origin of the .458 Winchester Magnum was 1955, not 1956.
By November 1955 General Hatcher was evaluating a rifle so chambered, in his capacity as technical editor at TAR.
The .458 WIN M70 African was subsequently released upon the unsuspecting public in 1956.)

Michael Petrov's Custom GUNMAKERS OF THE 20TH CENTURY VOLUME TWO, pp. 153-160, part one of his .400 Whelen saga, revealed some dates pertinent to this.

The .400 Whelen was announced in mid 1922 according to Michael Petrov, first notice was in Arms And The Man on June 15, 1922.
Apparently the first four rifles, under construction then were two 1903 Springfields and two M98 Mausers.

Whelen started working on the .38 Whelen in 1919, according to Michael Petrov who found a letter from Whelen to Fred Adolph, typed on WAR DEPARTMENT letterhead, dated August 23, 1919.
Whelen was inquiring about barrels of .375" groove diameter, .365" bore diameter, and 1:18" twist.
This was Townsend Whelen's first necking up of the .30-06 case, according to Petrov.

"From 1923 to 1925 Griffin & Howe only offered their proprietary Whelen cartridges as their largest caliber rifles and not any of the English cartridges such as the .375 H&H." (Petrov)
They were using a 275-grain bullet designed for the .38-72 W.C.F.

However, because Winchester quit making the bullets they had been using, Whelen announces discontinuation of the .38 Whelen on April 1, 1923, "and suggests that no more .38 Whelens be made."
APRIL FOOLS DAY 1923 ! No it was true. When revived in the 1950's they called it the .375 Whelen, according to Petrov.

Michael Petrov claims the .35 Whelen was announced in a September 15, 1923 article in TAR, THE AMERICAN RIFLEMAN, entitled "American Heavy Caliber Rifles for Large Game." I got an email copy of a so titled article from the LATE GREAT Michael Petrov, but the date on that one is September 1, 1923.
And I do not recall mention of the .35 Whelen in it.
There may be a "PART TWO" of that article published 2 weeks later, on 9-15-1923.
That would seem to be the "second" article referred to by Ken Waters.
Water's interpretation is suspect in not mentioning the .38 Whelen, however.

Well, maybe there was actually a shooting .35 Whelen in 1922. I am not so sure now.
The format is hopefully legible, best I can do, from Michael Petrov's email:







Interesting to note that the original .400 Whelen used a .409/300-grain bullet, in 1922-1923.
That must have been the easily available .405 W.C.F. bullet of the day.
See cartridge drawing above, and note the shoulder diameter is 0.455" and neck-1 diameter is 0.431",
and neck-2 is 0.430.
Functional shoulder.
Brass specs are maximums.

A 1956-dated G&H chamber drawing indicates bullet diameter as .411 (deduced from a .412" diameter PSFB)
and an erroneous shoulder diameter of 0.455" and shows the greater-tapered neck.
Chamber specs should be minimums,
They are allowed to be bigger than brass maximums.



Making a chamber reamer too tight in the shoulder and loose in the neck-1 caused a lot of BS for the .400 Whelen.
Undeserved.
Just like the .458 WIN is undeservedly much maligned.
$#!& happens.

The functional .400 Whelen reamer has a shoulder diameter of 0.458" MINIMUM,
to fit the brass shoulder diameter of 0.455" MAXIMUM.

The PT&G reamer by Michael Petrov is shown in part two of his saga, pp. 161-167, it has a .458" diameter shoulder minimum,
it was derived from a chamber cast of a G&H rifle that worked:



I call that the ".400 Whelen-Petrov of 2003."
It is certainly a bit different than what Howe came up with for Whelen in 1922.
I now call that the ".400 Whelen of 1922."

The Petrov reamer has .004" of neck taper.
The G&H reamer drawing had 0.003" of neck taper on the 1956 dated drawing.
Townsend Whelen's drawing for the ".400 Whelen of 1922" showed only 0.001" of neck taper
just like my slightly longer-throated ".400 Whelen-B-Team of 2013."
The latter can be loaded LongCOL for a 3.6-inch box or ShortCOL for a .30-06-length box.

Well, anyway, it seems certain that Townsend Whelen started wildcatting the .30-06 case in late 1919.
He probably did them all as dummies, .35-.400 just about exactly 100 years ago.
He masterminded them all, and Mr. Howe was his "ENABLER."

The original Whelen cartridge was the .38 Whelen of 1919, with a .375-caliber/275-grain bullet.
The .375 Whelen wildcat of 1951 resurrection is the same rose by another name, and smells as sweet.

Rip ...

Thanks RIP. I have lost track of everything related to Michael Petrov except the Petrov pages book marked in my current computer. The original stuff was lost two computers ago. I am interested only in the Petrov labeled design. Be Well. Packy.

I like History, but too much information, much of it complete nonsense and non workable ideas, only confuses the new guys. And Petrov, while I am sure trying to explain things, made them more complicated.
But it is actually simple; get a rifle chambered for the 400 Whelen, using the G&H chamber print. Use 30-06 brass, which must be expanded out to .458 before you size it back down. Get matching dies from CH4D. That combo works.
I use only .410 groove diameter barrels. That works for bullets made for the 450-400 and the .405 as well. 41 Mag pistol bullets also make good plinking loads. Quite versatile.
Period. You will get 450-400 Nitro velocities out of it, with none of the drama of odd bullet or barrel sizes. It will feed through most any action, again with no drama in alterations
I have done many of them. Guys call me all the time, totally confused about the 400 Whelen by what some recent, and not so recent, guys wrote about it.
As for making a 400 on Mag, RUM, or 9.3x74 brass, well, then you are in a completely different category of cartridge, and it is not necessary; gains little of value.

I see a bunch of references to 35 Whelen M1 Garands... Has anyone made a 400 Whelen Garand? Can it be done?

I would like a Garand if it could be successful. Thanks Boomie. Be Well, Packy.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
I see a bunch of references to 35 Whelen M1 Garands... Has anyone made a 400 Whelen Garand? Can it be done?

there have been a couple 458winmag garands ....

I would love to shoot a stripper clip full of 400 Whelens. Come up on a pack of pigs and Boom Boom Boom Boom!!!!
https://youtu.be/IFREYqHwq5s
I just got two new rifles to add to my dream list. A pair of Whelens in Garands. 35 and 400.

Ruger made a couple small runs of 45-70 #1’s, a few year ago, that were designated “1–S-C”. Midweight sporter with 26” “C” contour barrel. For me, it’s the all-time cat’s meow of #1’s. The “c” contour is the same as that found on the #1’s in 375 H&H, but two inches longer. The rifles weigh right at 8lbs in 45-70. I think such a rifle in 400 Whelen wood be very cool!

I could definitely make a Garand in 400, but the gas cylinder would have to be opened up to allow for a larger barrel OD at that point. If not, the wall thickness would be very thin at the splines. But that can be overcome. Threads are .550 and the splines are .510, leaving a wall thickness of .050.
As for the Ruger #1, I am doing one exactly what Matt describes, now.

Please post a video of this beauty to be. A true DG culling machine!

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
I could definitely make a Garand in 400, but the gas cylinder would have to be opened up to allow for a larger barrel OD at that point. If not, the wall thickness would be very thin at the splines. But that can be overcome. Threads are .550 and the splines are .510, leaving a wall thickness of .050.
As for the Ruger #1, I am doing one exactly what Matt describes, now.

I assume you are funding the project?

I can see a GoFundMe page happening for this. I pledge $20! Anyone else?

Glad everyone is still having fun with this thread. RIP, thank you so much for posting Townsend Whelen's original American Rifleman article.
Just two years to go before we can call the .400 Whelen a century-old classic!
I finally laid in some 210-grain .410 Speer Deep Curls for fire-forming the rest of my Qual Cart brass. Sure look forward to it.
I'll root around here for load recommendations.
Tom, would love to see the Ruger No. 1 you are building.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
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.

Or just get a 416 Ruger and load it light.
No pretentious belt. Animal won't know the difference, as they say. Does a hunter really need a 4-5 round magazine? And if so, they may want more than a 400-06.

Since 350 grains at 2600fps is a max load 416 Ruger,
aim at 350 grains at 2450fps.
Or for something more comfortable in a 338~to-375 range of feel: 300 grains at 2450fps and 4000foot-pounds muzzle.

Need a 400 grain bullet? Then 2150fps will be a comfy 4000 foot-pounds, and load up to 2400fps as one feels ones oats/nerves and wants to reach out.

I agree totally with this EXCEPT the ( pretentious belt) comment.
I don't know why people can't just Get Over It !
I've had great fun and reliable service from belted cartridges.
The comment makes an excellent post sound idiotic.

quote:

Originally posted by Cold Trigger Finger:

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
I tried to get a group order for at least ten barrels and sets of new dies; only got one order; ...

Or just get a 416 Ruger and load it light.
Animal won't know the difference, as they say. Does a hunter really need a 4-5 round magazine? And if so, they may want more than a 400-06.

Since 350 grains at 2600fps is a max load 416 Ruger,
aim at 350 grains at 2450fps.
Or for something more comfortable in a 338~to-375 range of feel: 300 grains at 2450fps and 4000foot-pounds muzzle.

Need a 400 grain bullet? Then 2150fps will be a comfy 4000 foot-pounds, and load up to 2400fps as one feels ones oats/nerves and wants to reach out.

I agree totally with this EXCEPT the ( pretentious belt) comment.
I don't know why people can't just Get Over It !
I've had great fun and reliable service from belted cartridges.
The comment makes an excellent post sound idiotic.

Didn't mean to trigger CTF with the belt. I like the 338WM and it has a belt. I just feel that the difference between .511" and the .532" diameter of the belt could be used for powder.

So I would inherently prefer a 338 PRC to a 338 WM. I really like the balance of trajectory, bullet weight, and recoil that the 338 produces.
And I like the 416 Ruger for "heavy", getting back to this thread.

The whole point is to have something unique, something that not just every guy can walk into Walmart and buy. That leaves out the 416 Ruger and every other common commercial cartridge. My philosophy is to never carry anything into to field that someone else is likely to have, and also, never to carry an off the shelf rifle. Except DRs.
So, "just get such and such" readily available rifle/cartridge, misses the point. Mine anyway.
BTW belts are fine if you know how to manage reloading them; that is not the point either.
As for an M1, 400; when someone actually wants one, and will pay for it, PM me. I can do it.

That is a cool offer. What will the cost be above the donor gun?

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
The whole point is to have something unique, something that not just every guy can walk into Walmart and buy. That leaves out the 416 Ruger and every other common commercial cartridge. My philosophy is to never carry anything into to field that someone else is likely to have, and also, never to carry an off the shelf rifle. Except DRs.
So, "just get such and such" readily available rifle/cartridge, misses the point. Mine anyway.
BTW belts are fine if you know how to manage reloading them; that is not the point either.
As for an M1, 400; when someone actually wants one, and will pay for it, PM me. I can do it.

Have to PM me if serious; it is gauche to discuss business details in open forum.

yes. I am sorry for my gaucheness or rather, being a gouchebag

Go for it Boomie! Tom can deliver.

quote:

Originally posted by ColoradoMatt:

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
It's dead.

I’m still in denial!

Me too, 98 Mauser with 400gr Woodleigh softs and solids at 2255 fps, five down and one in the pipe, what's not to like?

quote:

The whole point is to have something unique, something that not just every guy can walk into Walmart and buy. That leaves out the 416 Ruger and every other common commercial cartridge. My philosophy is to never carry anything into to field that someone else is likely to have, and also, never to carry an off the shelf rifle. Except DRs.

DPCD , you have been reading my playbook!

I will not list many, but for instance, a customized pre 64 M70 FW in .308 deer rifle, 1886 TD 45-90 elephant rifle, 1895 .405 TD Cape Buffalo rifle, custom made big bore SxS DRs, Winchester 9422 xtra MAGNUM (.22 WRM), Texas Heart Shot experience using customized M77 .338 WM plains game rifle, etc.

Also Parker shotguns.

@CRShelton
What is a 405 TD?

Is there a commercial source of 400 Whelen brass that is acceptable?

1895 TD is a take down Winchester 1895.

quote:

What is a 405 TD?

It is a TD (take down) out of place.
Sorry, it should have read "1895 TD .405".

Thanks for catching that.

BTW, my 1895 TD .405 with extended chamber shoots Woodie 400 grain pills at 2076 fps which is rumored to be very effective on large game.
Likely just gossip among shooters of factory 450/400 doubles.

Crshelton, I heard a rumor you killed very effectively a couple of Cape Buffalo with that 405 and load.