I might have a 1-pound cannister of the old RL-10x. Does 2009 vintage qualify?
Will get a "new" can too and compare them in loads for the 300-grainers.

Meantime, just to maintain sanity here, what with the current epidemic of bore envy breaking out,
consider predictions by QuickLOAD for the archetypal 400-grain bullet:

400 Whelen
3.250" COL
23.622" barrel
.411/400-gr Woodleigh RNSP flat-based bullet length: 1.298"
Shot Start/Initiation Pressure: 3625 psi
Cross sectional area of bore: 0.13082 Sq.In. (calculated by QL)
400 Whelen R.I.P. certified maximum average chamber pressure: 62,873 psi
Brass length: 2.490"
Case capacity overflow: 78.99 grains H2O


Powder: Winchester 748 (ball powder)
Charge: 60.0 grains
Case fill: 99%
MV: 2239 fps
KE: 4454 ft-lbs.
Pressure: 62,643 psi
Powder burned: 100.0%
KE/Thermodynamic Efficiency: 40.5%
(54.0-gr charge >>> 2038 fps >>> 3690 ft-lbs. >>> 44,823 psi >>> 89% fill)


Powder: H335 (ball powder)
Charge: 57.8 grains
Case fill: 94%
MV: 2199 fps
KE: 4296 ft-lbs.
Pressure: 62,714 psi
Powder burned: 100.0%
KE/Thermodynamic Efficiency: 39.1%
(52.0-gr charge >>> 2013 fps >>> 3600 ft-lbs. >>> 45721 psi >>> 85% fill)


Powder: ReLoder-15 (extruded powder)
Charge: 59.0 grains
Case fill: 105%
MV: 2191 fps
KE: 4265 ft-lbs.
Pressure: 57,929 psi
Powder burned: 99.0%
KE/Thermodynamic Efficiency: 37.9%
(54.3-gr charge >>> 2026 fps >>> 3646 ft-lbs. >>> 44,694 psi >>> 97% fill)


Powder: H322 Extreme (extruded powder)
Charge: 54.4 grains
Case fill: 100%
MV: 2184 fps
KE: 4235 ft-lbs.
Pressure: 62,530 psi
Powder burned: 100.0%
KE/Thermodynamic Efficiency: 40.7%
(50.0-gr charge >>> 2042 fps >>> 3705 ft-lbs. >>> 48,913 psi >>> 92% fill)


Powder: Benchmark Extreme (extruded powder)
Charge: 55.6 grains
Case fill: 101%
MV: 2154 fps
KE: 4119 ft-lbs.
Pressure: 62,669 psi
Powder burned: 100.0%
KE/Thermodynamic Efficiency: 39.7%%
(50.0-gr charge >>> 1972 fps >>> 3456 ft-lbs. >>> 46,565 psi >>> 90% fill)


Does anyone know of a more efficient cartridge than the 400 Whelen?
Any adiabatic/internal combustion engine that converts 40.7% of its fuel's chemical energy into kinetic energy of piston (or bullet)
is a very efficient machine indeed.

I have a 25-year old cannister of W-748, from my Thutty-Thutty Days, but will get a new can of that too.
Got lots of H332, Benchmark, RL-15, and H335.
Using ball powders is a relatively new trick for this old dog.
I am still wondering if the "new" RL-10x will perform like the old obsolete RL-12.

quote:

Does anyone know of a more efficient cartridge than the 400 Whelen?

That is one thing I really noticed in my 416 & 400PDKs.

Take a 400gr partition in a 416 Taylor 24" barrel and QL calculates around 2380fps. Not much gain over the whelen

Yep correct measurements and newer powders and the fan base for the 400 Whelen would have been much greater.

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:

Take a 400gr part in a 416 Taylor 24" barrel and QL calculates around 2380fps

Then QL is very close to reality with that one.
I get about 2415 fps with 400-grainers in my 26"-barreled .416 Taylor, with RL-15, easy as you please.

Riflecrank Internationale Permanente

The objective with the 400 Whelen was to duplicate the performance of the 450/400 Nitro express that had been found to be a success for large African game. There is no reason to "hot rod" it and there is a considerable body of data that suggests that nothing is gained and some things may be lost by exceeding the ballistics of cartridges that have been proven killers for nearly a century.
If you cannot get it done with a 400 gr bullet @2000 fps, you may be the problem.

45-70 there you go trying to put logic into the discussion. I agree 100%. It always amazes me that something like the 450/400 has taken large numbers of large and DG animals over the years with a 400gr in the 2000fps range. But other chamberings generating the same velocity or even higher are deemed too weak. Looking at Modern 450/400 ammo Hornady lists 2050 for the 400 and Kynoch lists 2125fps. So why wouldn't a rifle with 5 down and 1 in the chamber at the same velocity work?

Part of my plan with the 400PDK was trying to move a 400 at 404 velocity. Yep I know .411 vs .423 but heck I have a better SD. For some reason I was thinking historical 404 velocity was in the 2250FPS range. I see Hornady lists 2300 midway shows the Kynoch at 1975?????
So I can exceed 2300 but choose to load at 2257. Yes I know I load to a higher pressure. But heck I need to full loads to fully form my shoulder so my pressure isn't that high. I also no that handloaders will push the 404 to higher pressure as well.

I was heading for Africa in 2013 with my 400 to take a Cape Buffalo. But since I need a new heart valve in January that will now have to waite AGAIN.

I'm just glad we are getting some better 410-411 bullets to play with.

I think you folks might find this interesting even though the powders are obsolete. Hope you can read it, kind of in bad shape. Hit the "Ctrl" button and "+" to enlarge.

quote:

I think you folks might find this interesting even though the powders are obsolete. Hope you can read it, kind of in bad shape.

Based on pressure they were leaving alot on the table. Thanks for the info

Hi Michael Petrov,
Thanks for that!
Very interesting.
I suspect those "low pressures" are in CUP, as was customary back then,
and it is impossible to know the corresponding PSI except by guesstimation.
The PSI numbers might be higher than the CUP numbers: There's my SWAG.

My purpose in showing max QL loads for the 400-grainer, along with a near 10% lower starting load in parentheses below each max load,
is just to suggest it might actually be possible to duplicate 450/400-grain ballistics with ease.
Ditto a 300-grainer at 2530 fps to duplicate the foot-pounds of the 375 H&H 300-grainer.
All on the '06 based case.

I might even allow ball powder back in the house.
Will see.
I will not compress any ball powder loads, but I surely do like 105%, mildly compressed, loads of extruded Hodgdon Extreme and Alliant powders.

quote:

Originally posted by 45-70 shooter:
If you cannot get it done with a 400 gr bullet @2000 fps, you may be the problem.

45-70 shooter should rest assured that I do not want to encourage any 400 Whelen owners to become "problem shooters."
A 400 Whelen owner being a problem shooter is an oxymoron.

It is true that the modern bullets can handle more velocity than the 1895 Winchester and 1898 Nitro Express vintage ballistics.
Luddites are welcome to stay there. That is their problem.

Hell, I say, step up to some 1923 vintage, what Major Whelen was drinking.

quote:

but I surely do like 105%, mildly compressed, loads of extruded Hodgdon Extreme and Alliant powders.

I've actually gone to what QL calls 112% with no issue. However, I do prefer loads in the 105-107% compression.

RIP
For The fuck sake, Please change back to your Case Head Avatar.

Pyzda

quote:

RIP
For The f--k sake, Please change back to your Case Head Avatar

I thought he was posting his picture.

Is that V.I. Lenin or Colonel Sanders? Who was the last guy?

It is amusing to read the posts from the "utes" who have probably never hunted with a 400 Whelen who think it has to be "hot rodded" to kill anything. While modern bullets may, in some cases. be stouter, that is no reason to "upload" the cartridge. The Elk I took with mine and the old X was 250 yards away. The bullet was not recovered (Barnes usually are not) but from the damage I would say there was little expansion. None the less when you poke a 40 caliber hole through both lungs of an Elk, they die very quickly as in 3 steps and plop.
If you read actual hunting experienes in say African Hunter magazine, written by people who have KILLED more large game than we will ever even see, you would see (maybe learn) that pushing a large caliber bullet at high velocity is not always the best policy. Often times the arrow straight, non tumbling penetration you want does not happen. One of the regular Wolfe publishing writers, who has killed enough elephants "on control" to give PETA a stroke, swears by the 9.3x62 shooting a 286 grain solid that are hardly able to clear the bore at +-2200 fps. Arrow straight penetration and he has numerous elephant skull to prove it.
Some sage years back called it "Magnumitis".
If you must have a "fast 40" get a 400 H&H as it is the best there is. In mine I could push the 300 TSX to velocities I won't even list here, however even with a Vias, 10 pounds and a very comfortable stock design, it was nothing you wanted to run 50 through on the bench. Fun project and would shoot anything except the 400 old X into 1 moa or less but really not required for anything I hunt.



If I need a really "big bore" I get this off the wall:

quote:

Originally posted by 45-70 shooter:
If you must have a "fast 40" get a 400 H&H as it is the best there is. In mine I could push the 300 TSX to velocities I won't even list here, however even with a Vias, 10 pounds and a very comfortable stock design, it was nothing you wanted to run 50 through on the bench. Fun project and would shoot anything except the 400 old X into 1 moa or less but really not required for anything I hunt.

So you don't know how to spell "Vais" but do you know how to pronounce it?

http://www.muzzlebrakes.com/

Too bad they don't work so well with your patch&ball shooter, eh?

I'm sure Townsend Whelen would not insist on training wheels on the 400 Whelen cartridge,
nor training bra on the shooter.

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
I've actually gone to what QL calls 112% with no issue. However, I do prefer loads in the 105-107% compression.

QL must be the best internal ballistics software out there. Are there any competitors left?
However, QuickLOAD is challenged by keeping up with he changing powder lots from the powder makers.
I have seen QL predictions of 100% load that rattle in the case like 95% loads.
I am not smart enough to play with the powder variables inside QuickLOAD, but there is some allowance for that in the program.
One could get really close to reality by doing that.
Newest RL-10x needs some reprogramming.

I like RIP's KFC avatar. It looks like RIP with a fancy tie on. Back to the topic I have been anti magnumitis for a long time. I am not against velocity now with certain bullets but with conventional bullets a few hundred FPS is the realm of diminishing returns. I think 250-350 grains makes this cart sing. I don't know it the last 50 grains to 400 is worth it again the law of diminishing returns unless you are hunting Buff or Jumbo or hippo.

Can I petition for the Colonel Sanders avatar.

boom stick,
Gotta do Antique 400-grainers at 2150 fps AND 300-Grain NonCon at 2550 fps to make both Major Whelen AND Colonel Sanders happy.
I have been accused of looking like Col. Sanders when I wear the white suit with 3 feet of black ribbon bow-tied around my neck.


RIFLECRANK INTERNATIONALE PERMANENTE

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
boom stick,
Gotta do Antique 400-grainers at 2150 fps AND 300-Grain NonCon at 2550 fps to make both Major Whelen AND Colonel Sanders happy.
I have been accused of looking like Col. Sanders when I wear the white suit with 3 feet of black ribbon bow-tied around my neck.


RIFLECRANK INTERNATIONALE PERMANENTE

Geez Ron, why the unhappy face? Col. Sanders is smiling...

Jim,
Unhappy? No! Quite the opposite. Happy but dazed!
That was right after a cape buffalo mount attacked from 10 feet off the floor and hooked me on the forehead with his horn as I wrestled it to the ground with my bare hands!
It was at my son's house, and luckily he helped subdue the beast.
That is the only time I have been charged by a cape buffalo. And it ended well:



Why that buffalo wanted to get even with me:



It's a vicious cycle. Now I want to kill another cape buffalo, more than ever!

400 Whelen buffalo loads?
Which is better?

400-grain Woodleigh at 2150 fps
350-grain Swift A-Frame at 2350 fps
300-grain Barnes TSX at 2550 fps

These all seem reasonably possible from a 24" barrel.

That 1933 dated 400 Whelen data from Du Pont, posted by Michael Petrov above, shows
a 350-grainer at 2273 fps and 42,960 CUP?

Now, back to 400 Whelen ... I am stocked up on 350-grain Swifts ...

Dude!!! Manhandling a Cape Buffalo!!!! Glad you came out on top...

350gr Swift... Though the 300gr TSX should certainly work just as well....

Oh yes, one small improvement for the 400 Whelen - ala .318 Westley Richards and .333 Jeffery - make use of the 3.6" magazine length of the modern M70 and seat the base of whatever bullet you're going to use at the shoulder/neck junction... Doing so you could make good use of a 400gr NF CPS bullet which is deadly on buffalo...

RIP, I forgive your rude behavior for insulting me because I am a lousy typist. It seems that there are people on the Internet who often act, while hiding behind a keyboard, that they would not FTF. Point is, I have a 400 Whelen and a 400 H&H and have shot both a lot. I also read a lot, both classic and current writings on hunting DG.
If you think you need to hot rod a 400 Whelen to kill a Buff, when 1000s of dead Buffs prove you wrong. None the the bullets you list are high on the list of PHs for Buff hunting. Top of the list right now is a 270 or 300 TSX in the 375 H&H. If I ever won the lottery and could hunt Buff and wanted to take my 400 W, I'd use my hoard of 350 or 400 gr old Xs that would duplicate the 450/400
which has proven effective on all DG for many, many decades.
BUT I doubt I'd take the Whelen as after the airline loses your ammo you are SOL, where as were I carrying my 375 H&H RSM, I could by replacement ammo "in country".
Merry Christmas and don't be rude to Santa or you'll get a lump of coal.

Coal in my stocking: I'll find a use for it.
Coal is good for many things, but not the best for reloading the 400 Whelen.

Left to right, 4 cans of powder:
1. Very Old Win-748, 25 years old at least.
2. New Win-748, latest lot I could find, purchased yesterday.
3. Old RL-10x, from when it was called "new" at first introduction, this cannister is a 2009 lot.
4. RL-10x lot made in 2012.



I am going to get a feel for these powders along with
Hodgdon's Benchmark Extreme
H322 Extreme
H335 (ball powder)
Alliant's RL-15 (for 400-grainers).
The RL-10x, old and new, is for 300-grainers.
W-748 is for all bullets, 300, 350, and 400-grainers. Hopefully it is accurate and fast, with at least one of them, but don't bet the farm on it.

RL-15 has been noted to vary significantly lot-to-lot according to a "lot" of 470 NE shooters/reloaders here,
but not as much as the big recent change in RL-10x.
I just gotta see that for myself.

I bet the Swifts bump up from .410" to .411" in the barrel.
They surely do bump up when they hit something.

Right now all I can do is tease with reloading plans, and get to reloading ...
I want to alternate 400 Whelen and .375/404JS shooting at next range trip.

Any new 400 Whelen load data with latest powders appreciated.
Hot air is OK too, when taken with a grain of salt and 11 herbs and spices.

Kentucky Fried Rifles
RIFLECRANK INTERNATIONALE PERMANENTE

As others have done:



Pass a .416-caliber jacketed bullet through a .410" Lee bullet sizer and they spring back to .411-caliber, and stay there.
Use STP Oil Treatment as lube. Trick learned from prof 242.
Above are an old Barnes Original .416/400-gr RNSP with .049" jacket,
and a Speer .416/350-gr Mag Tip.
I have enough of both of those to substitute for the more expensive Woodleigh and Swift bullets in preliminary load development.
We already have the perfect load for the Hornady .411/300-gr SP with newest lot RL-10x (57.0 grains) thanks to Rusty McGee.
Thus, I need to go directly to Barnes TSX .411/300-grainer for hotrodding the 400 Whelen.

thanks to all for this valuable, to me, information,drawings & pictures.

last yr. Michael p. & Mart helped me get started
on my attempt to getting my inherited .400 whelen
up and firing.
i let the project go cold after encountering headspace difficulty.
this posting of information has renewed interest.

i can't add anything noteworthy or fresh, and
my rifle is not control rd. feed, so i'm out of luck w/ the ladies

i will try to load a few pictures.

Thanks for posting the rifle pics.
Can you give some history on the gun? When and who made it ect. Interesting stock design.

gordief,

Fresh by unique features of your rifle!!!

If that is not a CRF Springfield, then what is it, with similar cocking piece?

I have never seen a stock with a goiter on the forearm, or an off-hand palmswell, but I am from Kentucky.

Who made that rifle, and was it made with the proper chamber to original 400 Whelen specs?

What sort of headspace problems made you put it away?
That can surely be fixed by at least one of the "experts" here.

The barrel band connecting the sling through the stock is interesting too.

quote:

Pass a .416-caliber jacketed bullet through a .410" Lee bullet sizer and they spring back to .411-caliber, and stay there

Yep works for me. Gives me a much larger bullet selection.

This is my 400.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
The barrel band connecting the sling through the stock is interesting too.

Just like the first gen Ruger RSM and older M77 Tropical 458WinMag in that regard.
The Adam's Apple on the forearm is less familiar, but looks highly functional too.

Mighty nice 400 PDK there, ramrod340.
Is that AHR Howell basic cylindrical brass (of 2.65" length) blank,
or does it have a headstamp?

quote:

Is that AHR Howell basic cylindrical brass (of 2.65" length) blank,
or does it have a headstamp

I'm 1000 miles away from the brass. It is probably closer to 2.7"+ from the factory. Headstamp says "Howell Basic". Cylinder brass from z-hat is headstamped 35 Whelen.

Thanks I love the way the rifle turned out

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
Can you give some history on the gun? When and who made it ect. Interesting stock design.

I'm not sure who made that stock but it was Ignatius Tamorria of Washington D.C. who originally designed that type stock. I have also seen a couple made by the Sportsman's Service Station at Tenafly, NJ.

Michael Petrov's original Griffin & Howe 400 Whelen (second ever made?), made in 1923 from a Model 1903 Springfield:



http://finegunmaking.com/page33/page51/page51.html

I hear he also has a 1951 M70 Winchester that was rebarreled to 400 Whelen, with the proper .411"-grooved/.404"-bored, 1:14" TWIST Shilen barrel.

1903 Springfield 400 Whelen: Is that not what gordief has?
Different stock, different sights, but looks like it would use the same Lyman Receiver Sight, and the stock has already been fitted for it ...





Maybe a restocked G&H and the only problem was with the reloading dies forming the brass with wrong shoulder diameter?

Another excerpt from Petrov:

.400 WHELEN:
"The first notice I find of the .400 Whelen is in Arms And The Man on June 15, 1922 where Whelen tells about his work on this cartridge. The .400 Whelen is the 30-06 cylindrical case necked down to take the .405 Winchester 300gr. .411" diameter round nose bullet. Four test rifles were being made up, two on the 1903 Springfield and two on the Mauser action. Whelen estimates the velocity of the 300-gr. bullets at 2350-2600 fps. These test rifles, as well as the loading tools, were made by James V. Howe then of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The barrels for these where made and installed by A.O. Niedner in Dowagiac, Michigan. By November 15th, 1922 Whelen was offering a circular by mail with information on the 400. Anyone know where one of these circulars is to be found?"

I am still collecting proper-sized bullets and new cans of powders, and proper brass is pending from Quality Cartridge.
Will start working my way through the powders,
soon as weekend weather allows at outdoor range.

When I first saw the thread asking if there were any fresh thoughts on the 400 Whelen I kinda chuckled cause I thought this cartridge was long obsolete. Boy, was I wrong. Five pages of posts, WOW!

I am still puzzled though. For a long time I had a 35 Whelen but I have never even seen a 400 Whelen in all my travels. Wouldn't it be simpler to just pick up a .416 Ruger and load it down a bit to duplicate the 400 Whelen and avoid all the possible issues with respect to the shoulder? .411 vs. .416, not much of a difference and both work in a 30/06 length action.

Somebody out there is scratching their head and saying "yea, but what fun would that be?"

quote:

Wouldn't it be simpler to just pick up a .416 Ruger and load it down a bit to duplicate the 400 Whelen and avoid all the possible issues with respect to the shoulder? .411 vs. .416, not much of a difference

Simpler??? Sure. but like you say what fun would that be???

Yep 416 Ruger, 400 H&H, 416 Taylor all would do the same thing. But like you said you have nver seen a 400 Whelen. Many of us like to be different.

What you see here is a number of actual users that say the shoulder is not an issue. So pretty much a 450/400 in a bolt action. Hmmmm when was the last time you had 5 down and one in the chamber with a magnum case?

A look into the past,

Michael,

I have always enjoyed that photo of the cape buffalo taken with the 400 Whelen. Those pictures are great. Obviously the fellows that used the 400 Whelen back then against dangerous game hadn't heard of the headspace issues.

Thanks for sharing the photos and all the great research on the grand old 400.

Mart

Boomstick,
as to history of the gun, the people who know for sure are all passed away, but it is belived the original owner was my grandmother's first husband.
he was killed by a hit & run driver in 1925,
in Norristown, Pa., where they lived. she remarried later on & his rifles have been passed down.
i was told by my dad, not a gun person, that the
rifle was made by G & H, but i think Mr. Petrov has more accurate information.
as kids in the 1960's we were told to call it :
"The Elephant Rifle".
there was also an sporterized '03 30-06 springfield rifle, & a Mannlicher-Schonauer bolt-actin carbine w/ full stock in cal. 9.5x57mm.

RIP,
I just assumed it was not CRF... it is a std. Springfield action.
chamber spec's are unknown at this time... my chamber cast attempt failed...hope to try again.
my headspace troubles are due to the shoulder being to small, outside dia., i hope to fix that w/ some of the dimensions gleaned from the above posts.

thanks to all for keeping this great old cartridge alive...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by gordief:
there was also an sporterized '03 30-06 springfield /QUOTE]

Did I see pictures of this rifle? If not I would like to. Thanks, Michael