>35 Whelen versus. 338 Win Mag TKO values (modified)

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

In close quarters the 338WM still does the same all the way out to 300gr rounds!

@CZDiesel
Does the same as what.
It lacks versatility.
Can't be loaded with cheap handgun bullets for fun.
Doesn't shoot any flatter than a 35 cal at a faster speed
And the Whelen as I have said before can be loaded with weights from 115-310 grains.
Whelen wins again
That's 3 for the Whelen
338 zip
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I really don't have a side here, but when things don't make sense I do question it. Could you please provide the powder loads and expected MV for maximum MV for these 225gr loads?

From my Switft manual, the 225gr load for the .338WM uses 74gr of RL-22 for 2750fps, that is the maximum velocity listed. From the same manual the 225gr load for the .35 Whelen is 60.5gr of BL-C(2) for 2623fps.

Ok that is 20% less powder but it's also 5% less speed. Thus the .338WM will have 10% more energy and 5% more momentum. Add to this the increased sectional density and BC, it's hard for me to buy into this notion that the .35 Whelen gives .338WM performance with identical bullets.

Will there be more recoil with the .338? Of course there will, but I'd put that up to the .338 shooting considerably faster, that's just physics.

To be certain both are proven calibers and I'm not disparaging either. I also own neither of them. I have a .300WM and a .375HH. Having both of these, I just don't see a hole that either the .338WM or .35 Whelen fills, that my existing two choices already don't. And I'll shoot my .375 with 250gr bullets all day long, heck even my wife is starting to do that now. Go "down" to the .300WM and with 200gr bullets and I'll shoot even longer.

@PHOENIX PHIL
THE WHELEN using Speers load of 70 gn of cfe223 gives 2,900fps. My load with the 225 accubonds with the same powder but smaller charge gives 2,950 fps chronographed.
Bob

 

[flatwater bill]

RDP is a new one to me.
8.2 for the 338 WM
8.6 for the Mighty Whelen
and I think the 243 splits the difference with an 8.4.......FWB

 

[CoElkHunter]

I’d prefer a .400 Whelen sending 400gr bullets down range at 2400fps just like a Rigby and with a RDP of 25.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

RDP is a new one to me.
8.2 for the 338 WM
8.6 for the Mighty Whelen
and I think the 243 splits the difference with an 8.4.......FWB

@flatwater bill
I think you have the decimal place in the wrong spot mate.
For the 243 it should be 0.84 at the most and that's being generous.
Bob

 

[MS 9x56]

Look, I like the 35 Whelen! I think it makes one of the best CQ bush guns out there!!!
Not for Dangerous Game but for everything else!
Id like to one day make one in a 20” bbl Mannlicher stocked custom…
But it’s not a 338Win Mag no matter how bad someone wants it to be! It’s not and will never be!
Thats OK, I LOVE my 264 Win Mag! Maybe my favorite cartridge and rifle I own!!! But it’s not the 7STW that I own either!
Just saying, there are places for all! And the 35W fits most but as the saying goes “Jack of all trades, Master of none!”

You would be about 119 years late to the party with that 20” barreled Mannlicher as the original 9x56 ms came out in 1905.

 

[cajunchefray]

I’d prefer a .400 Whelen sending 400gr bullets down range at 2400fps just like a Rigby and with a RDP of 25.

Me too! I did not know 2400 fps is possible in the .400 Whelen.

Is that using CFE 223? Now I need to build one

 

[DG870]

Interesting numbers. I don’t really have a dog in the fight either as I own and like both calibers and their cousin, the 338-06. It appears these calculations were done for muzzle velocity, it would be interesting to see the same calculations done from 100 to 500 yards at 100 yard intervals using the muzzle velocity at that distance. The higher BC for the 338 should retain velocity better so the scales should tip the other way. They are both great cartridges so one doesn’t really need to be judged “better“ than the other. Good discussion to have over a bottle of Bushmills (sorry Bob, not a rum drinker)

 

[CoElkHunter]

Me too! I did not know 2400 fps is possible in the .400 Whelen.

Is that using CFE 223? Now I need to build one

I'm not sure about the powder? You'd have to ask Bob.

 

[Flewis]

Me too! I did not know 2400 fps is possible in the .400 Whelen.

Is that using CFE 223? Now I need to build one

If you load the 400whelen to 2400 with a 400 grain there will be a lot of stuff going down range. CEH is pulling your leg.

 

[CoElkHunter]

If you load the 400whelen to 2400 with a 400 grain there will be a lot of stuff going down range. CEH is pulling your leg.

I was just seeing if anyone on here was awake at 0118 hours when I posted it. LOL

 

[Flewis]

I was just seeing if anyone on here was awake at 0118 hours when I posted it. LOL

I knew you were messing with them as always.

 

[flatwater bill]

@Bob Nelson 35Whelen oops...............FWB

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

@PHOENIX PHIL
THE WHELEN using Speers load of 70 gn of cfe223 gives 2,900fps. My load with the 225 accubonds with the same powder but smaller charge gives 2,950 fps chronographed.
Bob

Well I was trying to maintain an apples to apples comparison. This information may be accurate, but it makes this an apples to oranges comparison. A couple of holes:

1. 70gr of CFE is not 20% less than the 74gr of RL-22 powder load I looked up for the .338WM. This was part of why the OP thinks it's a better round.

2. If you're getting 2900-2950fps from a 225gr projectile in the .35 Whelen, with fairly close to the same powder charge weight, there's not a chance in hell you're getting 20% less recoil with same projectile in a .338WM at 2750fps. You'll be getting MORE recoil with the .35W, not less. The OP advertised 20% less recoil in similar loads.

3. What throws the comparison off however is the load you have for your accubonds. You've apparently found a powder that works far better for the .35W, but what about the .338WM? I've compared book loads. You didn't provide a comparison to an optimized .338WM load. If you're comparing an optimized .35 Whelen load to book loads for the .338WM, that's not an accurate comparison.

This is starting to remind me of the comparisons of how you can get .300WM velocities from a .30-06. Some things just don't add up.

 

[Scott CWO]

Well I was trying to maintain an apples to apples comparison. This information may be accurate, but it makes this an apples to oranges comparison. A couple of holes:

1. 70gr of CFE is not 20% less than the 74gr of RL-22 powder load I looked up for the .338WM. This was part of why the OP thinks it's a better round.

2. If you're getting 2900-2950fps from a 225gr projectile in the .35 Whelen, with fairly close to the same powder charge weight, there's not a chance in hell you're getting 20% less recoil with same projectile in a .338WM at 2750fps. You'll be getting MORE recoil with the .35W, not less. The OP advertised 20% less recoil in similar loads.

3. What throws the comparison off however is the load you have for your accubonds. You've apparently found a powder that works far better for the .35W, but what about the .338WM? I've compared book loads. You didn't provide a comparison to an optimized .338WM load. If you're comparing an optimized .35 Whelen load to book loads for the .338WM, that's not an accurate comparison.

This is starting to remind me of the comparisons of how you can get .300WM velocities from a .30-06. Some things just don't add up.

Yeah a hot load for the 35 Squealing compared to a low-end load for a 338WM death ray is cheating @Bob Nelson 35Whelen !!

 

[CZDiesel]

@CZDiesel
Does the same as what.
It lacks versatility.
Can't be loaded with cheap handgun bullets for fun.
Doesn't shoot any flatter than a 35 cal at a faster speed
And the Whelen as I have said before can be loaded with weights from 115-310 grains.
Whelen wins again
That's 3 for the Whelen
338 zip
Bob

Bob, gotta slow down on the sauce

 

[The35Whelen]

I really don't have a side here, but when things don't make sense I do question it. Could you please provide the powder loads and expected MV for maximum MV for these 225gr loads?

From my Switft manual, the 225gr load for the .338WM uses 74gr of RL-22 for 2750fps, that is the maximum velocity listed. From the same manual the 225gr load for the .35 Whelen is 60.5gr of BL-C(2) for 2623fps.

Ok that is 20% less powder but it's also 5% less speed. Thus the .338WM will have 10% more energy and 5% more momentum. Add to this the increased sectional density and BC, it's hard for me to buy into this notion that the .35 Whelen gives .338WM performance with identical bullets.

Will there be more recoil with the .338? Of course there will, but I'd put that up to the .338 shooting considerably faster, that's just physics.

To be certain both are proven calibers and I'm not disparaging either. I also own neither of them. I have a .300WM and a .375HH. Having both of these, I just don't see a hole that either the .338WM or .35 Whelen fills, that my existing two choices already don't. And I'll shoot my .375 with 250gr bullets all day long, heck even my wife is starting to do that now. Go "down" to the .300WM and with 200gr bullets and I'll shoot even longer.

The current Sierra manual has the Whelen pushing a 225 grain bullet at 2900fps and a 250 grain bullet at 2700 FPS with CFE223 and Power Pro 2000-MR.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

The current Sierra manual has the Whelen pushing a 225 grain bullet at 2900fps and a 250 grain bullet at 2700 FPS with CFE223 and Power Pro 2000-MR.

And how do those loads compare to what they list for .338WM in the same powder? I don't have a Speer manual. Actually, specifically what are those loads, please provide the charge weights.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

And how do those loads compare to what they list for .338WM in the same powder? I don't have a Speer manual. Actually, specifically what are those loads, please provide the charge weights.

@PHOENIX PHIL
I don't know mate I don't look up loads for the 338. If you have a look online you will see Speer lists 64gn if cfe223 for almost 2,700 and another powder getting over 2,700fos with the 250 gn.
Bob

 

[CoElkHunter]

I knew you were messing with them as always.

Fooled Bob. He "loved" My post. LOL