.35 Whelen vs. 9.3 x 62mm

[Beck]

Don't kill the messenger Bob, I just found the video.

 

[pilar]

That guy is a tool imo !
35whelen if you reload is about equal to a 9.3 x62 factory but illegal in Africa so mute point . Both are good game tippers where long shots aren’t necessary

 

[Beck]

That guy is a tool imo !
35whelen if you reload is about equal to a 9.3 x62 factory but illegal in Africa so mute point . Both are good game tippers where long shots aren’t necessary

Hard to disagree with you there; he’s pretty arrogant and obnoxious

 

[Axle2010]

He did a lot more showing off his rifles than he did teaching about the cartridge. That Field Ethos was a fine looking rifle though...

 

[Ruraldoc]

I like Sundles. Have spoken to him on the phone and he was helpful to me.

He has strong opinions, a ton of great firearms, and is no fan of government overreach.

I have used some of his ammo with very good results.

 

[RedTag]

He knows what he’s talking about when it comes to guns and ammunition, especially ammunition. I’ve used quite a bit of his ammo and it is very good. His public behavior and attitude towards customers have been questionable at times.
As to the .35 Whelen versus 9.3x62mm, I think it’s like arguing between the .270 Winchester and the 7x64mm. Performance is going to be quite similar given similar bullet weight, construction, and velocity with select loads. Slight advantages to one or the other depending on location, component availability, etc. As an American, I favor cartridges in the .30-06 family over any continental European options for domestic uses. If I were from Europe or certain other places I’d likely feel differently. I like belted cartridges a lot too and I think there is great merit in the belted concept as headspace is never a problem with ammo made to varying specifications in different countries. Check the CIP list of delta L problem cartridges and you’ll see what I’m saying.

 

[Axle2010]

He knows what he’s talking about when it comes to guns and ammunition, especially ammunition. I’ve used quite a bit of his ammo and it is very good. His public behavior and attitude towards customers have been questionable at times.
As to the .35 Whelen versus 9.3x62mm, I think it’s like arguing between the .270 Winchester and the 7x64mm. Performance is going to be quite similar given similar bullet weight, construction, and velocity with select loads. Slight advantages to one or the other depending on location, component availability, etc. As an American, I favor cartridges in the .30-06 family over any continental European options for domestic uses. If I were from Europe or certain other places I’d likely feel differently. I like belted cartridges a lot too and I think there is great merit in the belted concept as headspace is never a problem with ammo made to varying specifications in different countries. Check the CIP list of delta L problem cartridges and you’ll see what I’m saying.

Man I'm so glad to see another belt fan! I know they're not perfect but they were the cats meow for years until somebody started whining about that "horrible belt". I'm still mad they took the belt off the new Weatherby rounds.

 

[One Day...]

The belt was invented by H&H in order to insure positive head-spacing of its new long, slender shoulder, cartridges .300 H&H and .375 H&H.
Be that as it may, a belt is useless on cartridges with a well defined shoulder, and it does indeed generally reduce magazine capacity by 1 round.
Interestingly, the Germans never used it, neither the “magnum” moniker that referred to extra large Champagne bottles, and Lord knows they created cartridges that would deserve the name, e.g. 8x68S, 6.5x68 etc.

 

[Ruraldoc]

I think the 35 Whelen is better with bullets lighter than 250 grains. Really well suited to North American hunting.

I think the 9.3x62 is better with bullets of 250 grains and up. It also has readily available solids. To me this gives it the edge in Africa.

With the right bullets and high performance handloads they are very close.

Both of my 35 Whelens were Remington 700s. I sold both and moved on the 9.3 in a CZ 550, and later added my Steyr SM12.

So which one you prefer often comes down to rifle availability. I personally now use my 9.3x62 with 250 grain TSXs for about everything. I have a friend who has killed more than a dozen Cape Buffalo Bulls with that very load so I know it works.

Tim Sundles said it’s his favorite load in the 9.3 x62 and I think he is on to something in this regard.

With respect to the 35 Whelen loaded with full power 225 grain bullets, it does duplicate the classic 350 Rigby with 225 grain bullets which was highly respected in Africa as an all around medium bore which is saying something in itself.

 

[Olivier]

35 Whelen is a 9.1mm, 9.3x62 a 9.3mm frontal section. The difference is here and have some importance; 9.5mm (.375) is considered the minimum on DG. The 9.3x62 is konwn as efficient but not legal everywhere...it is the "minimum" under the legal munimum. If you go now to 35 Whelen, why not the accept 8mm cartridges for DG?

 

[Hyde Hunter]

I have a Sauer 100 in 9.3x62 and shoot 250-258 gr bullets at 2500-2600 fps but I can't load the bullets as long as I would like to due to the short mag and guns feed ramp, so I am working on a long action Rem 700 so I can load them out and now trying to decide on the 35 Whelen or stay with a 9.3x62. the Whelen can be loaded and shot hard but locally there is a lack of bullet choice to hand load.

 

[Clodo Ferreira]

Hi,

To me, is unfair to compare the 35 W with the 9,3x62. Sorry for the 35 W...!
Starting from the cases designs: the unnecesesary 35 W long neck, even a disadvantage for a few reasons; the velocity with same weight bullets at similar pressures; to the factory cartridges and bullets available: the .366" bullets around the world cover all 9,3x62 uses. And more!

CF