310gr Aussie Bear Repellent for my 35Whelen

W

Whelen B

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
61   0   0
Just got a hundred of these.
woodleigh310gr_358.jpg

The cutaway 35 Whelen case on the right has the 310 seated to the canelure and is 3.280" COAL = just right! They should work OK in my AI version and my 350WSM too. I'd love to get a BIG bear with one of these bullets. Might go to Quebec with them "loaded for bear" in a month or so. We'll see. I wonder how fast I will be able to throw them? I'm thinking 2250MV outa my standard 35Whelens and maybe 2350MV or a bit more out of my 350WSM. Be launching em soon at the range.
 
I recently got some really old stock 275 gr Hornady bullets and I think that you just one up'd me for sure. I got them for my AI as well.
 
Corlanes Sports

Siverback - I've seen load data for those Hornady 275s in some older manuals. But it's great you got some. They're probably more all around practical than those 310s. But as you say 275s are no longer available from Hornadys. Anywho - I'm bound to have some shooting and hunting fun with those 310s.
 
Last edited:
I got some 250 grainers for my 8mm Rem Mag from Corlanes, last two boxes they had. Cant wait to shoot some...$39/50
 
I can't image that any game animal in Quebec would notice the difference from a 250gr bullet (through and through means dead), but hey, I'd try it (I have a 35 Whelen), and with a bullet that long, barrel twist rate could become a factor.

I'd work with H414 I think - a full or near full case would likely give the 2150 fps or so recommended by Woodleigh.
 
Last edited:
Hey I got some of those two from Corlanes to try in the 358 Win, seated to 2.785 I seem to be able to get only 2000fps out of it...kinda knew that when I started this little project. The 225's doing 2450fps are giving more energy. If I can find a powder that will give 2100fps safely then I'll be happy and keep them as my bear medicine. Right now it's IMR 4895 at 40g giving 2020 fps and starting to show pressure signs (crater)
 
hmmmmm....wonder if they would seat short enoungh for my 350 rem mag in a 600 length action....anyone try yet????
 
One of the early criticisms of the .350 RM was due to the short throat. By necessity heavy bullets had to be seated deeply resulting in a loss of powder capacity. The 600 also had an OAL limitation due to the magazine length, so lengthening the throat to accommodate the longer bullet might not be an advantage.

I doubt there is much to be gained by attempting to over drive these bullets beyond their design limitations. A heavy bullet at a moderate velocity results in a large frontal area with enough momentum for deep penetration despite the large frontal area. Penetration at the same range is likely to be the same as that of a high velocity 200 or 220 gr bullet, but the wound volume should be much larger with the heavier bullet.
 
...and with a bullet that long, barrel twist rate could become a factor.
Click to expand...
We'll see I guess. I know a 350RM rifle that shoots very accurately 300gr Barnes with a 1 in 16 twist (3 shots into .9" at 100). But I've got 3 flavours to play with -12" 14" and 16" anyway.
One of the early criticisms of the .350 RM was due to the short throat.
Click to expand...
??? - My 600 and 660 and Ruger77 350s all have long throats. With the 310Woodleigh seated to 2.820" (max in a M600 or M660 mag) as in this pic I just took, the "jump" to the lands is .315" in my M660. With a Barnes 300 the "jump" is less but still substantial at .205". I just reconfirmed this tonite. Jumps of .300" are typical with 250 Spitzers in all my 350RMs at 2.800" COALS. I would call that long throated.

Of course, as you say, the COAL is limited (to 2.820" by the mag in the Remingtons - 2.865" in the Ruger77). Most criticisms I heard were that heavyweight bullets required deep seating because of mag length restrictions not throating. Here's a pic of the 310 seated to 2.820" in a 350RM case. The ogive of this 310 is actually about a 1/16" down into the case mouth (but isn't with a Barnes 300 at the same COAL).
wdlgh310_350RM_2.820sm.jpg

Though deep seating does indeed waste boiler room space and looks awful too, one still may get decent performance with the 300 weights in a 350RM in the order of 2200MV to 2250MV I'm guessing. This Woodleigh bullet is not the best shape for the 350RM and the Barnes Original 300 is better I think. Oddly enough it seems a better shape for the 358 case. But getting the 358Win to kick it out the front door fast enough is a challenge as thepitchedlink has noted.
I can't image that any game animal in Quebec would notice the difference from a 250gr bullet (through and through means dead),
Click to expand...
True enough - I've been killing them just fine with 250s from various 35cals for a while and want to try something different - just cause.
I'd work with H414 I think
Click to expand...
Yes that may be a good choice for this application - thanks. I don't have any right now though.

Loooong enough post eh?
 
Whelen B said:
Loooong enough post eh?
Click to expand...

Well, we have a combination of:

- hunting;
- reloading (powder, seating, and twist issues);
- big-ass heavy for caliber bullet (and a Woodleigh at that); and
- a 35 cal question.

Of course they'll come out of the woodwork! :D
 
Whelen B said:
We'll see I guess. I know a 350RM rifle that shoots very accurately 300gr Barnes with a 1 in 16 twist (3 shots into .9" at 100). But I've got 3 flavours to play with -12" 14" and 16" anyway.

??? - My 600 and 660 and Ruger77 350s all have long throats. With the 310Woodleigh seated to 2.820" (max in a M600 or M660 mag) as in this pic I just took, the "jump" to the lands is .315" in my M660. With a Barnes 300 the "jump" is less but still substantial at .205". I just reconfirmed this tonite. Jumps of .300" are typical with 250 Spitzers in all my 350RMs at 2.800" COALS. I would call that long throated.

Of course, as you say, the COAL is limited (to 2.820" by the mag in the Remingtons - 2.865" in the Ruger77). Most criticisms I heard were that heavyweight bullets required deep seating because of mag length restrictions not throating. Here's a pic of the 310 seated to 2.820" in a 350RM case. The ogive of this 310 is actually about a 1/16" down into the case mouth (but isn't with a Barnes 300 at the same COAL).
wdlgh310_350RM_2.820sm.jpg

Though deep seating does indeed waste boiler room space and looks awful too, one still may get decent performance with the 300 weights in a 350RM in the order of 2200MV to 2250MV I'm guessing. This Woodleigh bullet is not the best shape for the 350RM and the Barnes Original 300 is better I think. Oddly enough it seems a better shape for the 358 case. But getting the 358Win to kick it out the front door fast enough is a challenge as thepitchedlink has noted.

True enough - I've been killing them just fine with 250s from various 35cals for a while and want to try something different - just cause.

Yes that may be a good choice for this application - thanks. I don't have any right now though.

Loooong enough post eh?
Click to expand...

When I build a rifle for a small capacity case these days I have the throat cut so that the bullet I am most likely to use does not extend below the shoulder. This makes a huge difference in the performance one can get from the cartridge, but requires a longish magazine. My .308 (long barrel) for instance will drive a 200 gr MK to with spitting distance of 2700 fps without excess pressure. Pretty quick for a .308.
 
Boomer said:
When I build a rifle for a small capacity case these days I have the throat cut so that the bullet I am most likely to use does not extend below the shoulder. This makes a huge difference in the performance one can get from the cartridge, but requires a longish magazine. My .308 (long barrel) for instance will drive a 200 gr MK to with spitting distance of 2700 fps without excess pressure. Pretty quick for a .308.
Click to expand...

if you have the magazine capacity to load a bullet long in a short case, why bother? why not just chamber for something with the appropriate capacity?
 
Be sure to check for bullet stability at 200 and 300 yards if you have 1/16 twist. What works at 100 may disappear as the velocity drops further out. A friends Remington keyholed at 150 with 300 grain bullets but seemed fine at 100 although the group was not very tight.
 
What works at 100 may disappear as the velocity drops further out.
Click to expand...
A good point. I have 100, 200 and 300yd berms at my range. Thanks for passing on your friends Remmy experience with 300s. Very interesting especially if evaluating stability.
This makes a huge difference in the performance one can get from the cartridge, but requires a longish magazine.
Click to expand...
Yep - better performance essentially just like a comparably larger case capacity would give - if you take advantage of it by adding more powder.
 
WhelenB; I have two 35 Whelens which make #'s 3 and 4 over the past 45 years. I shoot cast bullets, primarily, with the heaviest being a 287 grain bullet. Both of my current rifles are 1/14 and they will stabilize the 287 grain to 200 yards as determined on targets. Beyond that the trajectory gets a little too much to field judge for hunting so I pass up any animal outside the norms I have ascertained. I am only pushing this bullet at 1900 and doubt it would remain stable much further without more velocity to maintain the RPM's. The guys who shoot the heavies a lot say 1/12 is the twist to have. But, it is harder to get cast bulets to shoot as well with the faster twist so I compromised. For those that shoot jacketed bullets a 250 grain works well in 1/16 and is very effective at the animal end. The early work with the 35 Whelen by the namesake dealt with 275 grain and heavier and he recommended 1/12. No matter how your rifle is built in this chambering it is a great hunting cartridge if you match the bullet to your rifle. If anyone has trouble with the 310 Woodleighs then a 1/12 barrel will solve the problem. You have to test them at increasing ranges to know what happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom