338wm or 35 whelen , why?

bearkilr said:
The 338-06 wasn't one of the OP's choices and neither was the 9.3x62.

Didn't anyone read post #1? :confused:
Click to expand...

I don't know, seems like a pretty honest mistake to make, given that the 338-06 and 35 Whelan would be more of a head-to-head comparison, really isn't much of a comparison of 338 Win Mag to a 35 Whelen? More likely comparison to a 338 Win Mag would be a 358 Norma Mag.

Must be nice to be perfect and never make a mistake... some day you'll make a fine wife for somebody.... :p

Now back to the OP's actual question of 338 Win Mag vs. 35 Whelen, it would pretty much come down to the user's level of recoil tolerance.

Some advantages to the Whelen are: larger magazine capacity (in a bolt action) without the need for a drop magazine; able to use 38/357 pistol bullets for reduced/small game loads; available in larger range of action type, IE. pump.

IF one was to entertain the thought of a 338-06 vs. the Whelen, the best choice would then most likely be a 338-06: better bullet selection, better penetration, better wind bucking/trajectory, etc. There is a reason that Elmer Keith eventually decided on a 33 over a 35. On the other hand, if one wanted more horsepower out of the same cartridge head size, the obvious choice would be a 9.3x62. Of the 3 (338-06/35 Whelen/9.3x62), the ones on either side of the 35 Whelen do a better job.

I've always been kinda underwhelmed by the 338 Win Mag. Owned one for a while and came to the realization that it didn't do anything one of my 300 magnums wouldn't do with a stout 200 grain bullet. Then I bought a 340 Weatherby and found the ideal cartridge case for the 338 bore.

The 358 Norma would possibly be a better choice than the 338 as well, but we better be careful or the Post Police will come around and scold somebody for mentioning some cartridge that wasn't mentioned by the OP.

Although nowhere as near as popular, I'd put the 9.3x62 ahead the 338 Win Mag too. Very similar ballistics with 250 grain bullets, better selection of heavies, five down instead of 3.

Personally, the only 35 Whelen I'd consider is a Remington 7600, just 'cause.
 
remington jim said:
Sorry Johnn But the next step up is to the KING " 375 H&H " :d ;) RJ
Click to expand...

You're a ;)bad man. :eek: Don't talk dirty!! :rolleyes: Have "that" trumped,:d twice and I don't have to wear any,;) questionable clothing.



1st, with a Winchester model 70 Super Express in 375 H&H



2nd, with a recently acquired custom 375 Chatfield Taylor.
Now, to get them some field 'experience'.
 
Hard call. I own model 70's in both calibers. The Whelen is very versatile for sure plus you can carry 5 in the mag instead of 3 .338's. Hopefully you wont get into a gun-fight where this would make a difference. Having said that, I plan to carry my new .338 Alaskan exclusively this year for Elk until I take something with the damn thing.
 
35 whelen. I load 180 grain TTSX and they devastate whitetails. 225 grain TSX and it hits Moose like Thors hammer. Never seen anything like it in a non magnum cartridge with less felt recoil.
 
I'm another user of the 338wm Moose Hammer :) Not to be mistaken for this moose hammer:

BUCK%205X6.jpg
 
I'd take the .338 because it shoots flatter and is "enough". I've used the 225gr Partition in the past and if I were to get another I would stick to that or a 225gr Accubond. That would shoot as flat, or flatter than, a .30-06 with a 180gr and it would have quite a bit more jam when it gets there.
 
1899 said:
I'd take the .338 because it shoots flatter and is "enough". I've used the 225gr Partition in the past and if I were to get another I would stick to that or a 225gr Accubond. That would shoot as flat, or flatter than, a .30-06 with a 180gr and it would have quite a bit more jam when it gets there.
Click to expand...
I'll take the 35 Whelan because when you're hunting elk in the mountains, both will shoot across a slide to the draw on the other side. But when you run into a grizzly bear at kissing distance on those trails through the alders, there is no such thing as having "enough" while the stare down is going on. Including in available bullet weight.

And if I was going to make it an equal comparison, it would be a 358 Norma Magnum being compared to the .338 Winchester Magnum. The 35 Whelan is better compared to the .338-06: same base cartridge for both.

You can shoot pistol bullets through .35's all day for cheap, not to mention shot loads (finicky though; not worth it). You won't be doing that with a .338

In the real world, I doubt critters can tell the difference between a bullet from a .338 and a bullet from a .35 if they hit in the same spot.
 
Rick said:

In the real world, I doubt critters can tell the difference between a bullet from a .338 and a bullet from a .35 if they hit in the same spot.
Click to expand...

Exactly. That's why I'd take the .338 as it has an advantage over long range with respect to drift, retained energy and drop, while having no disadvantage at close range.
 
At least you fellas are ball park within reasonable use here.
Had a boss in Moose Jaw that was dumb as a post when it came to firearms/hunting. Him and his brother in law were once mule deer hunting in the East Kootneys.
Super Stupid thought his M94 in 44-40 was plenty enough gun for thier back country mountain hunting trip. That is, until they were about 30 yards from a grizzly bear on a narrow mountain trail. Luckily his BIL had a 7mm Rem Mag and his self defense shooting saved thier bacon. His one pathetic shot with the 44-40 only enraged the bear! lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom