.35Rem Based Wildcats

[Good Cheer]

Has anyone loaded for wildcats based on the .35 Remington case?

[Glen]

Yes, JD Jones did a .338 wildcat on the .35 Remington case back in the '70s. I believe he called it the .338 JRS (for "Jones Rhino Stomper"). He put it together for IHMSA shooting and one of the ranges he shot at had a small rhino silhouette out at 250 yards for tie-breakers.

[rockrat]

For one of my "get to one of these days" projects, I am going to run a 35 Rem reamer in short and maybe try to use 7.62 x 39 brass. If it works, then I will try it in an AR15. Use shortened 35 Rem dies to load.

[MT Gianni]

IIRC, there is/was a 30 Rem and a 25 Rem also. I believe they shared the same case but it has been a long time since I have seen either.

[GabbyM]

Smaller case head diameter gives reduced rear thrust recoil.
X psi pressing against Y case head diameter. As Y increases rear thrust increases.
Taking that into consideration we get into splitting hairs. Does a nine pound rifle in 6mm BR kick more than the same weight rifle in 6 x 47mm ? Ballistics is about the same.
Any difference is just moot. A 6x47 will feed from a magazine while the 6mm BR is a singe shot gun.

What gets completely stupid is the short magnum cases that do not exceed the 30-06 ballistics as can be hand loaded and certainly not the 30-06 AI. They just kick your teeth out. Add to that the reduced magazine capacity and I’ll declare the fat head magnums an idiots rifle. Sorry guys but you really do need to dump that junk. Someone has to say it.

The 6.8 SPC chambering has resurrected the .422” bolt head.

I’m one of the people who think my time is better spent working with off the shelf cases rather than re inventing the wheel.

[scb]

IIRC, there is/was a 30 Rem and a 25 Rem also. I believe they shared the same case but it has been a long time since I have seen either.

The 25, 30, and 32 Remington were all based on the same case head size. To the best of my knowledge The 35 Remington is the only cartridge that uses that head size. It's only .013" in diameter smaller that '06 based cartridges. I don't know why anyone would want to limit themselves by using that case as a starting point, but to each his own. I'd start with a .308 case. There will always be a lot of that around. It appears the 35 Rem. is going on the "seasonal" manufacturing list.

[Good Cheer]

Would think that a 25 or 32 based on the 35Rem case would be a joy to work with in a Marlin.
And yep, I enjoy that wheel every time it gets reinvented.

[GabbyM]

I used to think like that. Right up to when I got more guns in standard calibers than I can keep up with.

When you can buy 7.62 brass roll formed and cleaned up for a song it’s hard to justify using a case like 35 Rem to work from. Then even the Labua 308 brass is cheap.
It’s not reinventing a wheel it’s beating your head against the wall.

For the sub calibers there is the 6.8 SPC and the wildcat necked down to 6mm. It’s been done already. Or that parent case in 30 caliber.

A while back I thought the 6.8 SPC would be a cast bullet dream. But those whom have tried it have been disapointed with results.

[Good Cheer]

Wow, that sounds pretty miserable. I've only been shooting cast for forty years now so it's all still new to me. These new fangled lever actions that shoot shot after shot are really fun.

[rockhard]

GabbyM,

My understanding is that head size doesn't affect recoil. Instead a combination of power charge and type, bullet mass, bullet acceleration, and bullet velocity affect recoil - along with gross rifle mass and recoil pad.

The combined momentum of the bullet and gas that exists the muzzle cooresponds to the force that is exerted on the shooter. The energy of a bullet as it exists the muzzle is a reasonable measure of recoil, but does not take into account differences in gas momentum (or thrust).

In principle, less efficient cartridges will produce greater recoil when compared with cartridges that produce the same bullet muzzle energy.

An even more important factor to consider is peak or "felt" recoil - how evenly the force is distributed. In other words does the shooter take a sudden hit or a prolonged push to the shoulder (of equal overall force). This is where bullet acceleration comes into play - specifically how evenly the bullet accelerates through the bore. All else being equal, larger diameter bullets of equivalent mass will accelerate less evenly or progressively through the bore - thereby imparting greater peak recoil. Other factors affect acceleration including power expansion characteristics, inference between bullet and bore (tightness of fit), bullet hardness, bullet lubricity and so on.

The size and type of recoil pad also affects peak recoil by spreading the load more progressively.

End of physics lesson.

But you raise a valid point nonetheless. A smaller diameter bolt and receiver is required because the pressure on the bolt face is significantly reduced - thanks to the smaller case head diameter. To take advantage of this one would need to purchase a slimline design such as the Kimber Model 84L or NULA (New Ultra Light Arms) Model 24. On the downside the action is longer (than a short magnum action) but the additional weight from extra length is less than additional weight from larger diameter.

I don't love the short magnums, at least not for hunting purposes. I can't think of where a shorter but heavier firearm is desirable. If the short magnums give a slight accuracy advantage (like the 22 PPC supposedly has over the 222 Rem Mag) then I can see their merit in benchrest format.

Any accuracy advantage the 22 PPC has over the 222 Rem Mag is insignificant in the field. Also slender cartridges feed better from a magazine, and (as you point out) more rounds fit in a magazine. In other words fat cartridges are well suited to benchrest work, while slender cartridges are well suited to field work.

From a practical viewpoint, when purchasing a rifle such as a Ruger 77 there is no weight advantage to be gained when buying a long action 30-06 in contrast to a short action 300 RCM - because the receiver diameters are the same. As mentioned before, a Kimber 84L or NULA 24 would need to be purchased to obtain the weight saving.

Speaking of the 300 RCM, if I ever purchase a short action magnum this will be my pick. It does away with the pointless magnum belt (and allows head spacing on shoulder), doesn't have the feeding issues associated with the rebated rim of the WSM and SAUM cases, and has a better feeding shoulder angle than the WSM cases (and possiblely more accuracy-enhancing shoulder angle than the WSM cases), and a more moderate/efficient/accurate powder capacity than the WSM and SAUM cases.

[felix]

[QUOTE=GabbyM;1300025]/
A while back I thought the 6.8 SPC would be a cast bullet dream. But those whom have tried it have been disapointed with results.[/QUOTE

Yep, need throating and twist for cast. Dead in the water before you start without such a mod. ... felix

[felix]

All else being equal, larger diameter bullets of equivalent mass will accelerate less evenly or progressively through the bore - thereby imparting greater peak recoil.

True, when changing "peak recoil" to "felt recoil". The closer the MAX acceleration is to the shoulder, the more felt recoil. The torque needed to twist larger diameter projectiles plays it game on the shoulder as well. As the projectile progresses to the exit point, the lever in the felt recoil becomes less and less because more and more of the rebounding torque is applied towards the upward push of the gun. So, all in all, felt recoil plays heavily on stock design. ... felix

[Pat I.]

I think there's two different conversations going on here. One is about case head size and bolt thrust and the other is about felt recoil. Not the same thing

[felix]

Exactly. ... felix

[Good Cheer]

No cast bullet wildcats for the Marlins. Oh well. An 8mm would be a lot of fun but there's too many irons in the fire already.

[GabbyM]

Catch there is Marlin has come out with the 338 Marlin. So they beat you to it.

[bearcove]

Best one I know of is 356 rimless. Just run a reamer into a 35 rem.

[No_1]

I have a 336 Marlin chambered in "356 Rimless". The rifle was originally a 35 Remington and the conversion was as easy as running a 358 Win reamer into the chamber. With no other modifications the rifle feeds like it came that way from the factory. I form brass from mil 308 cases with one pass through a Redding size die.

I have not pushed the limit but have read it is possible to do 35 Rem loads +15%. Not sure if I want to venture down that road even though I am sure the action will handle it.
R.

[bearcove]

I've been thinking about it for a while. Gonna buy a reamer.

[Bret4207]

Would think that a 25 or 32 based on the 35Rem case would be a joy to work with in a Marlin.
And yep, I enjoy that wheel every time it gets reinvented.

I'm thinking a 25 or 7mm. The 7mmx35 would be what the 7x30 Waters could have been. With all due respect to Ken Waters, and believe me I DO respect him, the 35 case offers enough more oomph to turn it into a near 7x57. And the 7x57 is all a man really needs in the lower 48.