35 Whelen reloading: then and now

[Maineboy]

I have several issues of the American Rifleman from the mid 50s and enjoy reading them every once in a while. Sometimes I find something that makes me scratch my head. Today I was going over the April 1954 issue and came across a letter in the Dope Bag section where the writer was praising his 35 Whelen and claimed: "My load with the 200 grain Remington Core-Loct bullet and 59 grains of 4895 powder developed 3030 f.p.s. when tested with the chronograph. The 250-gr Barns spitzer bullet with 56 grains of 4895 powder gave a velocity of 2860 f.p.s." I'm assuming that he was talking about IMR 4895. The nearest reloading manual to me is Richard Lee's Modern Reloading second edition and a quick check of 35 Whelen data indicates a maximum charge of IMR 4895 is 58 grains (compressed) behind a 200 grain bullet for 2655 fps and 49400 cup and 55 grains behind a 250 grain bullet for 2475 fps and 51600 cup. Quite a difference between his and more modern data and even considering he used an extra grain of powder with each bullet it makes me wonder if he really did chronograph his loads or if it was just a WAG. BTW, the fastest load in the Lee manual is 2807 with 60 grains of BLC2 for the 200 grain bullet and 2550 with 59.5 grains of REL 15 for the 250 grain bullet.

[GBertolet]

I don't think chronographs were all that common to the average Joe back then. Only the government and ballistic labs normally had them, as they were horribly expensive. I don't doubt the powder charges, but I tend to believe the velocities are a WAG.

[sundog]

Wow, I would say that was quite a luxury having a chrono in 1954! I wonder how well calibrated it may have been. If I got results like that today and compared them to what you report from Lee's manual, I would certainly question the difference.

A friend gave me a large box of old Rifleman mags years ago. Lot's of good reading.

[Blackwater]

Chronos were indeed rare back then, and were only being developed at that time. Consequently, their accuracy was NOT what it is today, and even today there are variations. They're just much more tolerable now. Then too, many reloaders were rather innocent about pressures and the dangers therein, and it wasn't too uncommon for folks to keep adding powder until something gave way, which was usually the softer brass ctg. cases. As long as the brass would last 2- 3 reloads, many were satisfied with that, and kept loading what now would be regarded as very hot loads now. Metalurgy wasn't anywhere near what it is now, either, and individual guns varied a lot more than now, too. If one of these more daring reloaders got a particularly strong one, only brass life suffered unless and until bolt lugs set back, or other problems developed. Knowledge and understanding of how guns work, and why they did things was pretty hit and miss, and a miss COULD, though rarely, cost a few shooters their lives or at least some body parts like hands and eyes. It was a time of innocence and faith, and sometimes the faith was misplaced or misapplied. Overloads CAN, even today, be sustained for sometimes inordinately long periods, but the Piper always has to be paid at some point, and this produced the "inexplicable detonations" that occasionally occurred. Wishful thinking that we can get "something for nothing" or that "some of us" can get results that others can't, by the Grace of God or other sentiments, isn't quelled within us yet. Anomalies DO occur, but there's always a reson, somewhere. The hard part is FINDING that reason. It's been said that pressure = velocity, and that's pretty well true, but it's also true that some reloaders like to traipse on the wild side, and SOME (not all, but some) get away with it for unseemly long periods. This is a testament to our gun designers and manufacturers, probably, more than anything else, including "dumb luck." I once had whole big boxes of those old magazines, and they WERE indeed very interesting and pleasurable to read. Informative? Not so much - not with all we've learned since, and with the newer manufacturing properties and proceedures we use to make the same powders now. Change is said to be the only constant in life, and a darn good case can be made for that. Just enjoy them, but any sane man isn't going to try some of the stuff that was put in print back then any more than he's going to believe the world is flat any more. And though God's Grace is inestimable, I'm not sure it applies very well to getting away with shooting overloads.

My own Whelen is the AI version, and seems to produce good velocities with somewhat lower powder charges than some data might indicate. I quit when I get good velocity and accuracy. Darn fine caliber, and kills deer observably differently than the smaller bullet/faster velocity types. A bit more dramatic, but results are the same. Venision doesn't know or care what kills it or how. And us good ol' Southren Country Boys LIKE to eat! ;^)

[Yodogsandman]

You also have to remember that at that time, the 35 Whelen was a wildcat cartridge. Different rifles had different chambers and powder capacities.

[Maineboy]

After further research, I realize the writer is claiming 358 Norma Magnum velocities in his Whelen.

[35remington]

What he did wasn't advisable if velocities were correct......which they likely were not.

[Yodogsandman]

I'd like to thank all of the early authors for their articles, which ultimately led to Remington legitimizing the cartridge in 1987. Now we have published loads in the manuals, a bunch of great bullets and case heads that are stamped 35 Whelen. An article in 1958 led me to finally build mine!

[Maineboy]

It is a great cartridge and those early experimenters did a lot of seat-of-the pants reloading. Nowadays, good reloading components and data for just about any cartridge are plentiful and greatly appreciated. I haven't shot much with my Whelen except paper and a few water filled milk jugs. I was going to use it on my moose hunt but opted for my Marlin 45-70 instead. Once in a while I do carry it while deer hunting but haven't seen a buck on those occasions.

[30CalTy]

Heck chronographs were few and far between even into the mid-80's.

[taco650]

It is a great cartridge and those early experimenters did a lot of seat-of-the pants reloading. Nowadays, good reloading components and data for just about any cartridge are plentiful and greatly appreciated. I haven't shot much with my Whelen except paper and a few water filled milk jugs. I was going to use it on my moose hunt but opted for my Marlin 45-70 instead. Once in a while I do carry it while deer hunting but haven't seen a buck on those occasions.

Can't argue the success you had with your 45-70 on that moose hunt either. Your 35W would've worked fine but for something that big, firing 400+ grains of lead at it seems like it would give you a greater margin for success than 250 grains.

[TXGunNut]

Can't argue the success you had with your 45-70 on that moose hunt either. Your 35W would've worked fine but for something that big, firing 400+ grains of lead at it seems like it would give you a greater margin for success than 250 grains.

Maybe so, there's something very reassuring about a big chunk of lead in a Marlin levergun. Quite honesty the 35 Whelen is overkill for anything I may shoot in TX and probably plenty for moose but I sure appreciate the horsepower and confidence that a 45-70 brings to the party.

[35 shooter]

The 45/70 "knows no fear"! Neither does a 35 whelen!!!

[sthwestvictoria]

Some of these loads from GUNS magazine seemed fairly warm:

My jacketed load is sedate, 2450fps with the 225 Woodleigh over 55.5grains of AR2208 (Varget)

[kysunfish]

Although it does not have much of a shoulder to work with the .400 Whelen has always been one to look at. I have been around a couple of them and have witnessed their capability.

[taco650]

After loading the 30-06 for years, I see the suggested powders for the 35W and wonder why it likes faster ones than the '06.

[Screwbolts]

After loading the 30-06 for years, I see the suggested powders for the 35W and wonder why it likes faster ones than the '06.

It's a BORE thingy, our 06s are .308 cal as we know, when you take the same case and increase the bore to .358 you drastically increase the surface area of the base of the bullet. Or look at it as an increase in the cross section of the bore. To now properly burn powder you have to go with a faster burn rate class of powders to be consumed in the larger bore. You do not have a bigger case, just a larger bore. In reality based on the bore size of barrels of equal length, but of different bore size, they react the same as barrels of different lenghts. This is based on the relation/ratio of bore size to length, it does matter.

Ken

[W.R.Buchanan]

It's a BORE thingy, our 06s are .308 cal as we know, when you take the same case and increase the bore to .358 you drastically increase the surface area of the base of the bullet. Or look at it as an increase in the cross section of the bore. To now properly burn powder you have to go with a faster burn rate class of powders to be consumed in the larger bore. You do not have a bigger case, just a larger bore. In reality based on the bore size of barrels of equal length, but of different bore size, they react the same as barrels of different lenghts. This is based on the relation/ratio of bore size to length, it does matter.

Ken

The term for this relationship is called "Pressure Burn Ratio" It was explained to me by Dave Scovill of Handloader Magazine in reference to my question to him on why certain powders are used in certain cartridges, and why some work better than others.

In short the capacity of the cartridge in relation to the bore diameter defines this ratio. That is used to determine what burn speed the most efficient powder should have in order to produce desired velocities.

Larry Gibson could probably elaborate further on this topic as most of the conversation I had several years ago has long since evaporated due to dis use.

Randy

[Yodogsandman]

Maineboy, I used my 35 Whelen for both of my two moose hunts. I don't have a 45-70 and can't attest to it's lethality like you can. I can say that the 35 Whelen is fully and utterly capable. When you get another tag, you should give it a go!

[Maineboy]

Maineboy, I used my 35 Whelen for both of my two moose hunts. I don't have a 45-70 and can't attest to it's lethality like you can. I can say that the 35 Whelen is fully and utterly capable. When you get another tag, you should give it a go!

IF I ever get another moose permit, I plan on using the Whelen. The 45-70 had it's turn.