338-06 vs 35 Whelen

[338reddog]

They may have similiar recoil, but since they both use the same case, recoil should be slighly less in the whelen. Pressure is reduced in the larger bore. At least thats how it has been explained to me.
Im partial to both. But typically I reach for my 338wm. 200-210 Nosler or Barnes takes care of ground squirrels to elk. Makes them all wobbly, or tenderized. The 30/06 is still my favorite do most all rifle.
Jeff

 

[Vern Humphrey]

This thread sounds like hunting an excuse to buy another rifle. As if anybody here really needs an excuse.

The OP question of .338-06 vs .35Whelan... I don't have a frame of reference, so no pro/con comment. However, I recall Jack O'Connor ("The Hunting Rifle", 1971) talking about .30-06 using 180gr and 220gr bullets on Alaskan bears and Indian tigers, respectively. Professional tiger hunters said you needed the 220's to penetrate. IIRC, Mr O'Connor said the 180's would zip through a grizzly and keep going and they're thicker than an average tiger. Now this is just me thinking, but it seems if a modern load of 180gr .30-06 will zip through a big bear, it'd probably do the same on an elk, depending on shot placement/angle, out to 300yds.

Whatever you get, have fun.

No question about that. With a proper bullet, say a Nosler Partition Jacket, the .30-06 is up to anything on this continent -- and most of Africa, India and Asia.

 

[DM~]

However, I recall Jack O'Connor ("The Hunting Rifle", 1971) talking about .30-06 using 180gr and 220gr bullets on Alaskan bears and Indian tigers, respectively. Professional tiger hunters said you needed the 220's to penetrate. IIRC, Mr O'Connor said the 180's would zip through a grizzly and keep going and they're thicker than an average tiger. Now this is just me thinking, but it seems if a modern load of 180gr .30-06 will zip through a big bear, it'd probably do the same on an elk, depending on shot placement/angle, out to 300yds.

Whatever you get, have fun.

There's "night and day" difference in the bullets of today, compared to O'Connor's time!

DM

 

[Riomouse911]

The only real-world difference between the two is .35 Whelen is factory loaded by several ammo companies, including Remington, Hornady, Barnes, Nosler, Buffalo Bore, Federal and HSM. The .338/06 A-Square (It's SAAMI name) in factory-guise (Nosler, Norma?) is a LOT harder to find on store shelves. If you ever want to sell it, a Whelen rifle may be an easier sell because it's more commonly encountered.

Both shoot heavy bullets to similar trajectories, with the .338/06 being the flatter-shooting of the pair. (It's no Creedmoor, but the .338/06 does bring the mail out to reasonable hunting distances!)

If you're strictly a handloader, both are .30/06 offspring so the mother-cases are super common and easy to convert to the caliber of your choice.

Personally I would go with the Whelen mainly for the ammo option should something go wrong and I need to buy ammo in a pinch, but you'll be well served with either one for what you've described IMHO.

Have fun deciding, and stay safe!

 

[Craigman]

Based on the way my 350rm and 35w hammer Michigan whitetail, I would choose the 35 over the . 338. I've used and own all 3. (.338rm). The 35 seems more impressive in the now of the situation. All 3 do the job, no question. I'm sure the bullet selection is one of the main factors, but the .358 225 partition is now my go to.

 

[GooseGestapo]

I’ve got all three (almost, the .35 is a .358win)
Personally, I’d go with the .35Whelen.
Everything equal, you’ll be able to get another 50-100fps from the Whelen.
Like O’Conner said, comparing the .270 to .30/06, when hit by the larger diameter bullet, they’re more apt to flinch. (Referring to game).

I built my .338/06 anticipating going to Alaska and Colorado/Wyoming to hunt moose and elk. Haven’t made it to AK, but did make it to Colorado and Wyoming. First time I took the .338/06. (2003). After walking 50+ miles in 8days, I decided a 10.5lb rifle is a tad too much! Next time I alternately carried a 7lb .30/06 (Colt Lt Rifle) and a 7mm08 (Rem.M7). Last time in Colorado, it was a 10lb .300RUM, first day. After that, I took the Marlin .338ME.

The shorter, LIGHTER rifle is my choice. The little 7mm08 continues to endear itself, more and more! Therefore, I’m going off topic and suggest you have a 20” Mod-7 rebored to .338Fed or .358win. You pick!
I’ve got two Marlin.338’ (MX, MXLR). Also a Browning BLR’81 (steel reciever) in .358w. Only problem with the Browning is it’s too pretty to hunt with. If “uglier”, it would be my “less than 300yd” elk gun...

 

[mustanger98]

There's "night and day" difference in the bullets of today, compared to O'Connor's time!

DM

Notice I said a "modern" 180gr '06 load. If these bullets we get now are really so much better, and no doubt some are, we should have at least as good a performance as O'Connor described.

 

[DM~]

I hunted brown bears and moose, I didn't experience 180 grain factory equivalent bullets from 30-06's "zipping through big bears or moose".

"Modern" 180's are much better at controlled expansion than that, and I've even seen 220's break up! That's why I always recommend 200NP's in a 30-06, for bigger big game.

SO, I stand by my last post...

DM

 

[Slamfire]

I have read many comments about the penetrating superiority of 338 bullets over 358 bullets, but I think these are all based on assumptions. Something I would really like to see is data on wound channels. It seems that ballistic gel is the best standard for bullet performance in flesh, and so, is there any ballistic test data for either the 35 Whelen or a 338 cartridge? Something that shows the size of the wound channel, the amount of expansion of the bullet, and the penetration of the bullet? This would be much more definitive than guesses or assumptions of killing power based on bullet diameter, weight and kinetic energy. KE is predominate in all the cartridge comparisons that I have read in the popular press of the last century and yet it appears to be totally bogus as a measure of lethality. And, I would like to see the difference in bullet expansion and penetration at distance, lets say 300 yards.

Have I just missed calibrated tests of rifle bullet expansion, is it out there but I have not found it yet?

Too bad, Ackley did not make 338 or 358 diameter bullets, I would liked to see how those performed.

 

[Cocked & Locked]

Never had a 338/06 but my .35 Whelen is my favorite rifle. I've shot deer with it.

 

[mustanger98]

I hunted brown bears and moose, I didn't experience 180 grain factory equivalent bullets from 30-06's "zipping through big bears or moose".

"Modern" 180's are much better at controlled expansion than that, and I've even seen 220's break up! That's why I always recommend 200NP's in a 30-06, for bigger big game.

SO, I stand by my last post...

DM

What degree of penetration are you going for? Are you after the exit wound, or do you prefer to find your bullet inside the animal? O'Connor talked about that too.

BTW, I'm a fan of Hornady Interlocks.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

What degree of penetration are you going for? Are you after the exit wound, or do you prefer to find your bullet inside the animal? O'Connor talked about that too.

BTW, I'm a fan of Hornady Interlocks.

I use 225 grain Nosler Partition Jackets in my .35 Brown-Whelen, and I've never recovered a bullet from an animal -- they all sail right through and disappear downrange. And I've never had to track a wounded elk. I've always found them within sight of where they were when I hit them.

 

[mustanger98]

I use 225 grain Nosler Partition Jackets in my .35 Brown-Whelen, and I've never recovered a bullet from an animal -- they all sail right through and disappear downrange. And I've never had to track a wounded elk. I've always found them within sight of where they were when I hit them.

Sounds good to me.

 

[DM~]

Depends on the animal, but for the most part I've had my quickest kills from a bullet that expands fairly fast, AND gives full penetration.

I prefer Nosler NP's just for that reason...

DM

 

[Goosey]

My thought is that both of these will give enough penetration for elk under 300 yards and in theory a .35 bullet of the same weight and construction would take more force to push through the animal than a .338, expending more energy and hopefully making a slightly larger wound. In reality it would depend of the specific loads and projectiles. A .358 is to a .338 as a .257 is to a .243 so there's not a huge difference in diameter. I think a fair amount of .338 bullets might be somewhat tough at .338-06 velocities but if you wanted maximum penetration at the expense of a bit of wound channel that could a good thing. I'd rather have the .35 because they would both do what I'd want but one is a classic.

 

[Orcon]

Be a weirdo, get a 350 Rem Mag.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Be a weirdo, get a 350 Rem Mag.

And carry a Taurus Judge on your hip.

 

[Dr T]

My 35 Whelen (Remington Classic the year it was standardized) taught me about two things: Proper headspacing (I got some of the bad early brass, shoulder was too far back) and my personal threshold for recoil sensitivity when shooting off the bench.

With 200 gr bullets in factory loads, not too bad. Similar to my hot 30-06 load with 180 gr bullets (2650 fps from a 20" barrel in a No. 1 RSI)

With 225 gr bullets in handloads, it began to get my serious attention.

With 250 gr factory loads, OUCH.

It is probably linked to how the stock fits me and I have wondered if the Whelen contributed to my rotator cuff problems. As a side note, when I sighted in my 375 H&H, my experiences with the Whelen lead me to wrap a neoprene scuba belt with about 10 lbs of weight in it around the stock just aft of the pistol grip. It brought the recoil down to the 30-06 level (and I shot a couple of 1.25" groups at 100 yds with Winchester factory 270 gr Silvertips).

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Bigfoot Wallace, my .35 Brown-Whelen, was built by CE Fitch in Phoenix in the late '60s or early '70s. He knew how to built a rifle!

To begin with, it's about a pound or so heavier than the modern fashion. The cheekpiece slopes forward (so the gun recoils away from your cheekbone) and there is a very soft butt pad. My hunting load is a 225 grain Nosler Partition Jacket at 2800 fps, and it's tolerable for a dozen or more shots off the bench. But once I developed a load and got it zeroed, I only shot it from the bench enough to check the zero each season.

 

[Cocked & Locked]

Dr T...my 35 Whelen Remington 700 Classic (post #34 above) was also brutal with the 225 grain bullets...not fun off the bench. Shooting it made shooting my .300 Win Mag feel like I was shooting a .270.

I found a Limbsaver pre-fit recoil pad that matched up to my 35 W's stock. Took the hard factory pad off and put on the Limbsaver. That tamed the beast for me.

 

[someguy2800]

I personally think arguing which of these is powerful enough for elk size game and which will penetrate more is like arguing which will make you more dead, getting hit by a dump truck or an 18 wheeler?

 

[MachIVshooter]

Be a weirdo, get a 350 Rem Mag.

Hey, what's wrong with the .350? I love my 673 in .350 mag; a 225 gr. Accubond @ 2,650 anchors big hogs very well.

A .358 is to a .338 as a .257 is to a .243 so there's not a huge difference in diameter.

Not really. If you're going to make those comparisons, stick to other calibers .020" apart, like .244" to .264"

 

[Goosey]

Not really. If you're going to make those comparisons, stick to other calibers .020" apart, like .244" to .264"

If you scaled them up equally that's what you'd get, as .358/.338*.243 = .257.

A .257 has 12% more cross-sectional area than a .243 and a .358 has 12% more cross-sectional area than a .338.

 

[greg_r]

Never had a 338/06, but I did have an 8mm/06. It was a Mauser that had the chamber reamed. I liked it a lot. Actually better than my Savage 110 30/06.

Also had a 35 Whelan H&R Handi Rifle. I liked it a lot as well, but it kicked like an angry mule.

I would likely choose the 35 Whelan over the 338/06, but I think the latter is the better cartridge, on paper anyway.

When I downsized my Handi Rifle collection I had the 25/06, 280 Remington, 30/06, and the 35 Whelan. I kept the 280 Remington. Glad i did, i do think it is the single best cartridge out of the 4, but were i to keep two of them, it would have been the 25/05 and the 35 Whelan.

 

[MachIVshooter]

If you scaled them up equally that's what you'd get, as .358/.338*.243 = .257.

A .257 has 12% more cross-sectional area than a .243 and a .358 has 12% more cross-sectional area than a .338.

Would be helpful to denote that you're talking about a relative/ratio/percentage change rather than nominal diameter difference. Not sure what the utility in that parallel is anyway.