9.3x62 Mauser vs .35 Whelen

G

gmarr

New member
Ok, I'm looking at either of these for a non-magnum heavy hitter (something different). How do these compare? I don't reload so it'll be factory loads. Any thoughts?
 
Both are good for the intended purpose. In the USA most of the .358" cal bullets are a bit thin in their jackets for heavy bones. So is the .366" Speer bullet, but all other .336s I know of do well on heavy game. So the bullets favor the .366 size.
That's not to say the 35 is out of the fight. Swift, Nosler and Barnes all make bullets that are up to any task you'd need to fact with a 35 Whelen.

However on the other side of the coin the 35 Whelen is easy to make from 30-06. Some men do the same with the 9.3X62 but the case is actually a few thousandths larger so making them from 06 leaves a few bulges in the case that some object to. Brass is not hard to get for the 9.3X62, but not as easy as 06 brass.
So when it comes to brass the nod goes to the 35.

I have reamers for both and I make them both as well as the 338-06.
Up until about 2 years ago the 35 outsold the 9.3 in my custom orders, but that is now about dead even. The 9.3 is gaining ground and is a very good round.

I doubt you can make a decisive case for one and against the other. It's so close that you can flip a coin. Any advantage of one over the other is more imaginary then real as long as you use a good bullet in both of therm.

You say you don't load your own. So I would probably buy the 9.3 if I were you unless you want to start loading you own of find a friend who will do it for you.
Just be aware that neither one is cheap to buy rounds for.
 
I've messed with the 35 Whelen a bit, owned one briefly. Neither would be a top choice for me but just to be different either would work. I think you'll find more options for lighter bullets in 35 Whelen which makes it more versatile for North America. The 9.3 is offered in many more heavy bullets and would be legal in some African countries for the largest game. Not that either would really be good at that, but the way some countries laws are written it is legal. It comes down to how heavy you want to go and ammo availability. I'd think 35 Whelen would be more common.

In my experience a 35 Whelen with bullets under 250 gr you get MORE recoil than 300 magnum, and LESS performance. It doesn't make sense to load 200-225 gr 35 caliber bullets slightly slower the same bullet weights in a 300 magnum, only slightly faster than from a 30-06. At the muzzle they are equal performers, but the 300's or even 30-06 retain much more speed and energy at distances over 50-100 yards.

Once you get to 270-300 gr bullets the 35 and 9.3 start making some sense, but if you need bullets that heavy most folks skip straight to 375. Which would be my choice if I wanted anything larger than a 30 caliber.

Make no mistake, both 35 Whelen and the 9.3 are going to give magnum levels of recoil if loaded to levels that even slightly better 30-06 performance. Magnum is just a word stamped on barrels and cartridges. Lots of cartridges with "Magnum" stamped on them have very tolerable recoil and there are lots of heavy kickers that don't have the moniker.
 
gmarr,

I picked the 9.3x62, but I also reload for it.

Don't think I would have picked either the 9.3 or 35W if I didn't reload.
 
gmarr said:
Ok, I'm looking at either of these for a non-magnum heavy hitter (something different). How do these compare? I don't reload so it'll be factory loads. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

Since your a non-reloader does price matter to you? If it does then you're better off with .35 Whelen though I don't know of anyone chambering this round in current production other than CVA in a single shot rifle. The .35 Whelen has gained in popularity over the last few years since Mississippi and Louisiana allow it to be used in their primitive rifle seasons for deer hunting. More manufactures have also picked up production of the ammunition.

If money is no cost then got 9.3, but 9.3X62 ammunition is a lot more expensive on average. CZ USA still produces the 9.3X62 in their 550 lineup as well as Sako in the 85 series rifles. However, you can send pretty much any .30-06 rifle you might own to JES rifle reboring and for a reasonable fee you can have either cartridge.
 
Ok, I'm looking at either of these for a non-magnum heavy hitter (something different). How do these compare? I don't reload so it'll be factory loads. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

They compare very favorably to each other.

I went the 9.3x62 route, but a 35 Whelen is just as good an answer for hunting. If I had to do it again, I'd probably go the 35 Whelen route to make use of the multitude of larger choices for cast bullet molds in .358 as opposed to the very limited .368 bullet mold selections. But I wanted a Safari rifle, so that's what I got.

Ironically enough, the 9.3x62 offering from Prvi Partizan is cheaper than the least expensive 35 Whelen offering at Midwayusa. But, outside of the PPU offering, which is a very sedate loading for the 9.3x62, the others are very expensive starting at 2.60 per round. The 35 Whelen has more offerings, and the most expensive is at 2.85 per round.

The Whelen comes with bullet weights from 180 to 250 grains. The 9.3x62 Mauser 220 to 286 grains.

For North America, I'd say the Whelen is the hands down better choice as far as ammunition availability and cost. If you ever want to hunt in Africa, only then would the 9.3x62 be my recommendation.

As far as building on a Mauser, you'll need an action and a barrel. A barrel can be had quite reasonably: http://www.midwayusa.com/product/54...our-1-in-14-twist-24-chrome-moly-in-the-white and fitting it is a rather simple matter.

With the cost of commercial ammo, these are not plinking rounds and handloading becomes highly encouraged as you can get started for about the cost of 5 boxes of even the cheapest commercial ammunition.

Jimro
 
The .35 Whelen kicks more than a .300 Win. Mag. with the lighter weight bullets. :eek: My very sensitive shoulder says otherwise. My go to elk load in my .35 Whele pushes the 225 gr. Barnes TSX bullet to 2710 FPS and my M70 .300 Win. Mag. does 2900 FPS with the 200 gr. Nosler Partition or Speer Hot Core. Definitely quite a bit hotter than the closest factory load which is AFAIK the Federal Premium load with a 225 gr. Trophy Bonded Bear Claw bullet at an advertise 2660 FPS IIRC. I've taken four elk with my .35 since I bought it, all one shot kills or stops hard hit they could go nowhere. Two were DRT and two required a finisher. Shots were at 100, 150, 225 and 350 yards. The 150 and 350 were the two DRT shots.
I do agree that unless you're in a position where money is no object (I'm certainly not. :() reloading is the way to go. One, you can shoot bullets that are not found in what limited factory ammo is available and two, factory ammo is not loaded to it's full potential because Remington decided to use it in pump and semi-auto rifles as well as the M700. So with a good strong bolt action you can tweak the round up to a better level.
On the 9.3x62, you sure won't find ammo for that one at your local Walmart. Of course either will you find the Whelen and Walmart. My local Sportsman's Warehouse has Whelen ammo but not the 9.3x62. Maybe someday I'll get a chance to shoot a 9.3x62. Until then, I'll stick with the .35 Whelen. :D
I have three rifles in .35 Whelen all in the 8 to 8.5 pound weight range. I have four rifles in .300 Win. Mag. all in the 8.5 to maybe 9.5 pound range. The lightest is a Winchester M70 in a McMillan stock and recoil is not bad but it is still more than any of my three Whelens.
Paul B.
 
You'd be unlikely to find either in small places. The Mauser very likely far less so than the Whelen.
The 9.3x62 offering from Prvi Partizan is listed as Unavailable-Limited Production by Midway. Rest of the brands, run over $50 per 20.
Most of Midway's list of .35 Whelen is on back order. Remington brand is Unavailable-Limited Production.
Graf's has better availability for both. Including the Prvi. Just as pricey for the 9.3.
Unusual stuff is not something you want to play with if you are not reloading.
 
If you are buying a rifle in either caliber, I'd say it's a toss-up until you have to find or make ammo, at which point the .35 Whelen wins here, the 9.3x62 wins in Europe or Africa.

If you are CONVERTING a bolt action rifle to one of these, I think you'd want the .35 Whelen to go into a .30-06 length action. It seems to me that long ago, a '98 Mauser in 8x57 could be more handily converted to the 9.3x62 than .35 Whelen.
 
in africa last july i carried a cz 550 in 375 H&H mag and used it on a very large eland, and was going to use it on a large cape buffalo cow,but was offered a 9.3x62 MS to shoot the cow and i jumped at the chance and it did the job. but i think with the right bullet in the 35 whelen the results would have been the same,their is not much difference in them, 35 whelen .357 dia and the 9.3x62 .366 dia. so about .009 dia less with the whelen. eastbank.
 
Let's just say that the dumbest thing I ever did (related to guns) was trade off my beloved CZ 550 FS in 9.3x62. Beauty, handy, moderate recoil -- yet enough gun for nyati (legal in several african countries)... yeah, what's not to like about that? Ballistically, splits the difference between .35 Whelen and .375 HH mag.

I'd replace it if I didn't already have an A-Bolt II in .375 HH mag.
 
Just my opinion, (which means squat) both are heavy hitters (by American standards) approaching the 375 H&H, but not quite getting there.
They are both certainly enough for North America including the big bears and moose.
Price & availability goes to the Whelen in my area, but for nostalgia I like the 9.3 Mauser.
I do however reload, so my reasoning leans in that direction, even reduced loads in both calibers still "hit above their weight class". :cool:
 
If you don't reload, there is only one real answer:
.35 Whelen.

9.3x62mm factory ammo is difficult to find, and typically pretty bloody expensive.

Otherwise, they're close enough performance-wise that it doesn't really matter.
Arguing that .358" bullet selection isn't suitable for .35 Whelen is like arguing that .257" bullet selection isn't suitable for .25-06. It's true, as long as you have your head buried in the cheap stuff, and you're looking at bullets designed for .35 Remington (or .257 Roberts). But when you limit the selection to bullets appropriate for the cartridge and intended use (just as we do for things like .30-06 on big game), then things get a little clearer. There are plenty of bullets suitable for .35 Whelen, that are comparable to .366" offerings; and generally you're still looking at much better bullet selection for the .358" category.

Examples:
-Hornady offers 3 bullets suitable for .35 Whelen and big game. They offer just one bullet in .366" diameter. All are rated for exactly the same uses and velocities.
-Speer offers at least 3 bullets suitable for .35 Whelen and big game, and two of them were designed specifically for the cartridge. They offer just one bullet in .366" diameter.

And if you run through the common manufacturers (including Woodleigh and Lapua), the results are about the same. Overall, .35 Whelen has roughly twice as many suitable bullets available. And, even then, a bunch of the bullets I lump in as "suitable" for 9.3x62mm were actually designed for the lower velocities of .360 Nitro or .360 Nitro #2.
.358" bullet selection wasn't quite so good 15 years ago, but we've had some really nice additions to the lineup. :D

---

Admittedly, I am slightly biased. I built a .35 Whelen (cheap!) and have liked the cartridge for at least 10 years. I also reload for it.
9.3x62mm, on the other hand... Bullet selection sucks. Ammunition availability sucks. And even finding a rifle or getting a .366" barrel can be a pain in the butt. And that's not even factoring in the reloading-related problems.
 
And even finding a rifle or getting a .366" barrel can be a pain in the butt. And that's not even factoring in the reloading-related problems.
Click to expand...

The difficulties with the 9.3x62 are not insurmountable. I used a Lothar Walther barrel on mine, a very good barrel for the price. A standard milsurp Mauser 98 action is just fine for either the 35 Whelen or 9.3x62 Mauser, as is any standard length Rem, Ruger, Winchester, or Savage. Commercial rifles are available from CZ, Sako, or Tikka.

Brass is available from Prvi Partizan, Hornady, Lapua, and Norma. Reloading dies are available from RCBS (among others). Speer 270gr bullets are fine for anything in North America, even the big bears. Premium bullets are available if you want.

But the Whelen does have more bullet options, brass with the correct headsize is plentiful (just neck up 30-06 brass from any manufacturer, or buy 35 Whelen headstamped brass). And commercial ammo is more likely to be available if you really need it.

If I had to do it over again, I'd go 35 Whelen for the conveniences of that chambering, and save my pennies for a 375 H&H. The 9.3x62 is a darn fine hunting cartridge, but I think some of us really like it just because it is a little bit different.

Jimro
 
My deciding factors on what I shoot are availability and cost; For that reason, I would select the .35 Whelan, given the similarity in performance.

One of my customers in the 80s was a retired doctor with whom I would go shooting sometimes, and who was completely enamored with the .35 Whelan, which he shot in a rebarreled 03 Springfield. Can't really say anything bad about it.
 
Last edited:
Gmarr, in your op you said you don't reload. Factory ammo only, but you "want something different".

If you don't reload, you are probably not a gunsmith either. What way do you want your new rifle to be different? Just an oddball caliber, or is there another criteria that narrows the field down to just 35 Whelan and 9.3?
 
If I had to do it over again, I'd go 35 Whelen for the conveniences of that chambering, and save my pennies for a 375 H&H. The 9.3x62 is a darn fine hunting cartridge, but I think some of us really like it just because it is a little bit different.
Click to expand...
I completely understand. I like "different" as well. (And, in the last year, I built a rifle that has a single usable bullet on the market, now that Speer has discontinued the heavier alternative.)

I, in no way, hold the choice of 9.3x62mm against anyone that built or bought one. It's a good cartridge and a reasonable choice.

I simply went the other way (mostly due to bullet selection and brass availability 8-10 years ago). My love of .35 Whelen started when it was a cartridge that no one knew about. Unfortunately, it took quite a while for me to finally build one, and it's arguably almost "popular" now. :rolleyes:


Some of my rifles are looked upon with some utility in mind. (Such as prairie dog popping one day, and elk hunting the next.)
Others are intended for a single purpose, or fairly narrow set of circumstances. (Such as elk hunting in dark timber, and nothing else.)
For the .35 caliber option, I wanted a little utility through better bullet selection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top