Why don't .35 cal rifle historically do very well in the US?

Jason_W · Post by **Jason_W** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 3:00 pm

The .357 mag carbine not withstanding. I was reading an article on the new .338 Marlin express and one of the guys from Marlin being interviewed stated the historical lack commercial success was part of the reason for not making their medium bore a .35.

The same can be said for 6.5mm cals. Both are excellent bore diameters, IMO.

tman · Post by **tman** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 3:10 pm

i think it's the popularity of the .30 caliber. it was the first smokeless round and the military standard for 70 years. the 30-06 has alltherange and power for any north american game,anything above that is overkill. with that said, the .356&.348w.c.f.'s are my favorites.

buckeyeshooter · Post by **buckeyeshooter** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Well, let's see------ I've got a 35 remington, 2 .350 remington mags and a 35 whelen. Looks like there doping fine around my house

cowboykell · Post by **cowboykell** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 4:19 pm

Sure like my 1895 Winchester in 35 WCF. Bunch on Gunbroker.

Post by **Old Savage** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 4:29 pm

Recoil and range.

1886 · Post by **1886** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 4:29 pm

The .35 Rem. never did as well as it should partly because the factories insisted on loading it to truely anemic pressure levels. On paper it did not look as formidable as the .30-30 despite a larger, heavier bullet. Loaded to equivalent pressure levels, the .35 Rem. far surpasses the .30-30 in killing power. If you disagree, try the Speer 220gr flat point at 2200fps. Another reason is until somewhat recently there was never a good, suitable bullet selection for the higher performance .35s. The biggest reason may be American shooters love affair with the .30 cals. The .30-30 always did a great job for America's number 1 game animal, mister white tail. Properly loaded and at suitable ranges the .30-30 does quite well on Elk and even Moose. There may be better cartridges for America's larger game but the .30-30 has killed plenty. Now for the history of the .30-06......... 1886.

oldmax · Post by **oldmax** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 4:32 pm

Cause it wasn't called a 35-35,

cshold · Post by **cshold** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 4:41 pm

oldmax wrote:Cause it wasn't called a 35-35,

One of those hummm what if questions.

Gun Smith · Post by **Gun Smith** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 4:44 pm

As I own and shoot a 35 W.C.F. in a M. 95 Winchester. The 35 W.C.F. "kills at both ends" as they say, and that may be one reason it never became more popular. A 348 M. 71 can also bring tears to you eyes. The 30/30 is adequate for 99% of the common game available in the U.S. and pleasant to shoot. Ammo was inexpensive and available in every wide place in the road. Many calibers that Winchester and others brought out over the years were to fill a "nitch" in the market, and to have something "new" to sell. Firearms are lifetime tools that normally don't wear out and need replacing. If we were not tempted with the newest whiz-bang cartridge or gun, they would have gone out of the business years ago. Dozens of calibers and cartridges have similar ballistics to each other and most all will get the job done if used correctly for their purpose. Today, almost all auto manufactures use the same technique to fill the market with their product.

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 8:21 pm

Hi All,

I've got a Marlin 336 in 35 Rem....first rifle I ever bought (about 1971), and a custom Mauser in .358 Norma. If I'm big game hunting, I've got one of these with me!!

El Chivo · Post by **El Chivo** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 10:06 pm

probably because of type of game. If you could hunt Cape Buffalo around here, everyone would have 375's and 45-70's. When buffalo roamed the prairie, the calibers were big.

I think the point about the military round is a good one, too. Guys who learned to shoot in the service would be comfortable with what they were used to and not likely to think it ineffective.

marlinman93 · Post by **marlinman93** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 11:20 pm

My personal opinion is it never got enough variety in loads and bullet selection. That's probably because they chambered it in lever and pump actions that are particular about OAL of the cartridge. If they had offered it in bullet weights of 160-210 grains and higher velocities for the lighter weight bullets, then I think it could have been more successful. As it is those who have appreciated and enjoyed it are mostly reloaders.

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 11:55 pm

Good Website:

http://35cal.com/index.html

Stump Buster · Post by **Stump Buster** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 11:58 pm

I just Gotta reply...

Don't have an answer....but I'm becoming a .35 addict. It all started with a 336 in .35 Remington last year. This year I began looking for a Whelen......... Well, I HAVE to start reloading now because my girlfriend just bought this for me on gunbroker yesterday (I bid, she's paying...for valentine's day.)

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIt ... =121801585

I was going to take my 458 Lott up to Canada next year, but I think this will be a much handier little rifle. I'm planning on loading 225g Barnes TSX's to around 2500fps. I have lots of .308 brass, so if I can't locate any .358 stuff I should still be okay. With the powders and projectiles that are available today, I think this will perform as well as the original Whelen did when it was originally introduced. I'm calling this my "Poor Boy's Little Safari Rifle".

"Poor Boy", because if you think I got out of it easy....ask me AFTER the cruise I'm taking her on later this year.

I'm still keeping her though!!!!!!

Anyone else shoot a 358 Win?

Mike

JP_TX · Post by **JP_TX** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:43 am

Mike, you may have to rethink that 225 TSX load. That is a very long bullet and when loaded into a 308 length case so that it fits in a max 2.90 maagazine it will have close to half of the bullet inside the case. A 220 Spear is pretty much made for this case or you could use the Nosler 225 partition as well. Both are very good tough bullets. For accuracy the Sierra 225 BT is tops, but not as tough.

Good luck with that beauty, If it shoots as well as my Ruger Hawkeye .358w you will love it.

Stump Buster · Post by **Stump Buster** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 1:11 am

Thanks JP! I'll look into those bullets too! I was thinking the TSX would work okay because Conley Precision has a load made up with it going about 2550 fps. I'm hoping with Ruger re-introducing the 358 in their Hawkeye, the 358 will make a small comeback, or even better, Hornady, Remington and Federal will come out with factory loads. We can only dream right?

Thanks again!!!

Mike

JP_TX · Post by **JP_TX** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 1:53 am

Mike, your welcome. I don't know your reloading set up but from my experience with the Ruger, you can load the bullet out further than the cannalure if you use a Lee factory crimp die. The throat on my hawkeye and my Mark II 350 RM are both very generous. The limit on the COL is the length of the magazine rather than the lands of the bore. If you are looking for heavy loads, the Speer 250 spitzr is a peach. It loads up to 2390fps (probably 2400 with a little cheating) and it will give you more range and energy as well.

Anyway, it's all good shooting a .35 and good fun too. Enjoy.

6pt-sika · Post by **6pt-sika** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 2:31 am

Hmmmmm , they do pretty well at my house !

I have four Marlin's in 35 REM , a pair of Marlin's in 356 WIN and two more Marlin's in 357 MAG . In the past I had a Ruger 77R in 358 WIN , a Remington 700 Classic in 35 Whelen and a Remington 673 in 350 REM MAG .

I can't say I was overwhelmed by the 358 but I liked the Whelen and the 350 well enough .

Post by **Hobie** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:58 am

I have 3 .35 Rems...

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:23 am

6pt-sika wrote: I can't say I was overwhelmed by the 358 but I liked the Whelen and the 350 well enough .

Horsepower junkie huh?

I like the short action better than the horsepower. I love America.

C. Cash · Post by **C. Cash** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 10:36 am

There was a disconnect between the modern urban masses and those who actually built this country, shot the deer, and fed their families for hundreds of years. They older generation never knew that their slow truck and "underpowered" rifle were not enough. It took the mass gun media to tell them that over and over, and paper ballistics only confirmed that the gun writers were correct. The 35 Rem. was perhaps one of the main victims to this new philosophy. I fell victim to all this as a young man. In choosing between the 35 Rem. and 356 Win. I stared at the ballistics. Had to have the powerhouse 356 Win. or I didn't have a real gun. My Grandfather by comparison hunted deer with a 32/20, but I wasn't going to listen to anyone. After coming to my senses, I loaded the 356 Win. down to 35 Rem. levels and never felt the need for anymore. But you can't tell that to someone who is convinced they have to have high velocity and tons of energy. The mass media has over all helped turn us into a performance driven society...from cars to guns and computers and, much like scantily clad females dancing in front of us, we as men have a weakness for such things. Now the older I get, the more I realize how smart my Grandparents really were.

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:58 am

If you think a .35 kicks too much, you are not shooting your 45-70s and .444s enough

JohndeFresno · Post by **JohndeFresno** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 1:29 pm

Old Savage wrote:Recoil and range.

Concise and spot on!

Jason_W · Post by **Jason_W** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 1:43 pm

C. Cash wrote:There was a disconnect between the modern urban masses and those who actually built this country, shot the deer, and fed their families for hundreds of years. They older generation never knew that their slow truck and "underpowered" rifle were not enough. It took the mass gun media to tell them that over and over, and paper ballistics only confirmed that the gun writers were correct. The 35 Rem. was perhaps one of the main victims to this new philosophy. I fell victim to all this as a young man. In choosing between the 35 Rem. and 356 Win. I stared at the ballistics. Had to have the powerhouse 356 Win. or I didn't have a real gun. My Grandfather by comparison hunted deer with a 32/20, but I wasn't going to listen to anyone. After coming to my senses, I loaded the 356 Win. down to 35 Rem. levels and never felt the need for anymore. But you can't tell that to someone who is convinced they have to have high velocity and tons of energy. The mass media has over all helped turn us into a performance driven society...from cars to guns and computers and, much like scantily clad females dancing in front of us, we as men have a weakness for such things. Now the older I get, the more I realize how smart my Grandparents really were.

I think you nailed it with your assessment of our tendency as a society to gravitate toward maximum power. The reason I like a lot of the older calibers is the fact that they seemed to have been designed to do a job while consuming as few resources as possible (or perhaps that was just a side effect of the available technology). Unfortunately, many of these cartridges and the guns that shoot them are now highly difficult to obtain. I would really like a .22 hornet or 25-20 for small game hunting and plinking. Hornet options are pretty limited and a Marlin in 25-20 will really set a person back. Some people have asked me why I would want a .22 hornet over a .223. My answer is that I can load it so that it can take small game without turning it inside out. Sometimes it's nice to shoot a round that has more power than a .22 rimfire, but doesn't burn a metric ton of powder and have a report that is nearly as lethal as the bullet.

O.S.O.K. · Post by **O.S.O.K.** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 3:19 pm

I think this just comes down to ignorance. I don't mean to be insulting to anyone. I mean it in the most technically correct usage of the word.

The vast number of rifle buyers over the years have been predominantly hunters. These are people that have only a few guns that are tools to get game. They are not gun junkies or collectors, etc. - like many here.

They simply were more aware and comfortable with the well known 30 calibers and the .270 Win that was touted by popular hunting/outdoor mag writers over the years.

They weren't aware of the ballistic and terminal ballistic advatages of the other calibers out there that were slower or more slender than the more well known calibers.

I think if the caliber wasn't the fastest or most well known, then it only sold to those who took the time to learn about them....

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:18 pm

Because there's a perfectly good .30 caliber round that performs all necessary functions asked of it.

Bigahh · Post by **Bigahh** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:47 pm

Griff wrote:Because there's a perfectly good .30 caliber round that performs all necessary functions asked of it.

+1 I love my .358, but a good .308 is just as good.

tman · Post by **tman** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:37 pm

the .338win mag is a good example of this. sales were lagging in the 1970's, until the gun writers convinced us all that north american dangerous game suddenly became immune to the 30-06. what worked worldwide for 60 years was bouncing off of game, hunters everywhere were being charged, mauled, and eaten alive. this one sorta worked in reverse. the 30-06 was regulated to 130lb broadsided doesized game shot at 30yards. the .338, after awhile wasn't enough, and bigger magnums were introduced. i think this soured a lot of hunters. they quit the arms race and went back to the 30-06. the 35's were never hyped like the .338 was. there was an old saying that guys who hunt with the 30-30 don't read gun magazines, if they did, they would know better.

6pt-sika · Post by **6pt-sika** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:38 pm

Tycer wrote:
6pt-sika wrote: I can't say I was overwhelmed by the 358 but I liked the Whelen and the 350 well enough .
Horsepower junkie huh?

I like the short action better than the horsepower. I love America.

Not exactly , I like the 243 WIN , 7mm-08 , the 260 REM and the 338 Federal .

Never cared much for the 308 WIN or the 358 WIN .

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:48 pm

That 350 sure is a rocket.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:28 pm

C. Cash wrote: But you can't tell that to someone who is convinced they have to have high velocity and tons of energy.

I overheard a guy here in Indiana when they started the 'pistol caliber rifle' deer season, debating whether or not the .44 Mag would be 'enough for deer' so he elected to get a Handi-rifle in .500 S&W instead...

I almost advised him he should get a .500 Nitro Express, because I'd heard some of the deer just don't drop with a solid hit from the .500 S&W.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:53 pm

O.S.O.K. wrote:They are not gun junkies or collectors, etc. - like many here...

Who, us...?

6pt-sika · Post by **6pt-sika** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:52 pm

Jason_W wrote: Some people have asked me why I would want a .22 hornet over a .223.

Where as I on the other hand would be more inclined to say what in the world would you want a 223 for

The 223 , 308 and 06 all fall in the same category for me !

That category being "Not needed here !"

I'd rather have a 204 then the 223 , a 260 then the 308 and a 280 then the 06 .

I've had a fair share of accurate 223's , 308's and a couple 06's . I just never cared for them

6pt-sika · Post by **6pt-sika** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:58 pm

Tycer wrote:That 350 sure is a rocket.

A 350 REM MAG in all honesty is nothing more then a short action 35 Whelen . And with the short barrels they used on the 600's , 660's and 673's a bit of velocity loss might even make it less then a 22" barreled Whelen .

It's kinda like I've been wanting a 6.5mm/284 or 6.5mm REM MAG in a nice short action rifle . But in reality they're nothing more then a 6.5-06 and you can't seat the bullets out enough to get full usage of the powder capacity in the 284 or REM MAG case . So for the informed the plain vanilla old 6.5-06 is the easiest and best way to go . Although the thought of a 6.5mm WSM has me thinking a good bit lately . And it just so happens I am about to start working on a load in none other then a 6.5mm WSM for a friend in the very near future . Now if I got a nice used Remington Model 7CDL in 270 WSM and rebarreled to 6.5 WSM that just might be the ticket . Of course I don't need it , but what difference does that make

I suppose what all this boils down to is who cares what someone likes all that matters is whether or not the person that paid the bill was satisfied

C. Cash · Post by **C. Cash** » Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:06 am

AJMD429 wrote:
C. Cash wrote: But you can't tell that to someone who is convinced they have to have high velocity and tons of energy.
I overheard a guy here in Indiana when they started the 'pistol caliber rifle' deer season, debating whether or not the .44 Mag would be 'enough for deer' so he elected to get a Handi-rifle in .500 S&W instead... I almost advised him he should get a .500 Nitro Express, because I'd heard some of the deer just don't drop with a solid hit from the .500 S&W.

6pt-sika · Post by **6pt-sika** » Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:13 am

BlaineG wrote:If you think a .35 kicks too much, you are not shooting your 45-70s and .444s enough

What 45-70's and Triple Duece's kick

That ones news to me

afish4570 · Post by **afish4570** » Wed Feb 04, 2009 9:05 pm

Love my 356 Win Model 94, Marlin, Mossberg would do well to make a run of these....handloaded with the newly available 35 cal Leveroution (sp) 200 gr. they would make a great hog and deer gun . I chrono my 200 gr. RN bullets at 2330fps. Love it...afish4570

Slick13 · Post by **Slick13** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 10:21 am

Griff wrote:Because there's a perfectly good .30 caliber round that performs all necessary functions asked of it.

Yep!

In 1895, with the .30-30 and the .30-40, and again in 1906 with the .30-06 the deal was sealed that when it came to rifles we were going to be a .30 cal country. They got the jump on everybody else and the gap never was able to be closed.

A lot of good rifle cartidges have come along since the early 1900s, but do they really do as much and do it as well as the .30-30 and the .30-06 do?

~Michael

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 10:25 am

How much power do you need to deliver and what delivers it at the longest range with the least recoil. That is what the public at large is going to go for.

piller · Post by **piller** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 11:25 am

If all you are hunting for here in Texas is our little tiny deer with the outsized antlers, then you don't need anything much bigger than a .223. A .35 caliber would probably do too much damage to these little critters here. On the other hand, I do know one man I used to work with who uses a 7mm Mag on them and is strangely proud that he gets only part of the backstraps and the hindquarters to eat. Nothing against the .35 caliber, but I have just never shot one except in .357 Mag.

El Chivo · Post by **El Chivo** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 3:49 pm

I remember Hobie posting that it was well known that the 32 Special was hard to handle compared to the 30-30, if that was the general consensus then the 35 would scare a lot of people away.

At the time these were being developed, didn't Britian use the .303 for all their colonial conquests?

tman · Post by **tman** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:00 pm

agree with AFISH. hornandy should have come out with a 180&225 grain gummies in the .356wcf instead of the .338 marlin. add in a buffaloe bore 250 grn hardcast flatnose, and the .356 would be ready for anything. i like new calibers, but HATE when the factories and custom loaders abanden a perfectly good cartridge and introduce one with identical ballistics. whatever the .338 can do, it aint enough to justify it's introduction, while making the .356 obsolete.

O.S.O.K. · Post by **O.S.O.K.** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 9:12 pm

The .356 Win is obsolete? Don't let my Marlin 336 in that caliber hear that!

afish4570 · Post by **afish4570** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 11:04 pm

Pillar, contrary to most peoples belief the 356 and 35 Rem. are fairly mild in the recoil dept. compared to 3006's especially with the 180 gr. load. I think less meat is lost on the smaller deer cause the bullets don't react as explosively. However the penetration,trajectory and knockdown power are adequate forMod 200 yd. shots at deer at any angle. My partners wife shoots a 243 BLR and shot the 356 Win. in a 94 Win and said the recoil was less than she expected. Really a rimmed 308 necked up to a 358 cal. while the 243 is a 308 sized down to 244 cal. Bullet is 200 gr. compared to 100 gr. with similar powder charges so you will get a reasonable increase in recoil but not punishing at all. IMHO it is a balanced cartridge much underated but is great for eastern deer, bear......afish4570

6pt-sika · Post by **6pt-sika** » Fri Feb 06, 2009 1:11 am

El Chivo wrote:I remember Hobie posting that it was well known that the 32 Special was hard to handle compared to the 30-30, if that was the general consensus then the 35 would scare a lot of people away.

Maybe he said it but I don't agree with it !

I shoot quite a bit of 30-30 , 32 Special and 35 REM and NONE of them have much if any recoil !

And with that being said I presonally do not think the 356 WIN has much recoil or the 358 WIN . The 350 REM MAG is not bad at all and the 35 Whelen isn't noticable until you step up to the 250 grain bullets .

6pt-sika · Post by **6pt-sika** » Fri Feb 06, 2009 1:27 am

tman wrote:agree with AFISH. hornandy should have come out with a 180&225 grain gummies in the .356wcf instead of the .338 marlin. add in a buffaloe bore 250 grn hardcast flatnose, and the .356 would be ready for anything. i like new calibers, but HATE when the factories and custom loaders abanden a perfectly good cartridge and introduce one with identical ballistics. whatever the .338 can do, it aint enough to justify it's introduction, while making the .356 obsolete.

Well now lets see

I have no less then a PAIR of Marlin 336ER's that are in 356 WIN and I now have no less then a PAIR of Marlin's that are in 338 Marlin Express !

So based on what you say I should be at an impass trying to decide which is better

But I've already killed something with each of the 356's one with a jacketed bullet and the other with a cast bullet !

So then lets throw in some more things ! I have no less then FOUR rifles in 33 cal ! A 33WCF that came out long before the 356 WIN was ever thought of ! I have 338 Federal which is none other then the old 338-08 that Ken Waters wrote about 10 years ago and now I have the lever version of the 338 Federal in the 338 Marlin Express . Pretty much the same deal as Winchester did with the 358 WIN and the 356 WIN .

You know it's great if folks want to resurrect old cartridges and it's great when the gun and ammo companies come up with seemingly new cartridges . I still say as long as it draws people to buy from the manufacturers and keep them in buisness the bottom line is it benefits us all

Who knows maybe Hornady in their infinite wisdom will see fit to make the Leverevolution ammo for the 356 WIN and 375 WIN ! Lord knows I'd purchase a box or two of each just to try on paper and some poor unsuspecting deer

But make the 356 ammo at about 190 and the 375 ammo with about a 225 grain bullet

El Chivo · Post by **El Chivo** » Fri Feb 06, 2009 4:57 am

6pt-sika wrote:
El Chivo wrote:I remember Hobie posting that it was well known that the 32 Special was hard to handle compared to the 30-30, if that was the general consensus then the 35 would scare a lot of people away.

Maybe he said it but I don't agree with it !

I shoot quite a bit of 30-30 , 32 Special and 35 REM and NONE of them have much if any recoil !

And with that being said I presonally do not think the 356 WIN has much recoil or the 358 WIN . The 350 REM MAG is not bad at all and the 35 Whelen isn't noticable until you step up to the 250 grain bullets .

I think the context was, such was the opinions among the adults when he was a kid. I didn't mean to say that's his opinion now. We're talking about the bottleneck 32, as opposed to the 32/20.

But dude, you're just tough. I went shooting groups with my 35 Rem in the summer, wearing a t-shirt. I was getting nauseous from the recoil. On the other hand, when I fired it at a deer in the field, wearing a vest, I didn't feel it at all.

tman · Post by **tman** » Fri Feb 06, 2009 5:38 am

the reasn for the .356 was to extend the range and power of the win94, marlin36. the cartridges you mentioned were and are great. they are chambered in either modern box magazine levers, or 1886 sized base rifles. it would be interesting to compare ballistics of the .338 marlin and a .356 with a gummy bullet from 20"barrels. i like all the rounds you mentioned. i hope the .338 makes it big.

Post by **Hobie** » Fri Feb 06, 2009 8:59 am

El Chivo wrote:I remember Hobie posting that it was well known that the 32 Special was hard to handle compared to the 30-30, if that was the general consensus then the 35 would scare a lot of people away.

At the time these were being developed, didn't Britain use the .303 for all their colonial conquests?

What I said was that some "experts" said the .32 WS was "more powerful" and "killed quicker" than the .30-30. I also said that around here the .32 WS was the "experts'" gun. That was based on the idea that the "experts" were more knowledgeable, not that they handled recoil better.

Post by **Hobie** » Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:01 am

6pt-sika wrote:
El Chivo wrote:I remember Hobie posting that it was well known that the 32 Special was hard to handle compared to the 30-30, if that was the general consensus then the 35 would scare a lot of people away.

Maybe he said it but I don't agree with it !

I shoot quite a bit of 30-30 , 32 Special and 35 REM and NONE of them have much if any recoil !

And with that being said I presonally do not think the 356 WIN has much recoil or the 358 WIN . The 350 REM MAG is not bad at all and the 35 Whelen isn't noticable until you step up to the 250 grain bullets .

You should know better than to even think that I said that!

The .35 Rem does have more recoil in like weight guns compared to the .30-30 because it has about 38 gr. more ejecta at about the same velocity. BUT it isn't at all bothersome.