Author Topic: .35 Remington (Read 3770 times)

Lawdog · « **on:** August 24, 2004, 09:59:34 AM »

What is everyone's take on this cartridge? I know very little about this cartridge and one of the guards that works for me is thinking about buying one and asked me for my take on it for brush country deer and Black Bear. Lawdog

Graybeard · « **Reply #1 on:** August 24, 2004, 10:14:04 AM »

LOVE IT!

Got two. Both older Marlins. One with factory sights and the other wears the Williams Fire Sight front and a Willams receiver sight on rear.

I use ONLY the 200 grain round nose bullets. It kills all out of proportion to its paper ballistics. For deer, hogs and black bear it's as good as it gets inside 100 yards. Much over that you're really better off with a flatter shooting round in my opinion.

Folks who try to use lighter bullets in an attempt to make it some thing it isn't are making a mistake in my opinion. Fast and flat it ain't. Slow and effective it is.

7magWoodsman · « **Reply #2 on:** August 24, 2004, 10:18:54 AM »

My opinion on the .35 Remington is good, I had a great Uncle that would not use anything else, and I never knew of him using anything other than his .35 Rem. except his .410 Bolt and 22lr. for ALL his hunting needs.
For ranges of 100 yards and less, the .35 is ideal, but distances past that I would not recommend it. The .35 Remington was introduced in 1906, I believe,and to sum it up quickly and easily the .35 Remington is a 30-30 that makes a larger hole.
Truly a GREAT woods cartridge for deer, hogs, and black bear. VERY popular here in Kentucky/Tennessee. And very worthy of a look!

BattleRifleG3 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 24, 2004, 07:08:20 PM »

I've been considering one too. Anyone have a general idea of a list of what it is and isn't good for?

7magWoodsman · « **Reply #4 on:** August 25, 2004, 02:17:11 AM »

I would not take a .35 Remington to hunt large dangerous game(grizzly, cape buffalo, etc.) but if you are within 100 yards and put that .35cal bullet where it belongs, the old .35 Rem. will do the trick. This includes elk and moose...I choose to use another caliber myself, but I would NEVER doubt the .35 Remington for "anything".

dawei · « **Reply #5 on:** August 25, 2004, 04:21:06 AM »

Quote from: 7magWoodsman

I would not take a .35 Remington to hunt large dangerous game(grizzly, cape buffalo, etc.) but if you are within 100 yards and put that .35cal bullet where it belongs, the old .35 Rem. will do the trick. This includes elk and moose...I choose to use another caliber myself, but I would NEVER doubt the .35 Remington for "anything".

I have to wholeheartedly agree with you. Here in the Pacific Northwest we hunt the BIG Roosevelt elk in the black timber. Most shots are 100yds or less. A lot of older (=wiser) hunters, many well into their 80's; are STUMP SITTERS. They swear by the 35 Remington! Most use Marlins and a great many have older (Mdls 14 & 141) Remington pump guns. ALL ARE FITTED WITH PEEP SIGHTS. Of these guys I've talked to all say they use it for TWO reasons: It puts a big hole in the elk & thus it doesn't go far. Secondly it is VERY Mild in recoil.

Additionally I know of a guy that's been hunting elk since he was a kid in the 1930's. He's killed more elk than I am old (I'm 54). His gun? A Winchester Mdl 94 in 32 Win Special. These older hunters KNOW!

ratherbefishin · « **Reply #6 on:** August 25, 2004, 04:54:01 AM »

how does it compare with the 356 winchester?

Graybeard · « **Reply #7 on:** August 25, 2004, 05:44:06 AM »

I wouldn't intentionally go after brown or grizzly bears with it but if I had it only and one came to eat or kill me I'd not feel all that poorly armed either. Doubt I'd take it to Africa but in North America short of the big bears and within 100 yards I'd not feel under gunned.

It is nearly 400 fps short of the .356 Win. with all bullet weights. But that old round nose 200 grain bullet it is famous for will do what needs done inside 100 yards IF the hunter puts it where it belongs.

ratherbefishin · « **Reply #8 on:** August 25, 2004, 10:28:13 AM »

I think one of the advantages of the low recoil loads is the average guy shoots them way more accurately- because you tend not to flinch.Asmy dad used to tell me, the gun will do the job if you hold it straight.A heavy slug back of the shoulder means no annimal is going too far.I follow the usual sit down and wait routine after taking a shot- the annimal generally doesn;t go far if it's not pursued.

BattleRifleG3 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 28, 2004, 09:16:40 AM »

This is the first I've heard that 35 Rem would be ok for an accidental encounter with a grizzley. I read elsewhere that the wide cross section and low energy would result in low enough penetration that it would be worse than a 30-30. So you guys think a 35 Rem would be ok for a backup gun in griz territory while not hunting griz?

Graybeard · « **Reply #10 on:** August 28, 2004, 01:30:01 PM »

Quote

This is the first I've heard that 35 Rem would be ok for an accidental encounter with a grizzley.

I believe you read more into my post than was there. I just went back and read them all again and see no one else make specific mention of grizzly bear. What I said was:

Quote

I wouldn't intentionally go after brown or grizzly bears with it but if I had it only and one came to eat or kill me I'd not feel all that poorly armed either.

No where in that did I say it is a good choice as a self defense load for big bear. I said I'd not take it after them. Then I said that IF I found myself with only it and was attacked I'd not feel "all that poorly armed". Meaning better than tossing rocks or for that matter armed with a shotgun.

That's an opinion from a person who's never shot a bear at all. Likely never will. But anyone who thinks the .30-30 more medicine for them than the .35 Remington knows nothing of the .35 Remington.

dawei · « **Reply #11 on:** August 28, 2004, 04:01:27 PM »

Quote from: Graybeard

Then I said that IF I found myself with only it and was attacked I'd not feel "all that poorly armed". Meaning better than tossing rocks or for that matter armed with a shotgun.
That's an opinion from a person who's never shot a bear at all. Likely never will. But anyone who thinks the .30-30 more medicine for them than the .35 Remington knows nothing of the .35 Remington.

GB: I have several friends stationed in Alaska having encounters with bears. In all of these cases they were salmon fishing. MANY of the fishermen carried pistol grip pump shotguns loaded with slugs & buckshot. I'm not trying to argue or stir up a fuss. I think the 35 Remington is a great cartridge and very underrated or appreciated. If it were me however and I was charged by a bear; I'd want that shotgun! If I misunderstood your point; please educate me. Many thanks in advance....

Graybeard · « **Reply #12 on:** August 28, 2004, 06:50:57 PM »

I'm merely stating my OPINION. You're entitled to yours and they don't have to be the same.

Lawdog · « **Reply #13 on:** August 29, 2004, 09:58:52 AM »

Quote

MANY of the fishermen carried pistol grip pump shotguns loaded with slugs & buckshot. I'm not trying to argue or stir up a fuss. I think the 35 Remington is a great cartridge and very underrated or appreciated. If it were me however and I was charged by a bear; I'd want that shotgun!

After seeing many times what happens to buckshot after entering the frail human body, the last thing I would trust to use on anything bigger than a angry Jackrabbit would be buckshot of any size. A shotgun loaded with Brenneke slugs is a different story altogether. Read what they have found out about the effectiveness of buckshot on dangerous animals in Africa(Leopard's for starters). Go to http://www.african-hunter.com/Rifle_Choice_4_Dangerous_Game.htm for the story. If buckshot doesn't work on Leopard's why would anyone trust them on animals 5(+) times larger? Lawdog

7magWoodsman · « **Reply #14 on:** August 29, 2004, 11:50:19 AM »

Quote from: Graybeard

Meaning better than tossing rocks or for that matter armed with a shotgun.

I would rather have a .35 Remington over a shotgun too.

Quote from: Lawdog

After seeing many times what happens to buckshot after entering the frail human body, the last thing I would trust to use on anything bigger than a angry Jackrabbit would be buckshot of any size.

For this reason.

Quote from: Graybeard

But anyone who thinks the .30-30 more medicine for them than the .35 Remington knows nothing of the .35 Remington.

This is a fact!!!

Stay Safe.

Buffalogun · « **Reply #15 on:** August 30, 2004, 03:14:21 PM »

Lawdog,

Several years ago, I had a Marlin 336 chambered to the .35 Remington. I used it down in the deep woods of the south. I remember taking at least one buck with it. The reason I remember this buck is because at a range of around 50 yds., the 200g. bullet went in almost centered between the front legs(quartering to me) and exited around the rear of the left side of the rib cage. The deer went down and jumped up and ran about 20 yds. and fell.
When I cleaned the buck I saw the bullet had cut seven ribs in two :eek: , before making its exit. That 200g., .35 cal. slug just doesn't like to stop.

Buffalogun

BattleRifleG3 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 01, 2004, 06:51:26 PM »

Quote from: Graybeard

I believe you read more into my post than was there. I just went back and read them all again and see no one else make specific mention of grizzly bear. No where in that did I say it is a good choice as a self defense load for big bear.

Sorry to misinterpret, thanks for setting me straight on that.

Don't worry, I'm not about to trudge into griz country with a 35 Remington and meat in my eyes. But I'm glad to hear it's powerful enough not to file off the sites (if you guys have heard the phrase.)

BrushBuster · « **Reply #17 on:** February 10, 2005, 05:30:23 PM »

It's not very often that I can claim to be knowledgeable, but when it comes to the killing effectiveness of the .35 Remington cartridge I'm as experienced as anyone around.
I've spent the last 40 years hunting with it and have raised a family on moose and deer venison that fell to the Marlin 336RC in that calibre. I have always been in awe of how the largest of moose would fold when hit squarely with it; 2nd shots were not usually required. I respected its limited range capability by keeping my shots within 150 yards.

I also never killed a grizzly with it, but took a number of large blacks; often the outcome of returning to my kill sites to retrieve meat left overnight. Perhaps I was undergunned if a grizzly had made a claim on my kill, but I also knew that my short, well balanced .35 in a smooth lever action rifle was capable of delivering a lot of firepower and fast! No, it's not a grizzly rifle cartridge, but I always knew that I had a capable friend if it was called upon.

.270 · « **Reply #18 on:** February 10, 2005, 09:09:26 PM »

I have a .35 in a short and very light pump. I can tell you in the thick stuff there is nothing I would rather carry. For shooting at short ranges I would say its as good as it gets :grin:

BattleRifleG3 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 18, 2005, 04:44:01 PM »

My semi-auto in 35 Remington is moving along...

JDK · « **Reply #20 on:** February 19, 2005, 01:18:15 AM »

My grandfather and great uncles all used Marlin 336s in 35 Remington. Hate to think of the number of deer and black bear they killed here in Maine with them. For a very short time they converted to Remington 742s in 30-06 but quickly went back. I inherited 2 and they are still killing some deer. :grin:

Great woods cartridge.

Harry Snippe · « **Reply #21 on:** February 20, 2005, 09:50:32 AM »

Quote from: Lawdog

What is everyone's take on this cartridge? I know very little about this cartridge and one of the guards that works for me is thinking about buying one and asked me for my take on it for brush country deer and Black Bear. Lawdog

Lawdog
Trying to get something going for the 35 are we?
I have a 336/35 and I love the rifle. I reload and reloading does favour the 35 Remington . I use the 180 Speer on deer and use the RCBS 205 lead pills for the range shooting plates. It sure is no 325 WSM , but with in 150 yards and medium game it sure is a nice rifle to have.

Now for bigger game , I would grab the '06 since it has abit more horse power . For the Grizz? I would lend ear to one that shot more then one.

BattleRifleG3 · « **Reply #22 on:** February 20, 2005, 03:48:42 PM »

I never thought of the 35 Rem as being up to griz, just noticed the comment about being not too undergunned and took it as more optimistic that I should have.

Besides, the 35 Rem seems best used east of the Mississippi and south of the St Lawrence, where moderately sized animals roam and the ranges are frequently short. Apart from my dreams of distant hunting adventures, that's really where I'd be most likely to hunt. :grin:

Harry Snippe · « **Reply #23 on:** February 21, 2005, 06:54:36 AM »

Quote from: BattleRifleG3

I never thought of the 35 Rem as being up to griz, just noticed the comment about being not too undergunned and took it as more optimistic that I should have.

Besides, the 35 Rem seems best used east of the Mississippi and south of the St Lawrence, where moderately sized animals roam and the ranges are frequently short. Apart from my dreams of distant hunting adventures, that's really where I'd be most likely to hunt. :grin:

South of the St Lawrence?

I am sure your more than welcome to travel North east of the Mississippi across the St Lawrence and east to the Ocean
There are many place's you could Hunt in Canada with a 35 Remington and you are more than welcome to come up and fill that dream.

BattleRifleG3 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 21, 2005, 10:24:45 AM »

I should win the vague and confusing award. I was just thinking that I can't name an animal south of the St Lawrence and east of the Mississippi that 35 would be bad for at short range. I'm sure there's plenty of use for it on the rest of the continent, but there are also animals there that I wouldn't use it to hunt.

Hildy · « **Reply #25 on:** February 22, 2005, 11:52:20 AM »

I have a Marlin 336 in 35 Rem. Two years ago it was used to harvest a nicely sized doe in the woods of central Pennsylvania. One shot with a Federal 200g SP put the doe down within 200 yards. Upon inspection, both lungs and the heart were gone with a 1" exit hole in the opposite side.

I really like the feel of the gun and just recently I had the stock torn down and refinished to a natural walnut look. Also put a new scope on it...a Swift 1.5-7X with a very unique circular crosshair. Works great on the gun!!

Overall, I think the 35 Rem is a great caliber for close range thicket. You won't be blasting deer at several hundred yards with it...but that not what it was made for. The caliber penetrates like a bear and has some great knockdown with that large diameter, high grain bullet. Also a very efficient cartridge. I'd take this caliber up to maybe 150 yards if the conditions were right.

Buckeye · « **Reply #26 on:** February 25, 2005, 03:22:19 PM »

Quote from: ratherbefishin

how does it compare with the 356 winchester?

The 356win. is a flatter shooting round which is close to the 358win. in ballistics,I'm not knocking the 35rem.but its better to compare the 35rem. to the 30/30 and the 32 win. spec.
The 356win. when chambered in the strong 94bb action can push a 220gr. bullet to over 2400fps.
You can somtimes find a 94BB in 356win. in "Guns America" or other sites simliar.

Buckeye · « **Reply #27 on:** February 25, 2005, 03:26:02 PM »

Quote from: ratherbefishin

how does it compare with the 356 winchester?

The 356win. is a flatter shooting round which is close to the 358win. in ballistics,I'm not knocking the 35rem.but its better to compare the 35rem. to the 30/30 and the 32 win. spec.
The 356win. when chambered in the strong 94bb action can push a 220gr. bullet to over 2400fps.
You can somtimes find a 94BB in 356win. in "Guns America" or other sites simliar.

Harry Snippe · « **Reply #28 on:** February 25, 2005, 06:39:42 PM »

[What I meant was

You are welcome to come North of the border and across the St Lawrence.

Happy

South of the St Lawrence?

I am sure your more than welcome to travel North east of the Mississippi across the St Lawrence and east to the Ocean
There are many place's you could Hunt in Canada with a 35 Remington and you are more than welcome to come up and fill that dream.[/quote]

DakotaElkSlayer · « **Reply #29 on:** February 27, 2005, 05:30:49 PM »

The .35 Rem is one of the great American classic cartridges... Grice's in PA had some 7600 carbines made in .35Rem that would make a sweet woods gun.

As for the question of using a .35Rem as backup in Grizzly country? I would feel a whole lot safer with one than the .44mag revolver many carry.

Jim