Thanks Bob.

Question...why do the .350 Rem and .358 Win generate such frequent complaints as kickers when the 9.3x57 in my 6 lb rifle is a joy to shoot and my 9.3x62 in carbine form easy as well?

I've always found it curious.

In fact, in my case, years ago, I steered away from both those attractive .35's for years because I already had a .375 H&H and figured "why bother getting a lower-powered rifle that kicks more than my .375", this opinion based entirely on what I read about the .35's. I would have loved a Savage 99 in .358...

Thus, I've never owned either of the .35's and have never shot either of them either, but I have shot a .35 Whelen and it was fine, no big deal at all.

Is this a case of the gunwriters ruining two good cartridges and psyching shooters out? I mean, the ballistics are similar or less-inspiring than my 9.3's, so I just do not get it.

I think I've heard "Brutal recoil" or some such associated with the .350 and .358 more than any other cartridges. Yet the ballisitcs belie it.

Maybe Remington and Winchester stocks are poorly shaped?

Your thoughts?

A fellow I know owns a .350 carbine here. He lives in the middle of nowhere and it has been his cabin and hound hunting gun for the best part of his life. He never complains about the kick. Really curious about what you think; Are .358 and .350 owners frequently small-bore shooters who want a "big'un" but are afraid of recoil so they buy something in the middle and then realize they really can't stand kick at all?

A mystery wrapped in an enigma sealed in a riddle??