Quote:

---

The Surprising 9.3x62 Rifle Cartridge..

https://www.ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/the-surprising-93x62-rifle-cartridge

---

Quote:

---

Rifles built on the dependable Mauser controlled-round-feed bolt action were home to most of the early 9.3x62 cartridges. This rifle is the superb 416 Rigby on a magnum action. One chambered for 9.3x62 would be slightly trimmer.

---

Huh? Why not put up a photo of himself shooting a 9.3x62? What on Earth does a Magnum actioned .416 got to do with this subject?

Quote:

---

Despite its low pressure rating, the 9.3x62 holds its own ballistically, spitting 232-gr. Norma Vulcan bullets 2,690 fps ahead of 59.7 grains of Norma 201 powder, according to Norma Reloading Manual 2013. (Trajectory table below.)

Both Hornady and Nosler handloading recipes show 286-gr. bullets from 24” barrels hitting 2,400 fps or slightly faster. This bullet size down to 250-grains appears to be the sweet spot for the 9.3x62, balancing muzzle velocity and energy for peak performance. The 300-grain A-Frame load at 2,350 fps shown in Swift Reloading Manual Number One doesn’t appear to offer significant advantages, as the accompanying chart shows, although momentum and penetration potential would be better.

---

Quote:

---

But we can’t leave this “poor man’s 375 H&H” without pushing bullet mass limits. With a 300-grain Swift A-Frame aboard, SD rises to .320 and muzzle energy to 3,679 f-p. To me this suggest we’re running out of steam, yet Norma offers a 325-grain bullet option. Call that one Penetration Station. The 286-gr. bullet comes within 20 f-p of the 300-grain’s muzzle energy, but hangs onto more of it downrange; 84 f-p more at 100 yards. By 200 yards this climbs to a 156 f-p advantage. Unless one desires the higher SD for deeper penetration and/or plans to engage dangerous game inside of 100 yards, I see little reason to shoot the 300-gr.

---

Huh? Its interesting the author doesn't mentioned the 320 gr Woodleigh offering. Perhaps because no one loads it in factory loaded ammo, which he is probably pushing sales for? Also no published ballistics to use for an article?

I have some on hand, but have not used them yet. I want to give them a try in the 74R. Seeing my 286 gr loads are a bit slow at around or below 2,200 fps, I suspect the 320's will be too slow. BUT, I believe many 9.3x62 and certainly 9.3x64 users use them successfully on buffalo for which they are probably designed. A 286 gr FMJ will no doubt kill elephant as well. A 320 gr FMJ at sufficient velocity would be a great choice.

"Down range" ballistics is not really an important thing with actual big and dangerous game bullets. Elephant normally at less than 25 yards, and buffalo at less than a hundred. Often closer in the thick stuff, and that is when these marginal choices are lesser choices to the good old larger big bores.

I'll have to watch the video. Hopefullly there is lots of talk about actual use of the cartridge and hunting stories about it!

Interesting I never knew the 9.3x62 preceded the .30-06, by a couple of years. Would have been sure the 9.3x62 was a necked up .30-06. But evidently not. But the .30-03 predecessor of the .30-06 was earlier than the 9.3x62. So perhaps it influenced the length of the 9.3x62? Who knows? It could also be the 61/62m/63 mm length was an ideal longer case length for the standard Mauser bolt actions? These cartidges using 8x57 and 7x57 cartridges as parent designs, lengthening the case for added velocity.

While I have a .375 H&H Magnum and it is actually in a standard length M98 action. Is a little tricky for others to load the magazine in a hurry, must always tell people how to if borrowing my rifle. And I load the 300 gr Wooudleigh RNs to the cannelure and also double check they will fit in the magazine. While I have a .375 and it outperforms the 9.3x62 in every way, the 9.3x62 is a great non nonsense cartridge choice. Should be far more popular. Far better than a .35 Whelan. A 9.3x62 in a standard action in a handy length and weight rifle would be a wonderful choice for brush hunting of sambar deer, driven game boar and deer, no doubt a choice for bear, moose, elk, African plains game and certainly able to take buffalo. Within the minimum requirements for buffalo and elephant.

Legalities aside in some jurisdictions. Just like the .375 H&H Mag, makes a useful "one gun, one world" hunting rifle and cartridge choice.

My rifles in the 9.3x62 range include my Whitworth M98 .375 H&H Mag, my Tikka 512SD U/O double rifle in 9.3x74R. Both of these I have used a fair amount. Haven't shot "600 buffalo" with them like some of the commenters to the article. My Mannlicher 9.5x57 stutzen stocked rifle, wil be interesting to see how performs when I get to try it out. Even though stutzen stocked they are quite long.

PS I think the article misses dealing with the 9.3x64, which is the true comaprison cartridge to a .375 H&H Mag.

On a different note, the 62 mm or similar length cartridge of the 7mm/8mm x57 original cartridge seems to peter out with the 9.3/.366 calibre. Everything from .25 to .366 seems to work well. The .270, 7mm, .30, 8mm, .338, .35 and finally the 9.3mm seems good caalibre options. When we get to the .375/06 it seems to have run out of popularity? No doubt some will post and disagree? Certainly the .400's and above, seem finished.