Stuart
(.275 member)
18/07/07 03:55 PM
Value/advice on a Husky Crown Grade in 9.3x62?

I have an opportunity to pick up a "Husqvarna Crown Grade, 9.3x62 bolt action rifle. Small ring mauser 98 action, wood and bluing v.g.-ex. has been hunted with, shoots very accurately." I don't have pics yet and I'm not very familiar with these, aside from knowing that Husky rifles are generally very good. Is there anything in particular I should be asking the seller, or anything to watch out for? Apparently the trigger is non-adjustable, so I'd probably want to replace it. I'm a bit surprised to see a 9.3x62 on a small ring action, but perhaps this is not unusual?

Many thanks

Stuart


ozhunter
(.400 member)
18/07/07 04:53 PM
Re: Value/advice on a Husky Crown Grade in 9.3x62?

I am not that familiar with the different models but was told to make sure it had a FN98 action and not the SM 94 when I bought my one.
Although the trigger is fixed, my gun smith could still adjust it and thought they are a good no nonsense trigger.

A friend with my Husky 9.3x62 with RECKNAGEL swing off mounts and steel 4x36 Schmidt&Bender scope.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
18/07/07 10:42 PM
Re: Value/advice on a Husky Crown Grade in 9.3x62?

Stuart, there is a Forum devoted to Swedish civilian and commerical arms and I know you will get an extensive response there.

Oz, neat rifle, looks like a 146, like one of mine.

Some basics...

Early Husqvarna {HVA} bolt actions were made from 96 actions that were essentially just plucked off the military production lines {called the Model 46}. Later, {1938-40} a series of rifles was made by HVA with FN-manufactured military 98-type actions {HVA Model 146}. After WW2, Swedish Mausers were "improved" for civilian/commercial market. Here's where it gets a little confusing: Most times people naturally think that means the typical "improvements" that are made by many manufacturers to the 98 action.

However, since the "Mauser" in Sweden was the 96, the development of Husky commercial guns essentially revolved around that action; the Small-ring 96, and that is eassentially the case, but just to be cantakerous, after 1950 the Swedes used some more FN 98 actions {contemporary commercial 98's this time} in their 640 series right along with 96-type actions also in their 640 series of guns! And they used both relatively military-type 96's and a version without the thumbcut in the left wall, the so-called 96 "strengthened" action a sort-of rare middle transition type {I have one}. Action type doesn't really settle down till the introduction of the 1600 series which I suspect, but do not know in the absence of other info, is yours.

All that to say this:

9.3x62's ARE commonly built on 2-lug small-ring 96 actions. There may be safety problems but I have never heard of any safety problem arising from their 96 design {due to their inferior gas escape venting system compared to the 98, or their lack of a safety lug, etc}. HOWEVER, and this is significant for shooters of shootable guns; many owners of 96-action 9.3x62's report that the guns will not feed from the magazine and function with standard length x62 factory ammo. Yup, the action {96} is just a hair shorter than the 98 and ammo must be handloaded to less-than-standard OAL. I have no idea what length ammo Norma loaded back in the '40's and '50's when these guns were made. That has been a source of great discussion on the Swede forum.

Later x62's in the 1600 series {also a small-ring action, but of 98 length I believe} do not have the length problem I don't believe.

From your description, it is impossible to determine exactly what model it is:

1} Are you sure it is 9.3x62? 9.3x57 is common.
2} Does the bolt have a safety lug?
3} Is the trigger a single stange 98-type or is it a non-98-type commercial trigger? Or is it a double pull military?

Here is a link to the Swede forum:

http://www.gunboards.com/forums/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=41

Top to bottom:

M46 in 9.3x57
M648 in 8x57 "strengthened" 96 action
M146 in 9.3x57

My 146 last Fall, whitetail:



My 5 1/2 lb 46 9.3x57, hound-run bear last Fall:



Again, my 146 last Fall, cow elk:





Stuart
(.275 member)
19/07/07 12:22 AM
Re: Value/advice on a Husky Crown Grade in 9.3x62?

Thanks for the info, folks. Yes, I must ask the seller what model it is, as I gather that "Crown Grade" simply refers to a particular finish within a series. As to the calibre, yes, I notice that there are lots of 9.3 x 57's around. There is a company in Montreal (Tradex Canada) that has several of them on their website, along with 6.5x55 on the 96 action. I could also wait for a x57 in good shape and having it rechambered.

Stuart


9.3x57
(.450 member)
19/07/07 12:43 AM
Re: Value/advice on a Husky Crown Grade in 9.3x62?

Good show! Please give us a further report.

As for rechambering a x57 to x62, I wouldn't, and didn't.

I use cheap Remington component 8x57 brass, make one pass thru the Hornady 9.3x57 sizer die and load. I neck-size only and the cartridge is exceedingly simple to load uses little powder and kills efficiently.

With 285 grain bullets, I get an honest 2100 fps in my 146 and performance on game {several whitetail deer, elk and black bear & coyote and small varmints} of the Prvi Partizan bullets has been excellent from 25 yards to 225. The 9.3x57 is regaining popularity in Sweden with the growing population of boar. Norma loads it, offering a couple excellent loads. I stick to handloads, but I believe RWS also loads it?

The difference between the x57 and x62 is similar to that between the .308 and .30-06. Keeping shots on your moose to 200 yards or less, I doubt the animals will ever know the difference.

The 9.3x62 is an excellent cartridge and nothing bad can be said about it. But rechambering a x57 to x62 requires the use of x62 cases which if bought are more expensive than cheap 8x57's, and if formed from '06, the x62 case, while not difficult, requires a more complicated procedure.

In case you haven't noticed, I like the 9.3x57!!


Stuart
(.275 member)
19/07/07 01:47 AM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

9ThreeXFifty7,

Yes, your moniker does give a rather strong hint of your preference. I am thinking of this partic. rifle for a possible second trip to Africa. (The first trip will hopefully happen in 2009, for which I will be taking a BSA-sporterized P-14 rechambered to .303 Epps for plains game.) So it's not a "must-have" but rather something I might pick up if it's a good purchase.

Stuart


88MauSporter
(.375 member)
19/07/07 06:45 AM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

9ThreeXFifty7 / Stuart:
Good trade of info. I too am partial to the 9.3X57. I have two. What I see from -Firty7's email, mine are a M146 on the 98 action and possibly an older model M46 on the 96 action. The reason I say older is the stock configuration. "Bag" rounded grip, much slimmer at the comb and the forend. The appearance is more early 20th century European. Both are excellent condition. I tried to pick up an 8X57 recently from SARCO, but they cancelled the order after they took it, saying that they had run out. I bought both my others Huskeys from them. I was very disappointed.

I previously posted info of my Ram hunt with the 9.3x57. Won't repeat again. I too was thinking of the conversion to 9.3X62 on the M146. Not that I don't care for the performance of the x57, but, when I go to Africa or otherwise, there is a better chance of finding 9.3X62 factory.(?) Am I mistaken on this? The idea may be redundant due to having my FN Mauser .375 HH for the same thing.

I agree with -Fifty7 that the reload and brass for the X57 is an easier prospect. Ahh, so many options and so little time! I do favor the 286 grainers. Heavy round nose bullets. I use .318 200 and 220 gr in my 88 Mauser sporters. They shoot to sight aim and with authority. With these velocities and ranges, the roundnose is a better hunter. (my opinion and experience)

I have learned much about the Husky versions reading -Fifty7's posts. I usually research all my collection, and know much Mauser detail to a geekish detail. No time the last few years for real research. I am sneaking 5 minutes of time from the client to poke this out.
Thanks.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
19/07/07 12:23 PM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

I should have added; I have modified the stocks on all of my rifles. Aside from bedding, all buttstocks have been reshaped for left-hand shooting. Many of the Husky stocks came with castoff and are really annoying to shoot from the left shoulder, in that the knife edge comb cuts the face. I have totally reshaped mine, giving one a little hogback but basically lowering the comb till my chin rests on the forearms and the sights are dead ahead. I think I have high cheekbones, but I have always felt recoil on my face far worse than on my shoulder. All of my guns are now very easy shooting, including my 5 1/2 lb 46 in 9.3x57 with the original HVA jaktdiopter peep sight. What a delight to carry, and eveyone who shoots it is amazed at the lack of kick.

Anyway, my stocks are not "stock" so don't think Husky stocks look like mine.

Here are 3 of my Husky stocks from above and behind, showing the "rollover" effect. I used a Farrier's rasp, files and sandpaper to shape, shouldering the rifles as I altered the stocks to make sure the sights line up.





88MauSporter
(.375 member)
19/07/07 12:49 PM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

9ThreeXFifty7 :
Thanks for the explaination. Nice work.
Mine are "stock" stocks. Only cleaned and oiled as needed. I am a righty.
I would like to know about when my Huskys were made. Any source of that that you know?
I also have a Husky SXS combo, 16 ga x 12.7X44R underlever hammer gun. I have a facination for these combos. I have another 1904 make German SxS combo in 9.5X56R x 16 ga.This one is a true bavarian piece with the associated Buffalo horn grips and lever, tang sights, etc.
I will take time to find out how to post photos here so I can show. That is one of the best parts of these forums.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
19/07/07 01:24 PM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

I believe the guys on www.gunboards Swedish Civilian and Commercial Firearms will answer every dating question you have, models, too. Give 'em a whirl.

Charles_Helm
(.333 member)
20/07/07 01:55 AM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

Pettson's Place used to have a lot of great information. Apparently it is going to be moved and rebuilt:

http://www.pettsons.info/


Stuart
(.275 member)
20/07/07 02:38 AM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

Quote:

I should have added; I have modified the stocks on all of my rifles...



9ThreeXFifty7,

This may be something to consider when/if I pick up the 9.3x62, as I'm not familiar with relatively heavy kickers, aside from my Marlin 1895, which feels about the same as a .338. There was an article in Rifle Magazine a while ago by Alaskan guide, Phil Shoemaker, whose fibreglass-stocked Model 70 in .458 has been modified considerably until it fit him like a glove. Unlike yours, the results were NOT pretty- it's been nicknamed "Ole Ugly", perhaps largely due to the Rustoleum paint job but when things get nasty it no doubt lines up fast.

ps to OzHunter: Nice zebra (and the rifle isn't shabby, either). Zebra is on my list when I go.

Stuart


ozhunter
(.400 member)
20/07/07 08:21 AM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

Here are a couple other animals worth considering. Again taken with the Husky 9.3Mauser.
The ability to load 320grn WOODLEIGH Protected Point and solid bullets makes the 9.3x62 a great option.



Although Shaun did not shoot this Ele with the 9.3, he was happy to have at least this caliber with 320grn solids when amongst these giants.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
20/07/07 11:22 AM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

ozhunter: great pix!

Stuart, do what you have to to get them to shoot. Thanks for the nice words about the looks of my Husky's. Sure, I guess you and me both would say they are better looking than Shoemaker's .458, but then again looks is as looks does, and you haven't seen my two working ranch rifles; my bull-barrelled Savage .223 and my 5.45x39 AK!! Paint works!

The Husky's are not expensive rifles, a good 46 going for $300-$400 or so, so as far as I am concerned, stock work to make them fit me is completely worth the effort. I don't invest in guns, so the value to me is in the shooting.


Stuart
(.275 member)
20/07/07 11:25 AM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

Quote:

Here are a couple other animals worth considering...



Both are on the list. My BSA-sporterized P-14 in .303 Epps will handle a zebra and no worries on warthog but the bigger stuff will have to wait for a second trip- and that 9.3x62. Not that there is a lack of "303" suitable game to choose from the first time around.

A fellow here in Canada is making 200 gr. bullets for the .303 (in .311, .313 and .314, to cater to all flavours of bore diameter). I also have some Woodleigh 174 gr. so I will do some penetration tests to see how the 200 gr. stand up compared to the "woodleigh standard." I'd like to be the first person to use Steve's "Mk.9" 200 gr. bullet in Africa.

Stuart


9.3x57
(.450 member)
20/07/07 11:32 AM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

Stuart:

I shot some Speer Grand Slam .311 diameter 200 grain bullets for a test and posted them on the ".375 Penetration" post here. Sorry but I sold all of mine when I sold my .303's...

Charles: "Pettson" is the Moderator over on the gunboards Swede commercial site. Great guy.


Stuart
(.275 member)
21/07/07 03:41 AM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

9ThreeXFifty7,

I didn't know Speer made a .311 aside from the 180 gn. Must be discontinued now as I don't see it on their website. Maybe this is why Steve Redgwell at .303british.com is making a 200 gn.

Stuart


9.3x57
(.450 member)
23/07/07 11:13 AM
Re: 57 to 62 conversion

Stuart, the .311/200's were indeed a short run made for a Canadian firm that spun out some wildcat ammo back in the '90's. That's what I was told by a guy down at the Speer a few years ago. Redgwell's bullets look good to me, but I've never had the opportunity to shoot them.


Contact Us NitroExpress.com

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact


Copyright 2003 to 2011 - all rights reserved