|
|
|||||||
I've been thinking about for quite a while now & decided to correlate all my notes together for those that like this calibre (& others) that I reload for. It will be my new repository so if I do further work I can easily add to this post. I would also like to encourage other to do the same so that all reloading data is together & becomes more comprehensive as time progresses As always the old adage these loads are safe in my rifle (Mark X Mauser), but they can be used as a reference to start those along the way rather than starting completely from scratch as I did! When I first started reloading for this cartridge Circa 1987 there was no loading data in Australia what-so-ever at the time. I wrote away to MULWEX Australia & received a letter from a Mr W.F. Pheasant who was the General Manager at the time. He suggested a stating point of 63gn AR2209 to a maximum of around 70gn, using standard primers rather than magnum primers on lighter loads due to them shattering resulting in higher pressures with slow burning powder. So thank you Mr Pheasant, your information was a very handy start to a young (then) man that had some reloading experience - but nothing like this! A lot of water has passed under the bridge since then & best educated guesses have now been replaced with programmes like "Quick Load" to give us much more insight as to how to progress & what powders to best use etc. These however must only be a guide & as all rifles are different; so what works best in mine may not in yours! My aim has been to try to achieve factory specification, but my main emphasis fore mostly was to get the best accuracy in that process. Those marked with a '*' were the best preforming in my rifle with deviations of 10fps or less. For those that are interested in the Woodleigh Hydros, I have done some testing on the Mk1's, but sadly I must confess due to feeding issues I didn't keep notes on these! To this point I haven't used the Mk II's which have the protective tip & hence have eliminated any feed issues. Wishing all the best to those who would like to shoot this unusual calibre, I hope this brings more life back into this wonderful old cartridge! Jack Lott was very impressed with this cartridge, even rating it better than the .375H&H! https://rws-munition.de/fileadmin/datasheets/rws-9-3x64-uni-classic-19-0g.hunt.en.pdf Regards 93x64mm Cases RWS Primer Federal 210 - All loads Bullet 293TUG Powder AR2208 OAL 85.2mm Charge FPS (rounded) 60gn 2400 61gn 2440 62gn 2480 63gn 2520 *64gn 2560 Bullet 293TUG Powder AR2209 OAL 85.2mm Charge FPS (rounded) 68gn 2470 69gn 2490 70gn 2510 71gn 2530 (compressed) *72gn 2570 (compressed) Factory equivalent load Bullet 270Speer Powder AR2208 OAL 85.0mm Charge FPS (rounded) 55gn 2215 (extremely accurate) 56gn 2255 (Group 1 BGR Minimum load) Bullet 286Woodleigh PP Powder AR2208 OAL 85.68mm Charge FPS (rounded) *63gn 2530 64gn 2550 Bullet 286Woodleigh PP Powder AR2209 OAL 85.68mm Charge FPS (rounded) 71gn 2470 72gn 2455 (compressed) 73gn 2510 (compressed) *74gn 2635 (compressed) 75gn 2660 (compressed) (factory 2690fps) Bullet 286Woodleigh FMJ Powder AR2209 OAL 84.15mm Charge FPS (rounded) 71gn 2470 72gn 2485 (compressed) *73gn 2580 (compressed) (shoots 1" lower than 286PP at 100m) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
Yep..the 9,3 Brenneke has many times swirled in my head...but when it came to actually choosing an ultimate 9,3mm the 9,3x70 DWM became my dream. Both cartridges are rockstars. The 9,3 Brenneke will catch up with the .375H&H but the 9,3DWM will run away from the .375H&H..LOL But the question always remain...Do you need more than a .9,3 Brenneke?...I don`t think so. It will do it all. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
Quote: Agreed Jens! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
Quote: Loading data courtesy of Nojden Fixing the graphics. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
From Dotchicco Re: My article on Norma website... Satisfaction! [Re: NitroX] #340128 - 16/04/20 03:06 AM Quote:Quote: |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
320 gr Woodleighs make the 9.3x64 a very useful African and Big Game cartridge. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
https://jww.de/93x64-brenneke-334/ |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
Great data share 93x64mm, how long is the barrel on your rifle? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
Coll416, my 9.3x64 has a 26" barrel, I've never been a admirer of short barrels. I do have an old 1892 Winchester with a 20" barrel, but that's for teaching the younger ones to step up into centerfire |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
Quote: Reloading Data courtesy of Safarischorsch More info on the 9.3x64 http://forums.nitroexpress.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=6394&page=0&fpart=1&vc=1 From Dorleac & Dorleac - a marvelous rifle to highlight this unique caliber http://forums.nitroexpress.com/showflat....true#Post330803 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
It was stated above: With premium bullets like CDP, Partition or TUG, SWIFT A-Frame... you have an equal cartridge to the 375H&H with better accuracy and less problems to use it in a standard Mauser 98 system. On the other hand you can realize reduced loads close to the 8mm Mauser! I agree with all of that except the part about better accuracy. I have made a lot of 375s in my life as a gunsmith, and I personally am on the 2nd barrel of my 375H&H and the accuracy is excellent. I get groups at 100 Yards with 4 shots that all touch with my rifle both with 270 and 300 grain bullets, so I can't see how a 9.3 could be more accurate (considering I am also shooting a 4X scope with a 2 MOA Dot) My 9.3s (all 3 of them, ---- may soon be 4 too.) are also very accurate with my Ruger #1 in 9.3X74R being just as accurate as my 375H&H, but none beat it and the other 2 don't match it. So far I have not seen many rifles that do beat it, and I have owned it since I was 23 years old. That's 41 year now. To be honest a sub MOA 9.3 or 375 is delightful, but any accuracy you get under about 1.5" is largely just "feel-goodies" and of no real-world value for hunting any game you'd actually hunt with such calibers as a rule. Most men anyway. maybe I am a bit "off" but it's not uncommon for me to shoot antelope with my 375 or my 9.3s. I have killed a few with my Ruger at over 400 yards, but even a 400 yd shot doesn't actually NEED a 1/2 MOA rifle and load. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
I had the same experience with the .375H&H as to accuracy, Steve & to the point of bullet weights of 235gr. to 300gr. all going into a big group that ran a little less than 1" x 2" or so, on centers, with individual bullet weight groups of 1/2", within the composite group. That they were all in a group an inch wide by 2" high speaks volumes for having one sight setting for all bullet weights. The 300's of course were lowest, with the 270's next and in between the 300's and the 235's, just as you would want/expect. Further, I don't know if the 9.3x63 shares this close point of impact trait with different bullet weights, but my 9.3x57 did using resized 225gr, .235gr., .232gr. Norma, resized 270's and the 300's I tested in it. It is nice to have a single sight setting for all bullet weights. My .30/06 M70 almost does this, only 1/2" to the right & 1/2" lower with 180gr. vs. a sight setting for the 165's. It's close enough for "government" work. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
Quote: Reloading Data courtesy of Safarischorsch More info on the 9.3x64 http://forums.nitroexpress.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=6394&page=0&fpart=1&vc=1 From Dorleac & Dorleac - a marvelous rifle to highlight this unique caliber http://forums.nitroexpress.com/showflat....true#Post330803 Another Dorleac & Dorleac masterpiece http://forums.nitroexpress.com/showflat....true#Post341584 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
"With premium bullets like CDP, Partition or TUG, SWIFT A-Frame... you have an equal cartridge to the 375H&H with better accuracy" I sure don't agree with this statement. I've owned 2 different makes and shot 3 different rifles chambered in .375H&H and every one of them has been a sub MOA shooter. The 1970's Sako was a clover-leafer, a 3/8" C to C shooter, virtually every time & that was with a Leuy 2-5X scope. |