Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact
NitroExpress.com: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash

View recent messages : 24 hours | 48 hours | 7 days | 14 days | 30 days | 60 days | More Smilies


*** Enjoy NitroExpress.com? Participate and join in. ***

Shooting & Reloading - Mausers, Big Bores and others >> Big Bore Rifles

NitroXAdministrator
.700 member


Reged: 25/12/02
Posts: 39248
Loc: Barossa Valley, South Australi...
Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash
      03/09/21 02:24 PM

Quote:

The Surprising 9.3x62 Rifle Cartridge..

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





Does he mention anywhere actually shooting and / or hunting with a 9.3x62 himself? In the article? Or in the video? I haven't watched the video.

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.




Huh? I don't have a 9.3x62 but do shoot the 9.3x74R. No where in the article is the 9.3x72R mentioned or the 9.3x74R.

I have always wondered why the 232 gr projectiles are used so much? Including some double rifles being regulated for that bullet weight.

" 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. "

Never used a 250 gr myself in the 74R. The 286 gr bullet weight seems to be the most used and common weight for the larger 9.3's. "The sweet spot" for actual users using the calibre on larger antelope, deer and most certainly on buffalo is the 286 grs.

A 250 gr of good construction would be fine on plains game, but I would see no need to go below 286 gr fro buffalo, and defintitely not on elephant. A 286 gr 9.3 is very comparable to the .375 300 gr. Using a 250 gr 9.3 would be similar to settling for a 270 gr 375. A good plains game bullet or a choice for a lesser powered cartridge.

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.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"


Edited by NitroX (04/09/21 03:21 PM)

Post Extras Print Post   Remind Me!     Notify Moderator


Entire topic
Subject Posted by Posted on
* 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Ripp 09/09/20 02:18 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Rule303   09/09/20 07:08 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash NitroXAdministrator   09/09/20 07:26 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash PatagonHunter   09/09/20 08:55 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash 93x64mm   09/09/20 10:12 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash DarylS   10/09/20 02:04 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash PatagonHunter   10/09/20 02:37 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash DarylS   10/09/20 10:13 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Rule303   10/09/20 01:09 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash DarylS   10/09/20 03:18 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash NitroXAdministrator   10/09/20 06:21 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Ripp   10/09/20 11:37 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash NitroXAdministrator   11/09/20 02:24 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Ripp   11/09/20 11:42 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash szihn   12/09/20 01:04 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash NitroXAdministrator   12/09/20 07:08 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash NitroXAdministrator   12/09/20 07:23 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash rpeck   26/08/21 10:07 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Rule303   28/08/21 07:50 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Homer   29/08/21 09:07 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Northman   01/09/21 01:08 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Rule303   05/09/21 07:57 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Rule303   05/09/21 08:27 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash NitroXAdministrator   05/09/21 09:44 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash crshelton   05/09/21 10:42 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash kodiak   05/09/21 01:40 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash NitroXAdministrator   05/09/21 09:46 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash PatagonHunter   05/09/21 10:20 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash 9.3x57   07/09/21 09:00 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Rule303   06/09/21 07:19 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash PatagonHunter   06/09/21 08:40 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Rule303   07/09/21 09:07 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Northman   08/09/21 08:50 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash 9.3x57   07/09/21 09:12 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash PatagonHunter   07/09/21 07:00 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash PatagonHunter   07/09/21 07:14 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Ripp   02/09/21 03:27 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash NitroXAdministrator   03/09/21 02:24 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash rpeck   03/09/21 10:57 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash topcat   04/09/21 09:04 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Ripp   27/08/21 02:04 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash NitroXAdministrator   27/08/21 01:42 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash rpeck   23/12/21 10:04 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash 260rem   23/12/21 01:28 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Postman   26/08/21 11:25 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Ripp   27/08/21 02:03 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash 9.3x57   07/09/21 11:03 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash NitroXAdministrator   12/09/20 06:56 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash NitroXAdministrator   11/09/20 02:08 PM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash crshelton   11/09/20 04:48 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Rule303   11/09/20 07:05 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Ripp   11/09/20 11:03 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash EDELWEISS   11/09/20 09:46 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Ripp   11/09/20 10:59 AM
. * * Re: 375 H&H vs 9.3x62-Cartridge-clash Rod4861   10/09/20 07:46 PM

Extra information
0 registered and 39 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:   



Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Thread views: 12666

Rate this thread

Jump to

Contact Us NitroExpress.com

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact


Copyright 2003 to 2011 - all rights reserved