9.3x62 Ackley Improved

[Rick HOlbert]

I just so happen to have a line on a decent amount of RL-17... looking forward to working up some loads with it!

I do think you'll be pleasantly surprised with the results. Although I had a senior moment. I had ment the 9.3X64. The 9.3X66 was also known as the Sako 370. Either way in all the years and all the animals I've taken not one complained that the bullet that hit them was 40 fps slow. Excess velocity causes over expansion, limits penetration and doesn't kill any deader. Just my take on things.

 

[BlueFlyer]

the 9.3x62 tapers 0.02 " from base to shoulder, the 30-06 0.03", the 280AI 0.015"

if you want more uummpf, the 375s are the next step ( or a 9.3 x64)

You have got me thinking now. I have a 9.3X64B and the body taper is 0.033" and the shoulder angle is 17deg. It might be a better candidate for the AI treatment. The 9.3X64B is rare enough, never heard of a 9.3X64AI?

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Greetings everyone! I’m a huge AI fan (.22-250 AI, .280 AI and .30-06 AI) and have had great success. I have a 9.3x62 that’s getting ready to go in for some work and I got to thinking - I’ve never seen a 9.3 AI. Before I talk to the smith about reaming, has anyone done it or heard of it? Any reasons I shouldn’t? Thanks!

@Zas9.3
After spending time with the 35Whelen AI and the standard Whelen I quickly came to the conclusion it just ain't worth the effort.

You will need custom dies that costs $$$$$

Fire form cases more dollars in projectiles powder and primers

Then reload cases again time and money
Plus if'n your smith hasn't got an AI reamer you will need one

Resale value of your rifle will go down as it will be a custom chamber

All this to gain 100fps

Just reload the 9.3 to its potential and you will kill everything you shoot.
If'n it ain't broke don't try and fix it.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Truthfully, my reasons for doing it were to push it closer to the 9.3x64, thereby closing the gap between it and .375 H&H. What you said is precisely what I wasn’t sure on… the .22-250 and .280 got quite the boost from it. The .30-06 not so much. I do enjoy the added benefits when it comes to reloading, though. At the end of the day though my .280 AI and 9.3 are my travel rifles that will get more use than anything else, and more often than not won’t see factory ammo, so if I can squeeze a bit more out of it (while still justifying the cost of the reaming and a set of dies) I’m all for it, but I’m not willing to incur a huge bill for bare minimal gain, which is why I no longer have my .28 nosler

@Zas9.3
John Barsness formula of 4:1 may help you.
Every 4% gain in capacity gives you a 1% gain in velocity
If you think the gain is worth it go for it but to me in a case that size NO.
BOB

 

[Odinsraven]

I have a 9.3x64 coming - to play with - and have thr 7 and 8 so finishes the collection I suppose -

9.3x62 is in a sweet spot and works very well - so new wheel syndrome I suppose

 

[BlueFlyer]

John Barsness formula

I would put more credibility on your personal experience than a theoretical formula.
You got me curious and I had a look at some of my recent results with the 416WSM and as I was working up my loads for every 1.63% increase in charge weight it gained 1.36% in velocity.
I guess we need to understand the context of the John Barsness formula.
The only cartridges that will yield a worthwhile increase in velocity are when the base cartridge has considerable body taper, the 348W for example.

 

[metricman]

@Zas9.3
John Barsness formula of 4:1 may help you.
Every 4% gain in capacity gives you a 1% gain in velocity
If you think the gain is worth it go for it but to me in a case that size NO.
BOB

i believe that one of the provisos for that "rule" is that pressure is the same

 

[BFaucett]

...<snip>...

I guess we need to understand the context of the John Barsness formula.

...<snip>...

As you're in Australia, if you're not familiar with John Barsness:

"Whether you hunt with a rifle or shotgun, fish with flyrod or spinning gear or simply cook wild game and fish of North America, RiflesAndRecipes books are for you. John Barsness and Eileen Clarke have traveled from their native Montana to destinations as distant as Africa, South America, New Zealand, and Europe, not to mention Canada and Alaska to hunt, fish, and sample wild game cooking.​

​

John’s books are full of hunting stories, and advice about the rifles, shotguns, ammunition, binoculars, and rifle scopes that will make your hunt successful."​

​

https://www.riflesandrecipes.com/​

John has written extensively for magazines such as Rifle Magazine, Handloader Magazine, and Sports Afield. I consider him to be one of my most trusted sources of information when it comes to handloading.

Attached are a couple of articles by him (pdf files) that I thought you might enjoy. One is "Efficient Cartridges" and the other is "Debunking a Few Handloading Myths".

Just my two cents... Cheers! Bob F.

 

[mooze]

According to John Barsness, the 9.3x62 can get fairly close to the 9.3x64.


View attachment 722434

Just my two cents... Cheers! Bob F.

this is understating things for the 9.3x64: for 286 gr you are getting to 2750 fps with medium burnrate powders ( Varget, H4350) and even more with powders in the 4831 range.

 

[BFaucett]

this is understating things for the 9.3x64: for 286 gr you are getting to 2750 fps with medium burnrate powders ( Varget, H4350) and even more with powders in the 4831 range.

I just passed along the information that John Barsness published in an article. I have no experience with the 9.3x64. I can also refer you to this article by Gil Sengel:

Cartridge Board
9.3x64mm Brenneke
column By: Gil Sengel
Handloader Magazine April/May 2019

source: https://www.handloadermagazine.com/cartridge-board-7


Also, RWS lists a load for the 9.3x64 as a 293 gr (19 g) bullet at 2510 fps (765 m/s).

RWS 9,3x64 UNI Classic 19,0g
https://rws-ammunition.com/en/products/centerfire-rifle-cartridges/rws-9-3x64-uni-classic-19-0g


Bob F.

 

[Muskox]

I have a 9,3x64 on a commercial Voere 2165. I am not sure who made the action. It's a 2165, so it has all the normal features. Tang Savage/Ruger 77 (not mark 2) safety, butterknife bolt, and this one has a pica tinny rail on it. It has a hogback walnut stock, and is a very pretty rifle.

It is a 1.5-2 inch kind of gun, so it would work for about anything a guy wanted to hunt a 9,3x64 with.

Going to be my elk, moose, bear rifle when I get back to America. It's about 2 pounds lighter than my Blaser R8. Try to get it going in Wyoming in 2027 on elk, I have enough points.

 

[BlueFlyer]

i believe that one of the provisos for that "rule" is that pressure is the same

That makes sense, so it is assuming that the extra propellant it flattening the pressure curve. Baiscally it holding the peak pressure for longer. But there will be limitations, for example with an 18" barrel there would be very limited gains with the 416Rigby compared to a 416WSM, as most of the propellant in the Rigby would be burnt out of the barrel. But with a 26" barrel then there would be significant gains for the Rigby.

 

[BlueFlyer]

if you're not familiar with John Barsness:

Thank you for sharing the articles - many wise words.

 

[HWL]

Why reinvent the wheel?
9.3x62 or 9.3x74r
Or better, 9.3x64
The 9.3x66 is useless compared to the last three, but it's still useful.
A 9.3x65r Brenneke would be a miss.

Not at all....
The good old M98 Mauser can carry 5+1 9,3×66 cartridges.
More power than a 3+1 9,3x64 or .375 H&H.
The cartridge is not that bad.

HWL

 

[Clodo Ferreira]

Hi Zas9.3,

I don't know a bigger nonsense to even consider a 9,3x62 AI. Ridiculous. The 9,3x62 was born as an "AI" ....!
If you want some more power (but less availability cartridge or cases) go to 9,3x64. Or, for even more power, to a 375 Ruger for standard 30-06 lenght actions.
The x64 falls just in the middle between x62 and both 375H&Hmg/375 Ruger.
I am very pleased with my 9,3x62.
Also have a nice 375H&H original Winchester 70 pre 64. This one now is semi retired because the BRNO ZKK 9,3x62...

Good Luck!

CF

 

[fsrmg1]

As stated above, the 9.3x62 already has a short neck and not much taper, so little to gain by improving. If you want more, your only real options are to open the chambers up to a larger round like the 9.3x64 or 9.3x66 Sako.

The '64 will require the bolt face being opened up and maybe a little work on the feeding rails to accommodate a larger diameter case. You'll loose a round or two capacity in the process as well.

Simply put, the '66 is basically just driving the '62 chamber 4mm deeper, since it shares the same neck and shoulder dimensions. The advantage of this is that you don't have to alter the rails or bolt face, plus it retains the same magazine capacity.

I had an older FN 9.3x62 with some throat wear that needed cleaning up, so I had it opened up to 9.3x66. The extra length freshened up the throat and the rifle shoots perfectly again. Since the larger case has similar case capacity to the 9.3x74R, I typically use that data for general shooting. For hunting loads, I use 9.3x62 data plus a couple grains. This gives me just as 2500 fps with 286 grainers and 2650 fps with 250 grainers.

 

[baxterb]

for what its worth,

i wouldn't bother. the 9.3x62 is pretty efficient already. i don't think you could get an extra 100 fps out of the improved version.

my 9.3x62 shoots a 286 a frame at 2500 fps. any animal hit with another 25-75 fps won't know the difference and the holdovers for the "improved" version at hunting ranges, just wouldn't matter.

Yup.. my 9.3 shoots a 286 North Fork 2500+ as well. I don't think there is much more you can get out of it.