9.3x62

[One Day...]

I love Varget for a lot of applications - my 308, my daughter's 7mm-08, my 404 Jeff, my wife's 375 H&H. But for 9.3...seems like you need about a 50' drop tube to be able to get enough powder in the case. I imagine all-copper like Barnes and Hammer would just be worse.

258 gr Hammer on the left, 286 gr A Frame on the right
View attachment 675024

That said, I think Varget would probably be a good choice for a 250 gr like Accubond, Woodleigh, or Swift. For longer bullets, go with fine ball powders life 2000MR or Big Game - I've never tried CFE223 with my 9.3, but based on my own experience with 308 and @Bob Nelson 35Whelen 's with 35W, I don't see why it wouldn't work well.

CFE223 gives phenomenal velocity. I'm getting a skosh under 2900 fps with 168 gr Gold Dots, no pressure signs.

Yep, I have been wondering about all this...

The A Frame 286 gr is advertised as 1.315" long (interestingly the 300 gr is advertised as shorter at 1.310". In truth 0.005" is not much difference but I would have expected the 300 gr to be longer than the 286 gr) and the TSX is 1.525. This is a meaningful 0.21" difference.

Yet, Barnes advertised their 286 TSX load at 2,355 fps and Swift advertise their 286 gr A Frame load at 2,396 fps. There is only 41 fps difference for a 0.21" bullet length difference. I would have expected a larger speed difference...

Do you reloaders gurus (AZDAVE, sgt_zim, Bob Nelson 35Whelen, etc. --- I do not reload yet, this will be a retirement endeavor) believe that the 286 gr A Frame can be loaded faster? What are you getting?

 

[baxterb]

Yep, I have been wondering about all this...

The A Frame 286 gr is advertised as 1.315" long (interestingly the 300 gr is advertised as shorter at 1.310". In truth 0.005" is not much difference but I would have expected the 300 gr to be longer than the 286 gr) and the TSX is 1.525. This is a meaningful 0.21" difference.

Yet, Barnes advertised their 286 TSX load at 2,355 fps and Swift advertise their 286 gr A Frame load at 2,396 fps. There is only 41 fps difference for a 0.21" bullet length difference. I would have expected a larger speed difference...

Do you reloaders gurus (AZDAVE, sgt_zim, Bob Nelson 35Whelen, etc. --- I do not reload yet, this will be a retirement endeavor) believe that the 286 gr A Frame can be loaded faster? What are you getting?



View attachment 675169
View attachment 675171



View attachment 675170
View attachment 675172

Be careful with the 300 Gr -A-Frame. If i remember right they are swaged 375 300 grs. When I loaded dummies for my 9.3 the 300 gr stuck in the lands when loaded to the same OAL as my other bullets I tried.

the 300 carries its weight forward. teh black lines here are where the bullet (from nose) contacts the lands.

250 TTSX; 300 A-Frame; 286 NorthFork; 286 Woodleigh; 250 Woodleigh; 286 Cup Point, 286 Barnes Solid

 

[sgt_zim]

Yep, I have been wondering about all this...

The A Frame 286 gr is advertised as 1.315" long (interestingly the 300 gr is advertised as shorter at 1.310". In truth 0.005" is not much difference but I would have expected the 300 gr to be longer than the 286 gr) and the TSX is 1.525. This is a meaningful 0.21" difference.

Yet, Barnes advertised their 286 TSX load at 2,355 fps and Swift advertise their 286 gr A Frame load at 2,396 fps. There is only 41 fps difference for a 0.21" bullet length difference. I would have expected a larger speed difference...

Do you reloaders gurus (AZDAVE, sgt_zim, Bob Nelson 35Whelen, etc. --- I do not reload yet, this will be a retirement endeavor) believe that the 286 gr A Frame can be loaded faster? What are you getting?



View attachment 675169
View attachment 675171



View attachment 675170
View attachment 675172

Just a guess, but proprietary powder.

I'd be curious to know the COAL on the factory loads, as their load data is well short of what's possible for tangent ogive bullets.

Hornady's load data is even more ridiculous - 3.125" for their 286 gr Interlock, when SAAMI is 3.291.

 

[jruby]

@sgt_zim
It frustrates the hell out of me that you can hunt DG with the 9.3x62 but not the Whelen. A 310gn Woodleigh at 2,455 fps would do the job on buff just as well as the 9.3 or the 375 under the right situation but because it's 0.008 thou to small it's a big no no. That's life and I ain't upgrading just to hunt buff or other big stuff .
Bob

Not even the 358 norma passes that test. I have both and know that the norma surpasses the 35 whelen easily.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Yep, I have been wondering about all this...

The A Frame 286 gr is advertised as 1.315" long (interestingly the 300 gr is advertised as shorter at 1.310". In truth 0.005" is not much difference but I would have expected the 300 gr to be longer than the 286 gr) and the TSX is 1.525. This is a meaningful 0.21" difference.

Yet, Barnes advertised their 286 TSX load at 2,355 fps and Swift advertise their 286 gr A Frame load at 2,396 fps. There is only 41 fps difference for a 0.21" bullet length difference. I would have expected a larger speed difference...

Do you reloaders gurus (AZDAVE, sgt_zim, Bob Nelson 35Whelen, etc. --- I do not reload yet, this will be a retirement endeavor) believe that the 286 gr A Frame can be loaded faster? What are you getting?



View attachment 675169
View attachment 675171



View attachment 675170
View attachment 675172

@One Day...
The length of the bullet only plays a small part in reloading. Yes it can affect powder volume.
But
Jacket and core hardness.
Bearing surface of projectiles
Also affect the load as each cause pressure variables in their own way. A long bullet ,say a Berger will have a smaller bearing surface than a Hornady interlock and a swift A frame will have a harder jacket and core.
Even they all weigh say 180gns each will need a different powder charge to get the velocity desired. You may even need a different powder.
It ain't rocket surgery or brain science but it is fun learning.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Just a guess, but proprietary powder.

View attachment 675197
I'd be curious to know the COAL on the factory loads, as their load data is well short of what's possible for tangent ogive bullets.

Hornady's load data is even more ridiculous - 3.125" for their 286 gr Interlock, when SAAMI is 3.291.

@sgt_zim
To my feeble brain if'n H380 is win760 under a different name then
2209/H4350 a similar or higher charge rates would do the same or better with similar pressure
I found using 2209/H4350 in the Whelen with 310s I could safely exceed the max load.
This was possible because the max load fills the case 100% and is a compressed load but still way under maximum allowed pressure.

By using a long drop tube I could increase the max book load by 5-6 grains with the same amount of compression by the projectile and still be within allowable pressure.

It's a bit of mucking around but is it worthwhile.
Hell yes if'n I can get another 200fps SAFELY with those big 310s I'll take it. 2,250 fps compared to 2,455fps makes a big difference.
With an SD equivalent to the 350gn 375 and that speed it is going to put big heaps of hurt in a critter and those flat point solids with the lead covered with steel then covered with copper should ream a buff out quite nicely.
Dang if'n push came to shove and I had no option I would shoot an elephant in the side or front of the head with it and I'm sure the result would be a dead elephant and a badly shaken hunter.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Not even the 358 norma passes that test. I have both and know that the norma surpasses the 35 whelen easily.

@jruby
The Whelen passes the 3,900fpe with ease.
It just don't pass the .366 required cal.
Loaded correctly the Whelen gives the
225 gn 4,200fpe
250gn 4,100fpe
275gn ( same sd as the 9.3 286gn) 4,000fpe
And the big 310gn at 2,455 at 4,000fpe.
Yes the big Sweedes will surpass the Whelen but you need a lot more powder and recoil to do it.

I've been loading for the Whelen for around seven years now and know full well what it can do when loaded to its potential as it was meant to be.
Dang even the 400 Whelen easily equals the 400-450 and no one says that is a pipsqueak .
The Whelen was good in its day then Remington strangled it for use in its pump and auto with user powered loads. With the advent of newer powders it is now able to achieve what it was meant to be. A powerhouse in an 06 case.
Bob

 

[jruby]

@jruby
The Whelen passes the 3,900fpe with ease.
It just don't pass the .366 required cal.
Loaded correctly the Whelen gives the
225 gn 4,200fpe
250gn 4,100fpe
275gn ( same sd as the 9.3 286gn) 4,000fpe
And the big 310gn at 2,455 at 4,000fpe.
Yes the big Sweedes will surpass the Whelen but you need a lot more powder and recoil to do it.

I've been loading for the Whelen for around seven years now and know full well what it can do when loaded to its potential as it was meant to be.
Dang even the 400 Whelen easily equals the 400-450 and no one says that is a pipsqueak .
The Whelen was good in its day then Remington strangled it for use in its pump and auto with user powered loads. With the advent of newer powders it is now able to achieve what it was meant to be. A powerhouse in an 06 case.
Bob

I built my first whelen back in 1998 on a mauser. I do not consider the whelen the equivalent to the 9.3s. Most whelens are not shooting 300 plus slugs. Most are shooting 225 or 250 slugs which they stabalize well. I love the whelen but I do not consider it equivalent to a 9.3x62 any more than I do a 9.3x62 the equivalent of the 375h&h.. As far as recoil goes seem kind of funny that it is an issue considering many of cartridges discussed on this board.

 

[spike.t]

I await THE BOBS response....

 

[AZDAVE]

@One Day... When I load for a rifle I use the hornaday case length tool to establish where each bullet touches the lands is my first operation. I have found that the 286 Aframes and Nosler 250 accubonds are the most accurate 20 thousands off the lands in my rifles.

I use the 300's in my 9.3x74 double.

Still haven completed load development with 320gr woodleigh or hawk. Yet (Have a very limited supply.

My x62's are modern rifles and load should NEVER be used in older small ring rifles.

My custom rifle shoots most accurate with 286 aframes (Privi 285gr also use the same load and are cheaper to practice with) at 2505FPS. This is a max load (60 PSI level) in my rifle. My CZ550 shoots most accurate with a load at 2472fps. Not a max load but one the rifle likes.

My northfork CPS solid load that hit the same POI as the aframes are doing 2490ish in the custom. Haven't shot it in the CZ.

 

[Frederik]

Saw a recent video of a lioness hunt you were on in the Kalahari. Holy moly, dude, that was some good shooting.

Thanks years of BASA practise at the shooting ranges paying off.

 

[Frederik]

@Frederik
Yeh Ted is a top bloke that I'm proud to call my mate. Bloody good hunter and great shot.
Funny as a barrel of monkeys to go with it.
He is slowing down a bit now he is over 80 but not much.
Bob

Yes and half blind also
Really enjoyed his company and still sending a message to him now and then on FB.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I built my first whelen back in 1998 on a mauser. I do not consider the whelen the equivalent to the 9.3s. Most whelens are not shooting 300 plus slugs. Most are shooting 225 or 250 slugs which they stabalize well. I love the whelen but I do not consider it equivalent to a 9.3x62 any more than I do a 9.3x62 the equivalent of the 375h&h.. As far as recoil goes seem kind of funny that it is an issue considering many of cartridges discussed on this board.

@jruby
That's why when I had my Whelen built I got a 1:12 twist barrel so it would stabilise any weight I chose to use.
Even the standard 1:14 twist will stabilise the 310s. The 1:16 may be marginal.
Yes the Whelen shines with 225s and 250s but it's nice to know I can go bigger if I need the extra power and penetration.
Recoil tolerance is a real concern to some.
Whilst I find the 425 express and 300-378 comfortable to shoot I have a mate that has been a builder all his life and is rather stocky and the little 223 is his upper limit. My brother is 6'9" and around 350# and he finds the 303 British objectionable whist my 6' bean pole daughter has no problems with full power 250gn loads at 2,700 fps out of my Whelen.
So yes recoil does come into the equation.
I personally think a lot of men wouldn't admit to having a problem with recoil but will shoot far better with say a 30-06 than a 300 ultra mag.
The average person once recoil gets to 20ft pounds and over start to find recoil is getting objectionable.
That's why the military chose calibres that gave less than 20 pounds of recoil so the average soldier coul be taught to shoot well.
No one likes to be beat up by their rifle no matter how tough they think they are, we all have our recoil limits.
My mate Greg had one look at a 300-378 round and immediately said I ain't shootin that because I know it's Gunna hurt.
I rest my case in recoil we are all different.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Yes and half blind also
Really enjoyed his company and still sending a message to him now and then on FB.

@Frederik
He is also an accomplished knife maker now and turns out some beautiful knives with NitroV blades or beautiful Damascus blades as well as other good steels.
Bob

 

[TnKen]

@jruby
That's why when I had my Whelen built I got a 1:12 twist barrel so it would stabilise any weight I chose to use.
Even the standard 1:14 twist will stabilise the 310s. The 1:16 may be marginal.
Yes the Whelen shines with 225s and 250s but it's nice to know I can go bigger if I need the extra power and penetration.
Recoil tolerance is a real concern to some.
Whilst I find the 425 express and 300-378 comfortable to shoot I have a mate that has been a builder all his life and is rather stocky and the little 223 is his upper limit. My brother is 6'9" and around 350# and he finds the 303 British objectionable whist my 6' bean pole daughter has no problems with full power 250gn loads at 2,700 fps out of my Whelen.
So yes recoil does come into the equation.
I personally think a lot of men wouldn't admit to having a problem with recoil but will shoot far better with say a 30-06 than a 300 ultra mag.
The average person once recoil gets to 20ft pounds and over start to find recoil is getting objectionable.
That's why the military chose calibres that gave less than 20 pounds of recoil so the average soldier coul be taught to shoot well.
No one likes to be beat up by their rifle no matter how tough they think they are, we all have our recoil limits.
My mate Greg had one look at a 300-378 round and immediately said I ain't shootin that because I know it's Gunna hurt.
I rest my case in recoil we are all different.
Bob

I know a big guy that wants to shoot big guns and says the recoil doesn’t bother him, but put a dummy round in and it looks trying to bayonet the ground with his flinch. He is also not a very accurate shot because of it.

 

[jruby]

@jruby
That's why when I had my Whelen built I got a 1:12 twist barrel so it would stabilise any weight I chose to use.
Even the standard 1:14 twist will stabilise the 310s. The 1:16 may be marginal.
Yes the Whelen shines with 225s and 250s but it's nice to know I can go bigger if I need the extra power and penetration.
Recoil tolerance is a real concern to some.
Whilst I find the 425 express and 300-378 comfortable to shoot I have a mate that has been a builder all his life and is rather stocky and the little 223 is his upper limit. My brother is 6'9" and around 350# and he finds the 303 British objectionable whist my 6' bean pole daughter has no problems with full power 250gn loads at 2,700 fps out of my Whelen.
So yes recoil does come into the equation.
I personally think a lot of men wouldn't admit to having a problem with recoil but will shoot far better with say a 30-06 than a 300 ultra mag.
The average person once recoil gets to 20ft pounds and over start to find recoil is getting objectionable.
That's why the military chose calibres that gave less than 20 pounds of recoil so the average soldier coul be taught to shoot well.
No one likes to be beat up by their rifle no matter how tough they think they are, we all have our recoil limits.
My mate Greg had one look at a 300-378 round and immediately said I ain't shootin that because I know it's Gunna hurt.
I rest my case in recoil we are all different.
Bob

I would like to know where I can find 310s on the shelf? Never seen them yet.

 

[One Day...]

...
I'd be curious to know the COAL on the factory loads, as their load data is well short of what's possible for tangent ogive bullets.

Hornady's load data is even more ridiculous - 3.125" for their 286 gr Interlock, when SAAMI is 3.291.

Here it is

 

[One Day...]

@One Day... When I load for a rifle I use the hornaday case length tool to establish where each bullet touches the lands is my first operation. I have found that the 286 Aframes and Nosler 250 accubonds are the most accurate 20 thousands off the lands in my rifles.

I use the 300's in my 9.3x74 double.

Still haven completed load development with 320gr woodleigh or hawk. Yet (Have a very limited supply.

My x62's are modern rifles and load should NEVER be used in older small ring rifles.

My custom rifle shoots most accurate with 286 aframes (Privi 285gr also use the same load and are cheaper to practice with) at 2505FPS. This is a max load (60 PSI level) in my rifle. My CZ550 shoots most accurate with a load at 2472fps. Not a max load but one the rifle likes.

My northfork CPS solid load that hit the same POI as the aframes are doing 2490ish in the custom. Haven't shot it in the CZ.

If AZ means Arizona in AZDAVE, we should connect and you can teach me
I am in Snowflake. Where are you?
My 9.3x62 is a Blaser R8.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I would like to know where I can find 310s on the shelf? Never seen them yet.

@jruby
Fortunately I live in Australia and have access to the Woodleighs 310 RNSP and solid just a phone call away.
Bob

 

[sgt_zim]

Here it is

View attachment 675387

Can't imagine why any of the mfgs would go so short. 3.291 and tangent or secant ogive (and RN as well) would fit every 9.3x62 made.

9 hundredths short of SAAMI just seems stupid. That'll be a jump of over 1/10"