9.3x62mm vs. .375 H&H Mag

[Challer]

Then the 9.3X62 is equal to the .416 Rigby and .450 Nitro....it is also equal to the .338 WM and the .30/06... they all kill Buffalo equally dead... your argument is illogical and flawed with flowery sentimentality.

I feel you’ve taken that out of context. Let’s remember a century ago we bumbled around with the 9.3 using century old guns, bullets and powder. And it worked well. Then the Brits decided to ban “military” rifles and cartridges.

Now move today with modern guns and powder and bullets and both the 9.3 and 375 far outperform their kin. If both were adequate 100 years go, they are superb now.

Of course they are not ballistically equal. The real question was would you use the 9.3 if you could. Personally I don’t feel undergunned with it in the BBF. But my main cartridge is the 375 as I feel it’s just the best all around cartridge and available just about everywhere.

Just saying the 375>9.3 does not add any insight. We can just add the 416, 458, 470, howitzer. Turtles all the way down. With modern loading I don’t seen any difference in the dead animal index or how long I had to track etc. The chrono points out the obvious difference but doesn’t address so what. On a guided hunt with at least one backup gun, the real world difference is near zero. Neither are stopping cartridges.

 

[hoytcanon]

I enjoy both of these cartridges. I happen to own a lightweight 375 H&H that I like to hunt. I find it very easy to load my 375 to modern 9.3x62 ballistics with low pressure and long brass life. These loads work great on game (no surprise).
On the other hand, reaching some of the claimed velocities in modern 9.3x62 loads is tricky and generally requires a switch to less heat stable ball powders.

For dangerous game I would choose the 375 H&H. For everything else I would probably choose the rifle I wanted to use and be happy with either cartridge.

A reasonable and rational perspective.

 

[hoytcanon]

I feel you’ve taken that out of context. Let’s remember a century ago we bumbled around with the 9.3 using century old guns, bullets and powder. And it worked well. Then the Brits decided to ban “military” rifles and cartridges.

Now move today with modern guns and powder and bullets and both the 9.3 and 375 far outperform their kin. If both were adequate 100 years go, they are superb now.

Of course they are not ballistically equal. The real question was would you use the 9.3 if you could. Personally I don’t feel undergunned with it in the BBF. But my main cartridge is the 375 as I feel it’s just the best all around cartridge and available just about everywhere.

Just saying the 375>9.3 does not add any insight. We can just add the 416, 458, 470, howitzer. Turtles all the way down. With modern loading I don’t seen any difference in the dead animal index or how long I had to track etc. The chrono points out the obvious difference but doesn’t address so what. On a guided hunt with at least one backup gun, the real world difference is near zero. Neither are stopping cartridges.

Nothing taken out of context... I agree with you. However when starting a thread on one cartridge "Versus" another cartridge, there will be discussion on the nuances of each as they relate to the other. I 100% agree that in the field most of the time any given shot will likely end with similar results regardless of which cartridge propelled the projectile, assuming the projectile is of equal construction. But that aside, I can't understand how their can be an argument for the 9.3 to be greater (more powerful) than the .375... it just cannot be... unless you are cherry-picking numbers, by maxing out the 9.3 and dumbing down the .375. And with that, I am out... I promise... LOL. Good luck to all folks in the coming year, I hope your hunting dreams come true... hunt hard, hunt safe.

 

[WAB]

Nothing taken out of context... I agree with you. However when starting a thread on one cartridge "Versus" another cartridge, there will be discussion on the nuances of each as they relate to the other. I 100% agree that in the field most of the time any given shot will likely end with similar results regardless of which cartridge propelled the projectile, assuming the projectile is of equal construction. But that aside, I can't understand how their can be an argument for the 9.3 to be greater (more powerful) than the .375... it just cannot be... unless you are cherry-picking numbers, by maxing out the 9.3 and dumbing down the .375. And with that, I am out... I promise... LOL. Good luck to all folks in the coming year, I hope your hunting dreams come true... hunt hard, hunt safe.

We may have hit on the miscommunication. I doubt anyone would argue that the 9.3x62 is as powerful as the .375 H&H. It just isn’t. However, more powerful does not equal greater for most of us. Look at the number of PH’s and experienced hunters recommending the .375 H&H over more powerful rifles for their clients. Clearly they don’t think that the 375 H&H is more powerful than say a .458 Lott, however, they do feel that the less powerful cartridge is the greater solution in many cases.

 

[hoytcanon]

We may have hit on the miscommunication. I doubt anyone would argue that the 9.3x62 is as powerful as the .375 H&H. It just isn’t. However, more powerful does not equal greater for most of us. Look at the number of PH’s and experienced hunters recommending the .375 H&H over more powerful rifles for their clients. Clearly they don’t think that the 375 H&H is more powerful than say a .458 Lott, however, they do feel that the less powerful cartridge is the greater solution in many cases.

If the conversation isn't about power then we should probably just say "they both work," and leave it at that. Having guided hunters in Canada for more than four decades I can tell you why PH's make that recommendation and it has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the cartridge for the quarry at hand... it is because you would not believe the number of clients we see who over gun themselves and are afraid of squeezing the trigger... any guide would vastly prefer a lesser cartridge and have the bullet placed where it needs to go than a heavy cartridge where the client flinches badly and puts the bullet through the paunch or shoots off the jaw. I have literally seen a client squeeze the trigger and almost throw the gun away mid firing.

 

[RayAtkinson]

The 375 is the fastest MV and can have a heavier bullet and Ive shot a number of buffalo, several Hippo, and PG including big Eland etc..That said Im sure nobody can tell the difference in kill effect between the 9,3x62 and the 375 and most that have used both agree. the 375 shoots flatter but I cant name a time when that occured with me or folks I was with, Both excellent calibers.

 

[hawkeyesatx]

I have to admit that when I started this thread, I should have thought more on what the title should’ve been. It should have been something like 9.3x62, a great cartridge made better, or Old Cartridge 9.3x62 New ballistics, something to that effect.
With upped velocities, I have seen what hydrostatic shock can do on smaller game animals like elk, and mule dear, and black bear. It ripples through them just like a pebble in water puddle, or a larger rock in a pond. It drops the animal immediately, and usually doesn’t get up.
I’m pretty sure that with the bigger fauna in Africa, hydrostatic shock doesn’t apply, but shot placement and penetration are king. In that we can agree, as a medium bore, the 9.3x62 and the Sectional Density of its bullets work extremely well.


Hawk

 

[Tam Dl]

I can't imagine reloading for the 9.3 would be much cheaper than the 375 H&H.

Relative to Canada, there was a lot of cheap brass and bullets for a while, which might help if a lot of practice was in the offing. Also, you can reload 30/06 cases. Considered unsafe due to head diameter differences. Haven't tried it myself, but I did measure the two cases, and those in my possession are identical in head diameter. Another oddity is that one can find the occasional barrel in 9.3. Otherwise, pretty much nothing is out there, other than very expensive target barrels, but under 700 dollars, less. And lots of surplus rifles. I don't know how I was unaware of all this bounty for so long. 9.3 was not on my radar until about 10 years ago.

 

[Aaron N]

Here are the side by side Vortex ballistics for both. Number don’t lie, slight ballistics edge to the H&H, but are the other tradeoffs worth it?

 

[RayAtkinson]

I've shot a lot of buffalo with a 375 and a 9,3x62 and nobody could tell the difference in buffalo reaction between the two, both will break both shoulder's on a cape bull. and the 9,3x62 is a tad milder on the recoil end, and at my age that counts.

 

[hoytcanon]

Here are the side by side Vortex ballistics for both. Number don’t lie, slight ballistics edge to the H&H, but are the other tradeoffs worth it?

What other trade-offs???

 

[Aaron N]

What other trade-offs???

Generally a lighter rifle, and lower recoil (by most accounts)

 

[Flewis]

Loaded to the same pressure and there is even less difference.

 

[WAB]

Generally a lighter rifle, and lower recoil (by most accounts)

In my case my 9.3 is lighter, handier, and has less recoil. However, my .375 is a thing of beauty. Both are fantastically accurate.

 

[1dirthawker]

Clearly they don’t think that the 375 H&H is more powerful than say a .458 Lott, however, they do feel that the less powerful cartridge is the greater solution in many cases.

well said. pretty much encapsulates the whole conversation.

 

[Rule 303]

Generally a lighter rifle, and lower recoil (by most accounts)

Not by me, my 375H&H is lighter than most 9.3's and has less or same amount of felt recoil. It is a Rem700 SPS, Light and the plastic stock absorbs a fair bit of recoil.

It does not matter how you slice the pie the 375 is traveling faster with a heavier weight projectile that punches a bigger hole in the animal. Like I keep saying the diff between a 9.3X62 and 375H&H is the exact difference between a 35 Whelen (at book velocity's) and a 9.3X62. So using the same logic that say there is no difference between a 9.3 and 375 means there is no difference between a 35Whelen and a 375H&H.

Do animals notice the difference, according to some, no and others yes, up to and including scrub bulls, anything bigger, I don't know. Would I hunt Buff and El with a 9.3X62, Yes. Though I would prefer a 375H&H and would prefer a 416, 458. Anything above the 458's is hitting or passing my recoil tolerance.

 

[WAB]

Once again you are arguing that the .375 is more powerful. I don’t think anyone disagrees with you.

 

[hoytcanon]

Generally a lighter rifle, and lower recoil (by most accounts)

So you are saying that the trade-off is greater performance. So performance itself is the enemy. Anyone can chose a lesser rifle... lesser in weight, lesser in recoil, lesser in trajectory, lesser in energy etc... etc... but performance happens to be what drives the market, it is what we discuss ad-nauseum, and spend hours arguing the tiniest of details. Performance is what drove all of the wildcatters and cartridge designers of old... and new... it is what pushes the market and industry forward... Performance is its own benefit. As an individual everyone has a cut-off point where they are no longer comfortable with a platform or cartridge choice, that may be because of weight or ergonomics or recoil, but at some point, enough is enough... then we discuss if it is indeed enough for the job at hand.

So, as has been suggested, I am not simply discussing "power." The fact is, that performance is it's own benefit. It is why we have multitudes of cartridges, it is why we have discussions about what is sufficient for dangerous game, or when discussing plains game or big bears, what is considered a realistic minimum and what is over-kill, if there is such a thing.

However, performance itself cannot be viewed as an impediment by and large... that is for an individual to decide for themselves given the circumstances they are confronted by.

It is for every individual to decide if they believe their choice is sufficient to do the job effectively and then stay within the parameters that will allow success. When you walk back down the performance scale, you also limit those parameters that will allow success. There are things you can get away with when shooting a 500 grain from a Lott, that you can't with a 150 grain from a .308... it is all on a sliding scale from "X" to "Y"... and every individual jumps off at some point... the fact is, the .375 H&H is closer to "Y" than the 9.3X62 is.

 

[mauserhunter]

Some guys really get butt hurt on here.

 

[Aaron N]

So you are saying that the trade-off is greater performance. So performance itself is the enemy. Anyone can chose a lesser rifle... lesser in weight, lesser in recoil, lesser in trajectory, lesser in energy etc... etc... but performance happens to be what drives the market, it is what we discuss ad-nauseum, and spend hours arguing the tiniest of details. Performance is what drove all of the wildcatters and cartridge designers of old... and new... it is what pushes the market and industry forward... Performance is its own benefit. As an individual everyone has a cut-off point where they are no longer comfortable with a platform or cartridge choice, that may be because of weight or ergonomics or recoil, but at some point, enough is enough... then we discuss if it is indeed enough for the job at hand.

So, as has been suggested, I am not simply discussing "power." The fact is, that performance is it's own benefit. It is why we have multitudes of cartridges, it is why we have discussions about what is sufficient for dangerous game, or when discussing plains game or big bears, what is considered a realistic minimum and what is over-kill, if there is such a thing.

However, performance itself cannot be viewed as an impediment by and large... that is for an individual to decide for themselves given the circumstances they are confronted by.

It is for every individual to decide if they believe their choice is sufficient to do the job effectively and then stay within the parameters that will allow success. When you walk back down the performance scale, you also limit those parameters that will allow success. There are things you can get away with when shooting a 500 grain from a Lott, that you can't with a 150 grain from a .308... it is all on a sliding scale from "X" to "Y"... and every individual jumps off at some point... the fact is, the .375 H&H is closer to "Y" than the 9.3X62 is.

You’ve lost me. All I did was provide data that the 375 has a small edge ballistically on the 9.3. And then I pointed out that the 9.3 seems to have a fit and functional edge. So there’s probably a trade off to be made one way or the other. There’s no right or wrong answer