Longer shots 9.3x62

[Fastrig]

What 9,3x64 can do is irrelevant though. The question is how far 9,3x62 can be stretched if need be. If one has an option to buy another rifle, 300WM will beat 9,3x62 past 300m on any game. At 500m it will already have 1000J more kinetic energy and margin of error for distance and wind estimation is double of 9,3x62.

All true, however this whole topic is kind of like a discussion about buying a Tesla to make a long distance drive, i.e. wrong tool for the job. The 9.3x62 wasn’t designed to make long distance shots, it’s a short distance round (i.e. inside 200-250 yards). If you want to make long distance shots or make a long distance road trip then buy a 300 win mag or a gas/diesel vehicle with a large fuel tank. Use the correct tool for the job.

 

[bruce moulds]

the russians use the 9.3x64 for the same job as usa etc uses the 338 lapua.
that is as a longer range sniping rifle.
i believe they use a 250 ish gn bullet.
bruce.

 

[Clodo Ferreira]

Hi,

Just for the records: don't forget that there are no more than 100 f/s of difference with all bullet weights between the 9,3x62 and 9,3x64 loaded at similar pressures and same barrel lengths.

 

[samu]

All true, however this whole topic is kind of like a discussion about buying a Tesla to make a long distance drive, i.e. wrong tool for the job. The 9.3x62 wasn’t designed to make long distance shots, it’s a short distance round (i.e. inside 200-250 yards). If you want to make long distance shots or make a long distance road trip then buy a 300 win mag or a gas/diesel vehicle with a large fuel tank. Use the correct tool for the job.

Well in the case of starter of this thread, they already had bought the Tesla and came asking advice after first unsuccessfull road trip. The topic started drifting somewhat but suggesting x64 to fix the distance capability of the x62 is like suggesting to replace passangers and luggage with extra batteries on the Model S. Sure it will go just a bit further but if you bought it for comfort and convinience to begin with, there's now none left.

 

[Fastrig]

Well in the case of starter of this thread, they already had bought the Tesla and came asking advice after first unsuccessfull road trip. The topic started drifting somewhat but suggesting x64 to fix the distance capability of the x62 is like suggesting to replace passangers and luggage with extra batteries on the Model S. Sure it will go just a bit further but if you bought it for comfort and convinience to begin with, there's now none left.

Agree....if I know shots are going to be over 250-300 yards, I'm bringing a magnum of one flavor or another.

 

[dchamp]

What 9,3x64 can do is irrelevant though. The question is how far 9,3x62 can be stretched if need be. If one has an option to buy another rifle, 300WM will beat 9,3x62 past 300m on any game. At 500m it will already have 1000J more kinetic energy and margin of error for distance and wind estimation is double of 9,3x62.

Yes you are correct, the 300WM reaches further than the 9.3x62. But hey the 300Wby reaches further than the 300WM and the 338 Lapua reaches further than any 300, so on and so on.

The 300WM is not as pretty as the 9.3x62 to some and we men are visual creatures. We look at cartridges, handguns, cars and women and drool over their proportions and visual attractiveness. Fortunately we all have different taste.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Agree....if I know shots are going to be over 250-300 yards, I'm bringing a magnum of one flavor or another.

@Fastrig
If shots are at 250 to 300 yards even 400 yards just get to know your rifle and cartridge capabilities and trajectories and you will have no problems. I'm comfortable using my Whelen loads with the 250 grainers out to 400 yards as the drop is only 28 inches from a 3 inch sight in at 100 yards. Very doable with practice. It's about the same as the ought 6 with 180grains.
The buffalo hunters of yore shot them at amazing ranges with old black powder cartridges so with practice I would say yes doable but prefer closer distances.
Bob

 

[Fastrig]

@Fastrig
If shots are at 250 to 300 yards even 400 yards just get to know your rifle and cartridge capabilities and trajectories and you will have no problems. I'm comfortable using my Whelen loads with the 250 grainers out to 400 yards as the drop is only 28 inches from a 3 inch sight in at 100 yards. Very doable with practice. It's about the same as the ought 6 with 180grains.
The buffalo hunters of yore shot them at amazing ranges with old black powder cartridges so with practice I would say yes doable but prefer closer distances.
Bob

Not disagreeing with you on knowing your rifle, I’ve rung steel at 800 plus yards on any number of occasions with some of mine. However, those shots are quite a bit different than a hunting shot I’m willing to take. I’m still of the belief that if I have to hold over air I’ve got the wrong rifle and round in my hands, to insure an ethical kill at least. Can I do it over air? Yes. Can I do it every time and know I’m going to drop the animal with a well placed first shot? Nope, and that’s the point where I won’t pull the trigger. A 9.3x62 with the standard 286 grain round is seriously bleeding velocity and energy after 300 yards, your Whelen not so much....for 400 yard shots I have the wrong rifle in my hands, you have the right one....trade you

 

[shootist~]

The discussion is for a 9.3x62 with normal velocities for a 9.3x62. If I wanted more V, (and more recoil), I would also go with a magnum. In my case it would be a Sako 338 WM that has been quite lonely in my gun safe since the 9.3 arrived.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Not disagreeing with you on knowing your rifle, I’ve rung steel at 800 plus yards on any number of occasions with some of mine. However, those shots are quite a bit different than a hunting shot I’m willing to take. I’m still of the belief that if I have to hold over air I’ve got the wrong rifle and round in my hands, to insure an ethical kill at least. Can I do it over air? Yes. Can I do it every time and know I’m going to drop the animal with a well placed first shot? Nope, and that’s the point where I won’t pull the trigger. A 9.3x62 with the standard 286 grain round is seriously bleeding velocity and energy after 300 yards, your Whelen not so much....for 400 yard shots I have the wrong rifle in my hands, you have the right one....trade you

@Fastrig
That is my belief also If'n I have to hold on air stalk closer or forget the shot. 400 yards is a fair haul in the bush. I've used my Whelen on 300 yard pigs but I had no option and I was still holding on hair.
Rabbits and foxes as well as feral cats are a different story I will shoot them even if I have to hold a foot over them.
For game hunting hair is fair.
Bob

 

[Fastrig]

The discussion is for a 9.3x62 with normal velocities for a 9.3x62. If I wanted more V, (and more recoil), I would also go with a magnum. In my case it would be a Sako 338 WM that has been quite lonely in my gun safe since the 9.3 arrived.

Have another 9.3 on the way...love this caliber. 338 WM, that’s a shoulder mule-kicker for sure. Got rid of mine for that very reason.

 

[bruce moulds]

actually if you are interested in delivering power at 300 to 400 without having to aim too high, the 340 wby is probably a better choice than the 9.3x62 and the x64, in a gun that can be carried and shot offhand.
the cartridge offers a point blank +/- 3"probably past 300, and could aim on fur to nearly 400 at a pinch with 225 and 250 gn bullets of good b.c.
bruce.

 

[Rell]

I’ve used mine out to 550m with 250gr TTSX.

At real long range drop is much less important then you think. It’s a math problem.

You need to accurately establish distance, ballistic distance, and have a method of changing impact point on your aiming device.

Answer is range finder binos and maybe a 1.7-13.4x 42 Swarovski 8Xi with ballistic turrets.

 

[Scrumbag]

I’ve used mine out to 550m with 250gr TTSX.

At real long range drop is much less important then you think. It’s a math problem.

You need to accurately establish distance, ballistic distance, and have a method of changing impact point on your aiming device.

Answer is range finder binos and maybe a 1.7-13.4x 42 Swarovski 8Xi with ballistic turrets.

I've often thought the optimum set up for 9.3x62 at longer ranges would be 250gr Accubond with a good dialable turret such as that 1.7-13 you mention, the 1.7-10 meopta or the 1.5-10 Leica.

A good mate of mine uses the 1.7-13x42 Swaro on his 375 H&H and has used it on driven boar and deer at decent ranges (maybe 250m) so the scope seems a good choice for that.

 

[Safari Tom]

I don’t get it
i have a 9.3 I load with 250ab’s at 2700fps, a BC of almost 0.5, 3/4” groups easy from a CZ550
about the same as my 6.5creedmoor with 143g


why is one long range and the other not
or are they both long range
or are they both 200y guns
seems the 9.3 design is fine w modern pressures, powder & bullets

 

[Bonk]

Disclaimer: I'm a huge 9.3x62 fan.

I've never understood the fascination with 'flat shooting' rifles. I don't care what the trajectory looks like as long as I can put rounds on target. Does it matter whether the bullet rises 2" or 10" on it's way to the target? Trajectory has absolutely zero effect on terminal ballistics. Caliber, SD, impact velocity and bullet design are what kills. The trajectory the bullet takes to get there is completely irrelevant.

Throw enough powder at something and you can make any caliber 'flat shooting'. You'll pay for it with recoil and barrel wear but it won't kill any better than a slower moving bullet delivering the same terminal ballistics. In fact the flat shooting aspect of some calibers is just a byproduct of trying to generate energy via velocity. Velocity which is necessary to overcome poor SD.

 

[IvW]

I don’t get it
i have a 9.3 I load with 250ab’s at 2700fps, a BC of almost 0.5, 3/4” groups easy from a CZ550
about the same as my 6.5creedmoor with 143g


why is one long range and the other not
or are they both long range
or are they both 200y guns
seems the 9.3 design is fine w modern pressures, powder & bullets

Never understand the need for speed long range or light for caliber bullets. Use it for what it was designed with the appropriate bullet and weight which is 286gr for the good old 9 3 x 62 and that with the right bullet is good for anything up to and including elephant.

You wanna go longer range in that caliber range buy a 338WM use the 9.3 as a allround bush caliber thats what it does best

 

[Puddle]

A tad late to this discussion, but scrolling thru the pages I saw Cutting Edge bullets mentioned. That jogged my brain cells a bit and I recalled the Lapua Naturalis 185 gr. mono bullet @ ~2700 fps. Its G1 BC is kinda sad, but if it's anything like my .30-06 180 gr. load @ ~2700 fps and a 200 yard zero, then the drop is likely 8" - 9" @ 300 yards. Dunno, never got my hands on that ammo, but I hope to try it out one of these days.

Lapua 9.3x62mm 185 gr. Naturalis

 

[shootist~]

A tad late to this discussion, but scrolling thru the pages I saw Cutting Edge bullets mentioned. That jogged my brain cells a bit and I recalled the Lapua Naturalis 185 gr. mono bullet @ ~2700 fps. Its GI BC is kinda sad, but if it's anything like my .30-06 180 gr. load @ ~2700 fps, then the drop is likely 8" - 9" @ 300 yards. Dunno, never got my hands on that ammo, but I hope to try it out one of these days.

Lapua 9.3x62mm 185 gr. Naturalis

I tried a box. My CZ550 groups opened up considerably - plus they printed 6" or more high at 225 Yds Vs my 250 AB reloads.

 

[MS 9x56]

I really like the 250 accubonds. They shoot MOA in my 550 FS.