Becoming a 9.3x62 fanboy

[ligonierbill]

First, I like "classic" cartridges, and I'm fascinated by medium bores. I have been shooting a Savage 116 .338 Win Mag for a few years, like it, but I had to try this old German round. I bought one of the new cheap Sauer 100s last year and have been working loads. Now, the Savage weighs 8 lb empty with a scope; the Sauer is just a few ounces lighter. You would think they'd kick the whey out of you. Of course, that's a matter of perception, but I will say the .338 can wear me out. I had the 9.3 out this afternoon, and despite my previous assessment that it pretty much matches the .338 "thump", I would now say it's a pleasure to shoot. Not quite as sharp as the .338, although the 286 Partitions I was shooting today do push.

It does not have the range of the magnum, but a hell of a punch out to 300 yards. Maybe I'm just getting old, but that is starting to seem far enough to shoot. I should note that nothing from either rifle exceeds 1 1/2" at 100. For anyone asking about a big critter killer, I'm going to be a PITA touting the 9.3.

 

[tahoe2]

I've yet to get the opportunity to even handle one (9.3×62) let alone shoot one, but it is something I am determined to build/own, and this could be the year.
The 9.3 has always been known to punch well above it's weight class without punishing the shooter.
Africa is on my bucket list and the 9.3 is the quintessential plains game rifle (IMO) add a 404 Jeffery or 425 Westley Richards and life is complete.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk

 

[taylorce1]

I always leaned toward the Whelen over the 9.3. They're pretty much the same as far as hunting the States. I've shot the 9.3 a few times and it does have a lot to offer a guy wanting to hunt with a larger bore.

 

[tahoe2]

I think the Whelen (358 = 9.1) could be classified as the American 9.3, but there is a special allure for Otto Bock's 1905 creation, with the mystique of the Dark Continent implications. There really seems to be no difference with bullets available up to 310 grns(Whelen) & 320 grns (Mauser)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk

 

[mete]

For hunting here I'd suggest the 35 Whelan but for Europe or Africa the 9.3x62 There is a rimmed version for 9.3 double rifles .Heavy bullets are the preference for the 9.3. Recoil is not so bad But it will get the attention of the animals !!

 

[ligonierbill]

This fanboy has to point out that the 9.3x62 has about 10% more powder capacity than the .35 Whelen, 5.064 cc vs. 4.558. The critters can't tell the difference, though. I'm not sure why one would choose the Whelen for the US and the 9.3 for Europe and Africa. They work the same wherever you are!

 

[Wyosmith]

I am on my 2nd barrel in my 375H&H. I have used it a LOT in the last 40 years.

However I am looking at the 9.3X62 very closely. I have now made 6 of them for customers. Using the 286 grain bullets I see that the ballistics of the 375 with my 270 grain bullets and the 9.3 with it's 286 grain bullets are very close to the same at 200 yards. The 9.3 is slimmer and has a better BC. For all practical purposes I would use the 9.3 against any game I would use my 375 against at least in North America, and to be honest, I would not back away from hunting elephant with it either. I would use my 404 or 375 first, but just because I have them, but that is not to say the 9.3 would not do the job.

The real advantage of the 9.3X62 is the fact that about any 30-06 length action can be converted to a 9.3X62 with little or no modification to the action. The 375 needs to have a GEW length Mauser opened up, or needs a full length magnum action. This is a far costlier build.

I absolutely love my 375H&H and I have absolute confidence in it as 40 years of use have proven to me, but to be very honest, if I had been introduced to the 9.3X62 40 years ago, I think there is a very good chance I would share the same opinion of it that I do my 375, and it holds 2 more rounds to boot, and kicks less.

I have been trying to talk Green mountain into making 9.3 barrels. They are listening, but are unsure if the sales will justify the tooling. If you want very good and inexpensive 9.3 barrels, call them and tell them you'd want one.

If enough people tell them, they will make them.

I have about 45 people telling me now that they would buy one (some other smiths like myself are saying they'll take 5 right off the bat) If you like the 9.3s call them and tell them.

I also have become fond of the 9.3X57 for conversions on KAR Mausers. It's so easy and the rifles are real gems when done. The 9.3X57 does everything the 358 Winchester does and more, with less work on the actions.

I think the .366 bore deserves to be a lot more popular and I must not be alone. I see in the load manuals that .366 bullets are as numerous as .358 bullets and as a rule are jacketed heavier so they work better on large game.

 

[Blindstitch]

Never knew what 9.3 was till a local store was running a liquidation sale on boxes of Hornady bullets. $1 per box of 50 I think. They were long gone before I got to the store.

 

[eastbank]

i,ll take the 35 whelen, a lot cheaper to feed(reload) and to buy factory ammo for. in a good bolt-single shot rifle they both will kill any thing that walks on this earth. i shot a cape buffalo in africa with a 9.3x62 in a older MS rifle and it did the job,however i think the whelen with the same weight solid bullet at the same speed the results would have been the same. eastbank.

 

[GeauxTide]

I just got stuck on the .338-06 in the 80s. I chose it over the Whelen because of the larger selection of bullets, particularly the 200 Hornady and 210 Nosler. I couldn't tell the difference in recoil from the '06 180s. 2810 from 22" is stout and there are no bullet blow ups. I will say that I bought some Whelen brass because sizing is easier than expanding '06. I would have probably given the 9.3 a hard look if it had been available back then.

 

[Husqvarna]

I am on my third 9,3 rifle now, and this one is a keeper

There is a saying about 9,3x62
Too big for daisies and too small for t-rex but just right for everything inbetween

it is a switchbarrel and I also got a 6,5x55 barrel but found the 9,3 so soft shooting and accurate that I haven't felt the need to switch

had a benelli argo first, then a tikka t3,

this one shoots better than the tikka but it is a slightly heavier rifle so it is probably not more accurate jsut easier to shoot well with

I feed it norma oryx
3 pigs over the feeder, DRT
2 moose running, under 30 meters before the toppled

 

[eastbank]

i just started working with a ruger # 1A in 35 whelen after tuneing it and with the right loads its a true moa or better rifle at 100 yards, i,ll use it this year on deer. eastbank.

 

[edward hogan]

Lots of nostalgia for the 9.3x62 and even moreso for the .375 H&H.

I had a .375HandH and was not terribly impressed. Did both the AI'd version and standard Whelen, but sold them and settled on the .338-06. I live in rural Alaska. Did give the .450marlin a try about 10yrs back. Did not take to the lever action or the Scout Scope setup either.

I did recently buy a .375 ruger mag Guide Gun. More of everything with that one, including no belt, or brake. Plenty of wallop with factory hornady ammo. Of course, I handload everything I shoot though.

Have gone the AI route for one of my .30-06's and the .338-06. The gain is where I need it with both of these; more velocity with Heavy Bullets. I do cast for some applications. Hardcast bullets are tough. If was going to carry a .357 handgun in our woods, would have stayed with the .35 Whelen AI. I always like the versatility of using handgun bullets for light loads in a rifle. I do have that 200gr RCBS .358 mold, that is a great bullet for the Whelen or heavy .357...

But, can't see the sense in the 9.3x62 or any other 9.3... Just doesn't have the bullet variety or weight range of the .375 bore. Yet, there is some romantic aspect, some exotic allure that my pragmatism won't indulge, so my loss; at least in the realm of desire and fascination...

I do load my .30-06s with 200 or 220gr bullets only, and the .338-06 was standardized with the 330gr Nosler Fail Safe now can even more capably digest 250gr loads. The .30-06 is close enough to .300win performance levels that I no longer need a .30mag.

The guide gun though is real pleasant to carry. It really gives thought toward considering a one woods walking rifle situation. Bullets from 225gr up to 350gr, with a cast rn that goes 335gr or down towards 250gr. Lots of versatility! Lots of boatload designs, plus that 350gr Sierra Matchking! Shorter case allows more seating flexibility... More velocity from shorter barrel... Load it down to 9.3x62 levels and might have a real puppy dog of a shooter... Oh well, it's all about fun, ain't it? Hope you are having your fair share!

 

[disseminator]

Mark me down for the fan club.

I have a nice vz24 action I will be building into a 9.3 in the near future. As for bullet weights vs the 375 H&H, (which I also have) the available bullet weight are pretty comparable between the two. Take the Norma ORYX: 232, 285, 325 grains.

Pretty sweet.

 

[PlatinumCore16]

Husq, what make is that box feed wood stock 9.3?

It's beautiful.

 

[black mamba]

In the late '80s I had a hankerin' for a medium bore, and saw no need for moving up to the 338 Win Mag. The 9.3x62 was known then, of course, but there just weren't many rifles to choose from, and ammo was scarce and expensive too. I went with the 35 Whelen AI in a custom, from David Gentry out in Montana.

The AI version is just about as close to a 9.3x62 as you can possibly get, but has the advantage of bullet weights from 110 to 300 grains. I get 2625 out of a 250 grain bullet, and terrific accuracy as well. I'm still not sure though, if I had to do it over again right now, I'd probably go with the 9.3 Mauser in a CZ control round feed.