Zastava M98 Accuracy 9.3x62

dgradinaru

dgradinaru

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 99.8%
413   1   1
Location
British Columbia
Well I sold off my Zastava Fullstock with the 20inch barrel a couple of weeks and ago, then sold all of my reloading equipment for it, because my results was not what i was expecting. A couple weeks passed by and so I thought why not give the 9.3x62 another try, so I bought a Zastava M98 with the 22inch barrel from Tradex, with a dieset and bullets+ brass. I mounted a Nikon Prostaff on it, and finally got out to the range. I loaded a 285 Grain privi partisan SP bullet, with PPU brass, put 57Gr of H4895 for a charge( Ted Wagner recommended the load. My Results were excellent. My final 100yard grouping turned out to be .65 inch 3 shot group. I measured the Muzzle velocity on 4 Shots, first was 2436, second was 2443, third was 2450, and forth was 2442fts. With my old gun, the same load got me .09inch groups and a average 2300fts. Im really surprised how much more you can get out of a 22inch barrel. Recoil today was really heavy, more than my 325wsm. After shooting the 9.3, I went on shooting my other zastava in 7x57, man was there a huge difference- first shot on the 7mm felt like a 7.62x39. The Good old 9.3x62 by now on will be getting more attention from me. So now Im on the Look out for a CZ 550 in the same CAL.Im really happy with the accuracy out of these Zastava's.

Range 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Velocity - fps 2440 2312 2189 2069 1954 1842 1735 1631 1535
Energy - ft.-lbs. 3767 3383 3031 2709 2415 2147 1904 1684 1490
Momentum - lbs-sec 3.08 2.92 2.76 2.61 2.46 2.32 2.19 2.06 1.94
Path - in. -1.5 1.5 2.9 2.5 -0.0 -4.7 -12.1 -22.2 -35.7
Drift - in. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Time of flight - sec. 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6









 
Last edited:
Picked up one myself a short while ago,;) in .366 Wagner.



And for an 'inexpensive' rifle, :eek:I was amazed at some of my initial accuracy results.



I've since acquired an additiona; a small variety of bullets but I'd be hard pressed to surpass my initial results.
 
Im hating your first post OP. It is making me wish I had bought a Zastava in 30-06. I went with a browning A-bolt instead but those are some mighty fine groups out of harshly recoiling firearm.
 
.366 Wagner accuracy = MOA with selected loads.

Translations used in the above text, for the uninitiated...

.366 Wagner = 9.3x62 (that's a gimme)
MOA = Minute Of Awesomeness
Selected loads = Ted's select loads

It's like Lookinese but not all at the same time.
 
Johnn Peterson said:
Picked up one myself a short while ago,;) in .366 Wagner.



And for an 'inexpensive' rifle, :eek:I was amazed at some of my initial accuracy results.



I've since acquired an additiona; a small variety of bullets but I'd be hard pressed to surpass my initial results.
Click to expand...
I have the same gun. This evening I shot a black bear,ass in and neck out. No apology for that as I had waited long and the bear did not give me any other angle. It is 270 grain matrix bullet and of course in .366 Ted.
Just got home from port alberni.will gut it to see the damage.
 
dgradinaru said:
With my old gun, the same load got me .09inch groups and a average 2300fts. Im really surprised how much more you can get out of a 22inch barrel.
Click to expand...


Be careful about drawing that conclusion... it is not an apples to apples comparison of velocity at two barrel lengths (20" @ 2300 vs 22" @ 2450)... there are too many other contributing factors; ie. Different guns, chambers and bores. Different lots (and maybe manufacturers) of bullets, brass and powders... the span of time over which you are making the comparison would introduce environmental factors also (temperature, wind)... in my experience with barrel bobbing there is no way in an apples to apples comparison that you will loose 150 fps for a 2" barrel length change with the 9.3X62.

Good shooting.
 
elker said:
I have the same gun. This evening I shot a black bear,ass in and neck out. No apology for that as I had waited long and the bear did not give me any other angle. It is 270 grain matrix bullet and of course in .366 Ted.
Just got home from port alberni.will gut it to see the damage.
Click to expand...

Post pics in the Hunting forum.
 
elker said:
I have the same gun. This evening I shot a black bear,ass in and neck out. No apology for that as I had waited long and the bear did not give me any other angle. It is 270 grain matrix bullet and of course in .366 Ted.
Just got home from port alberni.will gut it to see the damage.
Click to expand...

Keep us posted with details of the results. I picked up some Matrix 290gr FB Bonded from Marshal and some Barnes 286gr TSX FB at WSS but haven't tried them yet. It's going to be hard to improve on the accuracy I've got with the 285gr PRVI bullets.
 
c-fbmi said:
Yep Hoyt, I was just about to say the same thing exactly...........you can get that variance from 2 different barrels of the same length in a given cartridge.
Click to expand...

I see the loss in velocity, due to a shortened barrel, expressed in fps/inch all the time... I have been guilty of it myself... in fact a far truer expression of velocity loss due to a shortened barrel, should be expressed in (% of original fps/inch)... in my experience the faster (lighter) cartridges loose MORE fps/inch than the slower (heavier) cartridges... but since they start out at a much higher velocity (sometimes double; ie .45/70 vs .22/250) the percentage loss is approximately equivalent. I bobbed a .45/70 barrel from 22" to 18" and loss less than 100 fps for the 4", or roughly 5% (2050 vs 1960; before and after). Where as a .243 bob from 24" to 20" resulted in a loss of 200 fps (58 VM's at 3800 vs 3600)... also approximately 5%. Of all the barrel bobs that I have done within reasonable ranges (say 18" - 32") the net loss of velocity has fallen in the 1.3 - 2.0%/inch range)... if one were to use (1.7% of initial fps/inch) as a median, you would be fairly close at calculating net loss per shortened inch of barrel length... for any given cartridge. In the chop tests that I have done the barrels were recrowned at each length and the same batch of reloads were used before and after. Of course this is a relatively small sample size (maybe two dozen barrels) and there are many variables... so don't chew up up my rough statistical analysis and conclusions... for my own uses, this is sufficiently accurate to assist with barrel length decisions vs the intended purpose of the subject firearm. As for "intended purpose"... the .243 chop I referenced earlier was on a varmint rig, to hunt our usual locations in brush country where light and handy are more important than speed, where shots are almost always under 200 yards and mostly under 100 yards... whereas, I would never consider bobbing my 26" 700 bench .243 rifle down to 20".
 
Johnn Peterson said:
Keep us posted with details of the results. I picked up some Matrix 290gr FB Bonded from Marshal and some Barnes 286gr TSX FB at WSS but haven't tried them yet. It's going to be hard to improve on the accuracy I've got with the 285gr PRVI bullets.
Click to expand...
I don't know if 286 TSX is good or bad. I shot a bear 2 years ago at the gut, this is the photo:
IMAG0425_zpsab44b568.jpg


IMAG0424_zps5c194de9.jpg


I had to shot it again as it rushed to me when I was too close to him. Well, it is unfair to judge by my case as I shot it not at vital area. Will gut my bear which I shot last night, still waiting for my son to wake up. we came home at 2 am.
 
For you fellas who are shooting the PP 285 gr bullets, has anybody used them on game? Ie. moose and elk. From the looks of things in the photo, they seem to be pretty well constructed.

93bulletssectioned.jpg
 
Just finished gutting and cleaning. Here are the photos of ASS IN and NECK OUT, in order accordingly

IMAG0426_zps354c303f.jpg


IMAG0430_zps67c4ea99.jpg


The matrix bullet went all the way from the A-hole to B-hole(between should and neck). It caused 0 meat damage(except cut a small piece of heart), almost no bone touched. The bear fell and died within a few seconds.
So as the OP asked about accuracy of 366 Ted,my testimony is it is very accurate. You aim at A-hole, you hit A-hole.
 
Straying a bit from the specific calibre topic....

From a build perspective, there isn't much to complain about a Zastava other than the wood but that is to be expected given the price point. Nevertheless, the Zastava is generally quite accurate. Following are a couple of targets (6.5x55 and 7.62x39 respectively) that I shot a while back. Barrel channels on both rifles had a few pressure points and I had shot those targets with only partially relieved stocks (WIP at the time). The smaller rifle was shot using irons only.....the factory installed sights although of better quality does have a quite shallow/narrow rear sight notch that isn't helpful even at 50m range.


 
elker said:
I don't know if 286 TSX is good or bad. I shot a bear 2 years ago at the gut, this is the photo:
IMAG0425_zpsab44b568.jpg


IMAG0424_zps5c194de9.jpg


I had to shot it again as it rushed to me when I was too close to him. Well, it is unfair to judge by my case as I shot it not at vital area. Will gut my bear which I shot last night, still waiting for my son to wake up. we came home at 2 am.
Click to expand...

I spoke to Anthony at Trade - Ex about premium bullets in 9.3 x 57 and 9.3 x 62, and the TSX specifically.

He has vast knowledge of 9.3's. He was very firm in his opinion that the x57 and x62 do not need premium bullets at all, as they do not produce the velocity necessary to get better results with premiums than with basic cup-and-core, and the tougher premium bullet may often get you worse results than basic c & c bullets.

He specifically pointed out the TSX bullest as being pretty much terrible in the x57 and x62, as the TSX's simply need too much velocity to work properly in commpnly available 9.3mm chamberings. He also found he could not get them to shoot well either.

The pics you posted are a good example of a bullet that is clearly NOT performing as it should, even though it brought down your animal. I'm guessing that bullet in the pic would have needed a good 500 fps more impact velocity to perform like a TSX should - which is impossible from a 9.3 x 57 or 9.3 x 62. You'd have to have some custom 9.3. like a 9.3 RUM or something, to make TSX's work properly.

I'd suggest just buying Prvi 285's for less than half the price and you're good to go. Save your TSX budget for a screamers like a 22-250, or a 300 RUM. :)
 
Last edited:
@Northman999
I could not agree with you more,. I hunt exclusively with a 9,3x62 and a 9,3x64 and when one looks at the jacket thickness of a Privi or say the Norma SP- Alaska, then one will realize that 0,035" jacket thickness and low velocity, i.e:2500f/s is ample enough for anything in North America.
I love the Privis in my 62 for bears and I find it puts them down faster than say with a Nosler Partition.
 
varminter said:
@Northman999
I could not agree with you more,. I hunt exclusively with a 9,3x62 and a 9,3x64 and when one looks at the jacket thickness of a Privi or say the Norma SP- Alaska, then one will realize that 0,035" jacket thickness and low velocity, i.e:2500f/s is ample enough for anything in North America.
I love the Privis in my 62 for bears and I find it puts them down faster than say with a Nosler Partition.
Click to expand...

While Ive had great results with the Privi's in my x62's and the half dozen or so critters Ive shot with them , Ive also had stellar performance on bears with the 286 partition in the same cartridge. Particularly on a just above the a-hole shot once , spine and shoulder smashed and came to rest just under the skin looking like it should be in a magazine add.
I think there is a case for the matrix bonded or partition type bullets on big bears and bison for example where big bones may be encountered and If I head out for a big Charlotte bear next year I'll use the partitions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom