375 H&H vs 375 Ruger vs 9,3x62

bigborefan said:
That's comparing apples to oranges again: I assume you have an exterior ballistics program on your computer, if not there are several available on the Internet, such as Hornady's.

Try this comparison between the .375 H&H firing a 300gr NP (.398BC) at 2550 fps (22.5"), and a 286gr NP at 2622 fps (real life at 64,000 psi - 22.5") from my Tikka 9.3 X 62, all the way to 500 yds and THEN tell me that the .375 H&H is in another class and has a longer effective range. The 300gr from the .375 H&H (or Ruger) is still limited, as is the 286 (9.3) to 1800 fps for effective expansion.

And, by the way, I've owned three .375 H&H's, one with a 22" that would barely make 2560 fps from 300's. That would be comparing apples to apples, I think.

Let us all know what you discover!

Edit to add: and yes, I know that a .375 H&H given a 26" will outclass the Ruger with a 24". I made 2700 fps from 300's in my 26" H&H. That outclasses the 9.3 X 62 by quite a bit. But that's apples to oranges again.


Bob

www.bigbores.ca
Click to expand...

Respect what you're trying to say Bob, but the straight fact is you can't make a 9.3x62 equal a .375 mag at equal pressures. The .375 will always win, more powder, and slightly more efficient at making use of the pressure with the larger base to work against, simple hydraulics. Finally, what is the purpose of matching bullets when the .375's biggest advantage is its far greater bullet selection? That's like telling two hockey players to wear the same size skates when one wears size 13s and the other 11s, and go for a race. It's manipulating reality an awful lot more to insist on matching bullets when far more selection rests in the .375's side than partitions (which are excellent, by the way).

It seems our argument is based solely on trajectory, as time and again I've said once in the animal, both cartridges will kill anything hit with them. Of course .375 allows up to 380gr (Rhino brand), and down to 200gr, but this again leads to the bullet selection argument. On elephants, no question from anyone a 350 or 380gr .375 is superior to 9.3, but how many of us hunt them? A few in this thread admittedly. The same can be said for .375 H&H 250gr TTSX or 260gr Accubond cross canyon elk loads, how many choose a .375 over a .300 for that? Well, a few here again.

But how many of us hunt 50-200 yards, for Moose, black bear, and deer? Most of us do that, and none will tell you a .375 is better than a 9.3 for that. So in the end we're arguing the outer limits of what medium bores do, and true all rounder territory. The .375 mag is going to win there no matter how we match bullets as it has more bullets available, and it has more powder. Why continue to flog the argument and push the 9.3 10,000+psi past its SAAMI spec, with less bullet options to stick in front of that pressure? That's my conundrum.
 
Finger Toes said:
Baribal can you tell me where to find literature on the failure for case head expansion to predict pressure please? I have a close relative that uses it all the time and I'd rather him not blow up.

Thanks

CP
Click to expand...
Me too. I've read the "watching primers to read pressure signs" stuff, but not the case head expansion stuff. Would the case head expand if the chamber was too tight to let it? Is it actually just a test of the quality of the brass and not a pressure sensor? Seems an awfully simplistic way to quantify something happening very fast and not the same all the time.
 
Ardent said:
Respect what you're trying to say Bob, but the straight fact is you can't make a 9.3x62 equal a .375 mag at equal pressures. The .375 will always win, more powder, and slightly more efficient at making use of the pressure with the larger base to work against, simple hydraulics. Finally, what is the purpose of matching bullets when the .375's biggest advantage is its far greater bullet selection? That's like telling two hockey players to wear the same size skates when one wears size 13s and the other 11s, and go for a race. It's manipulating reality an awful lot more to insist on matching bullets when far more selection rests in the .375's side than partitions (which are excellent, by the way).

It seems our argument is based solely on trajectory, as time and again I've said once in the animal, both cartridges will kill anything hit with them. Of course .375 allows up to 380gr (Rhino brand), and down to 200gr, but this again leads to the bullet selection argument. On elephants, no question from anyone a 350 or 380gr .375 is superior to 9.3, but how many of us hunt them? A few in this thread admittedly. The same can be said for .375 H&H 250gr TTSX or 260gr Accubond cross canyon elk loads, how many choose a .375 over a .300 for that? Well, a few here again.

But how many of us hunt 50-200 yards, for Moose, black bear, and deer? Most of us do that, and none will tell you a .375 is better than a 9.3 for that. So in the end we're arguing the outer limits of what medium bores do, and true all rounder territory. The .375 mag is going to win there no matter how we match bullets as it has more bullets available, and it has more powder. Why continue to flog the argument and push the 9.3 10,000+psi past its SAAMI spec, with less bullet options to stick in front of that pressure? That's my conundrum.
Click to expand...

I agree. A properly equipped 1/2 ton truck can tow a 10k trailer, cost less, and be easy to park. A 1 ton dually diesel can do the same, and more, with more flexibility; but costs more and can be a pain to park in the city. The rifles in question don't actually have large cost differences, so perhaps fewer purely logical reasons to choose the least flexible option.
 
emerson said:
Me too. I've read the "watching primers to read pressure signs" stuff, but not the case head expansion stuff. Would the case head expand if the chamber was too tight to let it? Is it actually just a test of the quality of the brass and not a pressure sensor? Seems an awfully simplistic way to quantify something happening very fast and not the same all the time.
Click to expand...

In general its measuring the case at the pressure line with a micrometer for expansion. One way is to measure factory ammo before and after firing in your rifle. Then use the recorded expansion to gauge reloads with the idea that you don't want to expand the case more than a factory load. Some ammo is under loaded like 45-70 or 9.3x62 and some people decide to go a certain amount over factory like 0.005 or something. I'm not sure if Baribal was talking about measuring the case HEAD or the PRESSURE line expansion in his post. My relative uses this method often and I think some of his loads are too hot. I believe he monitors other signs as well like primers, case head smearing by the bolt and bolt lift but he leans heavily on case expansion for pressure detection.
 
Finger Toes said:
In general its measuring the case at the pressure line with a micrometer for expansion. One way is to measure factory ammo before and after firing in your rifle. Then use the recorded expansion to gauge reloads with the idea that you don't want to expand the case more than a factory load. Some ammo is under loaded like 45-70 or 9.3x62 and some people decide to go a certain amount over factory like 0.005 or something. I'm not sure if Baribal was talking about measuring the case HEAD or the PRESSURE line expansion in his post. My relative uses this method often and I think some of his loads are too hot. I believe he monitors other signs as well like primers, case head smearing by the bolt and bolt lift but he leans heavily on case expansion for pressure detection.
Click to expand...

That is unfortunately an inaccurate way of judging pressure on anything but virgin brass of the same batch and maker as your factory ammo. Brass work hardens substantially even just with firing, let alone resizing. And if you're not small base resizing and annealing bases to exact hardness (nobody does this, for good reason) doesn't tell you much does it, as you're not starting at the same spec. So you've got harder brass at the base of slamming it with pressure, then you measure it and concur it only expands as much as softer, virgin brass, and therefore your pressures must be swell. I really don't care what people do with their own loads in their own rifles, I've hot rodded and guessed plenty too especially with wildcats with no data available. But let's be honest, we have very little (to no) idea what the pressure actually is. Quickload is handy, but it's an educated guess too, better than case head expansion however
 
A chronograph will help more than most other indicators IMHO, then use that info along with the usual indicators such as primers, case head measurements, bolt lift, etc.... And you can then guess away....

It's one of the mysteries and "voodoo"'that comes with reloading, unless you have a well equipped lab and unlimited financial resources that is.
 
There are several studies (I don't have them in hand right now, I am away from home) proving this, but you can make up your mind with this;
Why is it so difficult to have an accurate translation formula from CUP to PSI?
Simply beacause the brass (and the copper) reaction to pressure vs time (intensity) does not relate to a linear equation (nor a curve).
And I am not even going through brass work hardness which not only differs from make to make, but also from case to case.

If you compare the SAAMI CUP MAP to their Piezo (PSI) MAP specs, you will find that there is no way to make an accurate statement...

Take those couple of examples from both ways to express the pressure from SAAMI's standards;

270 Win = 52 000 CUP / 65 000 PSI
.338 Win Mag = 54 000 CUP / 64 000 PSI
.30 Carbine = 30 000 CUP / 30 000 PSI
303 British = 45 000 CUP / 49 000 PSI
35 Rem = 35 000 CUP / 33 500 PSI
45-70 Gvt = 28 000 CUP / 28 000 PSI

And the list goes on....

Take note that while SAAMI now uses Piezo transducers as standard pressure reading device, the CUP specs are still in use and considered valid, so both can be used to test a firearm....
 
9.3x62

I have a CZ 550 FS in 9.3x62 on the way from Prophet River!
20.5" barrel, iron sights, 7.25 pounds.
Looking at a VX-3 in 1.75-6x to mount in Warne QD rings. Need to get some dies, brass & bullets also.
:dancingbanana:
 
huntingfamily said:
I have a CZ 550 FS in 9.3x62 on the way from Prophet River!
20.5" barrel, iron sights, 7.25 pounds.
Looking at a VX-3 in 1.75-6x to mount in Warne QD rings. Need to get some dies, brass & bullets also.
:dancingbanana:
Click to expand...

Dies and bullets from TradeEx. I got my brass (Lapua) from Hirsch Precision but you can probably get Nosler brass from WSS or Cabelas.

Your scope selection is pretty much exactly what I'd go with.
 
BigUglyMan said:
Dies and bullets from TradeEx. I got my brass (Lapua) from Hirsch Precision but you can probably get Nosler brass from WSS or Cabelas.

Your scope selection is pretty much exactly what I'd go with.
Click to expand...

In preparation for getting my .366 Wagner, I lucked into 100 new Lapua brass, 200 PRVI 285gr bullets amd a set of RCBS dies including a neck sizing die. Later, I acquired several boxes of once fired Norma brass and a 'selection' of other bullets. However, I haven't got round to trying any of the other bullets as I'd be hard pressed to better the initial accuracy I've obtained with the PRVI bullets.
- My;) 'expensive' Zastava



- Initial reload test target results

 
They are starting to get "expensive". The 375 is almost $900 with tax, now.

My 375 is getting smoother all the time. ...wearing it in a bit every day. ;) It is going to be my dedicated cast bullet rifle, along with my sixty-seven year old 640 in 9.3X62.

Ted
 
Why not? said:
They are starting to get "expensive". The 375 is almost $900 with tax, now.

My 375 is getting smoother all the time. ...wearing it in a bit every day. ;) It is going to be my dedicated cast bullet rifle, along with my sixty-seven year old 640 in 9.3X62.

Ted
Click to expand...

I was quite surprised at the accuracy of my Zastava, so much so, I opted to 'pick up' its:p younger brother, in 7x57.



We've had discussions concerning the stocks and when you're here, I'll have to get you to show me exactly what you were getting at concerning changing the 'angle' when I shorten the stocks on both of them. Considering the price paid, my only 'real' complaint is the length of pull.
Oh, I'll check with my cast bullet supplier at the gun show tomorrow in Duncan, as to what he makes for the 9.3.
 
Johnn Peterson said:
366Wagner_zpsf658e624.jpg
Click to expand...

How come all of your bullet holes have nipples?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom