Maybe not..... But the test is the test and we all need to be subjective...... I still don't buy into the ttsx being the second coming of Christ, but I have to admit it performed admirably......
9.3 bullet test started. pics posted in #1
- Thread starter medvedqc
- Start date
Maybe not..... But the test is the test and we all need to be subjective...... I still don't buy into the ttsx being the second coming of Christ, but I have to admit it performed admirably......
Brad do not worry. things are not complicated. we will try some again and continue as there is more to test.
remember when i said that some may not be happy with the results and this is what is happening.
can t wait to see in the 250s a lot of different ones how they behave but yes the ttsx was above but some others were impressive even if the result was not a surprise it is always interesting: in no particular order the matrix, the woodleigh, aframe, tsx and i will repeat but the norma alaska, prvi and lapua mega for a regular cup and core were above .... even if the prvi splitted in two ...
that is really an interesting test that wont be here if the cgners communauty was not helping ... so thumb up to all of you.
remember when i said that some may not be happy with the results and this is what is happening.
can t wait to see in the 250s a lot of different ones how they behave but yes the ttsx was above but some others were impressive even if the result was not a surprise it is always interesting: in no particular order the matrix, the woodleigh, aframe, tsx and i will repeat but the norma alaska, prvi and lapua mega for a regular cup and core were above .... even if the prvi splitted in two ...
that is really an interesting test that wont be here if the cgners communauty was not helping ... so thumb up to all of you.
Your test is awesome....... and I am fairly new to reloading, and it is great to see these results......
My only complaint about your testing is that I am not up in the Yukon with you and Ted....... If I was, I woukd be the giddy schoolchild running up to see the results......
Bum just chatted with Ted and this is more 20 yards the distance that shots has been done.
Phil
Right, the jugs are at 20 yd. The chronograph is at 12 feet, which brings up another point. While a few are, most of the loads being tested are not maximum velocity. The idea is to sort of have the bullets impacting at velocities more like what they would be impacting at usual hunting distance.
For instance, the two 250 Barnes being discussed by you guys were 2277 fps and 2345 fps, which is at least 200 fps less than what most guys are loading them to.
Not scientific at all, but a bit more realistic as most game is not shot at 20 yards.
Ted
For instance, the two 250 Barnes being discussed by you guys were 2277 fps and 2345 fps, which is at least 200 fps less than what most guys are loading them to.
Not scientific at all, but a bit more realistic as most game is not shot at 20 yards.
Ted
burnt_servo
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- right in the middle of b.c.
I was thinking of replicating as close as possible what you guys are doing to have a result that would be comparable .
I figure the velocity out of my rifle with it's 20 inch barrel would be comparable to a hotly loaded normal 9.3 with a 24 - 26 inch barrel .
btw is there anyone in the Quesnel area with a crony that wouldn't mind me firing a couple rounds through it the next time your out ?
I figure the velocity out of my rifle with it's 20 inch barrel would be comparable to a hotly loaded normal 9.3 with a 24 - 26 inch barrel .
btw is there anyone in the Quesnel area with a crony that wouldn't mind me firing a couple rounds through it the next time your out ?
Hoyt, did you have a chance to test them in wet newsprint? Please post here when you do. It will be interesting to see how they perform in the different medium.
Phil wants five more loaded up for water test, so we will see.
Ted
They were plain cup and core soft points with a very round nose. I will check, Phil, as I might still have a few around here.
Great! Look forward to your testing, burnt_servo. Please post your results here.
As far as velocity reduction with the short barrel, you will be pleased to hear that the expansion ration of the 9.3X62 is so high that velocity loss in shortening a barrel from 24 inches to 20 is less than 60 fps. Another bonus for us 9.3 fudds.
Ted
Ted, have not done the test in wet newsprint... I would like to, but to be honest, with my current schedule, that is not likely to happen any time soon... there are a thousand items ahead of that on the priority list, unfortunately or fortunately, depending on how you look at it. I surely appreciate all of the work that you and Phil are doing on the 9.3mm test... a herculean task.
I might drop by the Yukon News tomorrow, and see if they have about four feet of old papers stacked up and ready for some research.
Only to give the Hornady a chance to redeem itself. Not interested in doing this for twenty other bullet types. Wet newsprint is heavy and hard to handle.
Ted
Only to give the Hornady a chance to redeem itself. Not interested in doing this for twenty other bullet types. Wet newsprint is heavy and hard to handle.
Ted
Someone wants to know what expansion ratio is. Really need to start a new thread, but brielfy, expansion ratio is the case volume plus bore volume, divided by the case volume.
Another way of looking at it, sort of, would be how many case volumes of powder would it take to fill the entire bore? Large cartridges fired in small bores have low expansion ratios. Small cartridges fired in large bores have high expansion ratios. Hence, the 30-30 has a much higher ratio than a 300 Weatherby.
The higher the expansion ratio, the less velocity will be lost in shortening a barrel. The lower the ratio, the more velocity will be lost. That's why a 9.3X57 is such a sleeper cartridge if one wants to build a really efficient big game 18-20 inch carbine.
That ought to keep a few of you awake tonight, and Anthony's phone ringing in the morning.
Ted
Another way of looking at it, sort of, would be how many case volumes of powder would it take to fill the entire bore? Large cartridges fired in small bores have low expansion ratios. Small cartridges fired in large bores have high expansion ratios. Hence, the 30-30 has a much higher ratio than a 300 Weatherby.
The higher the expansion ratio, the less velocity will be lost in shortening a barrel. The lower the ratio, the more velocity will be lost. That's why a 9.3X57 is such a sleeper cartridge if one wants to build a really efficient big game 18-20 inch carbine.
That ought to keep a few of you awake tonight, and Anthony's phone ringing in the morning.
Ted
Someone wants to know what expansion ratio is. Really need to start a new thread, but brielfy, expansion ratio is the case volume plus bore volume, divided by the case volume.
Another way of looking at it, sort of, would be how many case volumes of powder would it take to fill the entire bore? Large cartridges fired in small bores have low expansion ratios. Small cartridges fired in large bores have high expansion ratios. Hence, the 30-30 has a much higher ratio than a 300 Weatherby.
The higher the expansion ratio, the less velocity will be lost in shortening a barrel. The lower the ratio, the more velocity will be lost. That's why a 9.3X57 is such a sleeper cartridge if one wants to build a really efficient big game 18-20 inch carbine.
That ought to keep a few of you awake tonight, and Anthony's phone ringing in the morning.
Ted
All true, except that the cartridge with the lower expansion ratio, while losing more velocity as the barrel length is shortened, will still have more velocity potential than the cartridge with higher expansion ratio. E.g. a 9.3X62 can produce more velocity than the 9.3X57 at any barrel length, using more powder in the process. As for "efficiency", which seems so important to some, the 9.3X62 will require 5-10 grs more powder to produce the same velocity as the 9.3X57, more to produce higher velocity. That translates into about 4 cents a shot, which does keep some people awake - the same people who shoot two dollar bullets from thousand dollar guns..............
Love the bullet test.
burnt_servo
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- right in the middle of b.c.
so I went out today and fired a few rounds of the 250 grain accubond and a 286 grain hard cast gas checked bullet from jethunter
I used 5 5 gallon pails , each pail filled with ziplock bags full of water , then filled with water .
the accubonds went through 3 pails and stopped in the 4th , denting the inside of the pail .
the cast bullet went through 4 pails and dented the inside of the 5th pail .
the remaining weight of the accubonds I could find were 162 grains and 174 grains .
the cast bullet I recovered was 202 grains .
velocity ....... no idea , but as a guestimate I would say around 2700fps for the accubonds and around 2000 - 2200 for the cast .
I was about 20 yards away from the first pail .
the case capacity of the fired rounds was 81 grains of water .
a load of 75 grans of h414 for the 250 grain bullets was used .
a load of 67 grains of imr 4831 was used for the 286 cast bullets .
Remington mag primers where used .
fired out of a 20.5 inch barrel .
here are the pictures
[/URL][/IMG]
[/URL][/IMG]
[/URL][/IMG]
[/URL][/IMG]
the picture below is a factory 286 norma round nose next to a improved fired case and finally a 250 accubond loaded in a improved case
[/URL][/IMG]
and finally my rifle built from spare parts .
[/URL][/IMG]
I used 5 5 gallon pails , each pail filled with ziplock bags full of water , then filled with water .
the accubonds went through 3 pails and stopped in the 4th , denting the inside of the pail .
the cast bullet went through 4 pails and dented the inside of the 5th pail .
the remaining weight of the accubonds I could find were 162 grains and 174 grains .
the cast bullet I recovered was 202 grains .
velocity ....... no idea , but as a guestimate I would say around 2700fps for the accubonds and around 2000 - 2200 for the cast .
I was about 20 yards away from the first pail .
the case capacity of the fired rounds was 81 grains of water .
a load of 75 grans of h414 for the 250 grain bullets was used .
a load of 67 grains of imr 4831 was used for the 286 cast bullets .
Remington mag primers where used .
fired out of a 20.5 inch barrel .
here are the pictures
the picture below is a factory 286 norma round nose next to a improved fired case and finally a 250 accubond loaded in a improved case
and finally my rifle built from spare parts .
Last edited:
burnt_servo
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- right in the middle of b.c.
I should add , I am really impressed with how the cast bullet performed . it went through roughly 60 inches of water and retained a really decent amount of weight .
i'm curious to see how these do at higher velocities .
the accubonds mushroomed perfectly . and penetrated roughly 48 inches of water .
I am assuming these where built for factory 9.3x62 speeds . if that is the case , these preformed very well at the higher speed .
the biggest thing is the bullet stayed in once piece and mushroomed out to around just over 3/4" .
when the accubonds hit the first pail , the pail shot easily 10 feet into the air , straight up and split into 5 or 6 pieces . ( the tops where open , without lids ) .
the cast bullets didn't have this dramatic energy transfer .
i'm curious to see how these do at higher velocities .
the accubonds mushroomed perfectly . and penetrated roughly 48 inches of water .
I am assuming these where built for factory 9.3x62 speeds . if that is the case , these preformed very well at the higher speed .
the biggest thing is the bullet stayed in once piece and mushroomed out to around just over 3/4" .
when the accubonds hit the first pail , the pail shot easily 10 feet into the air , straight up and split into 5 or 6 pieces . ( the tops where open , without lids ) .
the cast bullets didn't have this dramatic energy transfer .
Last edited:
Thanks for posting that burnt servo, the 250gr accubonds is one of the bullets I have, waiting for me to get round to loading up, in my 9.3x62, Once I get the peep sights sighted in correctly, I will start on building up a load for 250gr and 286gr.
thanks for your work.
yes that is fun about that stuff flying up in the air ....
we will se how they handle in our own test very soon.
In the previous 6.5mm test, the cast bullet penetrated much farther than any other bullet.
Post #184 - 24+ inches! http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...ge-CGN-264-Bullet-Test-Result**-(lots-of-pics!)
dgradinaru
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- British Columbia
Ive tried the 286 hornady in lots of 2x6 wood. 1st bullet acted like yours did and second bullet did a better. The cup and core held together weighing in at 205grs. Seems to be a soft bullet. Kinda acts like a ballistic tip. Should make a fine deer bullet IMO. Impact velocity was around 2350fps, ive had them loaded to 2510 fps before but with these bullets I would probably stay under 2400 fps.
It's really damning with faint praise when the best that can be said of a 285 gr. chunk of lead is that it would make a good deer bullet.
