375 rimless nitro express

B

brybenn

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
53   0   0
Location
southern ontario
I've had a fascination with the 375 rimless nitro express cartridge. Aka 9.5X56, .375 Rimless Nitro Express, .375 2.25" Rimless. Rifles are in short supply so that leaves having a custom rifle built. An expensive option with expensive custom dies needed as well.
Another option is to buy a 9.3x57. It would be much easier and cheaper to freshen up an existing easily found rifle.
Performance should be indistinguishable so the question remains could I find happiness in a .366 when I really wanted a 375 nitro express?
It's primary use would be a light weight stalking rifle used for black bear. I'm just wanting a traditional wood and steel stalking rifle for nice long walks.
 
brybenn said:
I've had a fascination with the 375 rimless nitro express cartridge. Aka 9.5X56, .375 Rimless Nitro Express, .375 2.25" Rimless. Rifles are in short supply so that leaves having a custom rifle built. An expensive option with expensive custom dies needed as well.
Another option is to buy a 9.3x57. It would be much easier and cheaper to freshen up an existing easily found rifle.
Performance should be indistinguishable so the question remains could I find happiness in a .366 when I really wanted a 375 nitro express?
It's primary use would be a light weight stalking rifle used for black bear. I'm just wanting a traditional wood and steel stalking rifle for nice long walks.
Click to expand...
No worries going 9.3x57 over the .375 variant. I've found my Husqvarna M96 sporter to be more than adequate on black bear to 80yds or so.
I use Hornady dies & Norma brass along with hardcast 270 gr boolits for my loads. Very nice to carry for wanderin' about.

My rifle be identical to this one at Intersurplus. https://intersurplus.com/collections/9-3x57/products/husqvarna-m96-sporter-9-3x57-18
 
Iv been hunting with the .375 rimless for many years now, in an old open sighted mannlicher. I use the 9.3x57 to make brass, it’s a blast of a cartridge.
 
brybenn said:
I've had a fascination with the 375 rimless nitro express cartridge. Aka 9.5X56, .375 Rimless Nitro Express, .375 2.25" Rimless. Rifles are in short supply so that leaves having a custom rifle built. An expensive option with expensive custom dies needed as well.
Another option is to buy a 9.3x57. It would be much easier and cheaper to freshen up an existing easily found rifle.
Performance should be indistinguishable so the question remains could I find happiness in a .366 when I really wanted a 375 nitro express?
It's primary use would be a light weight stalking rifle used for black bear. I'm just wanting a traditional wood and steel stalking rifle for nice long walks.
Click to expand...
I had the same fascination with the cartridge for a long time, due, no doubt, to my reading of a bunch of the old Africa & Indian safari books; I even had an action & a very loose M96 barrel [0.373" grooves] fitted to a Turk M98 [large ring / small thread] action & a Husqvarna sporter stock for it.

Then I started doing some critical research. [Wouldn't be the first & likely won't be the last time I did things back-@$$-wards.

I currently have & very much enjoy shooting 4 different Husqvarna 9.3x57 rifles [2 Model 146 & 2 Model 46], which will eventually go to my 2 daughters & sons-in-law in Alberta.

I have found that, notwithstanding the stronger M98 based rifles, both those & the M96 based rifles enjoy [best accuracy, long case life] a fairly mild load of 48.0 grs. of RL15 behind PPU 285 gr. bullets. They yield from just under 2,100 fps in the loosest of the M96 barrels, to just shy of 2,200 fps in the tightest M98 barrel [both chronographed]. That yields from 2,800 to 3,050 ft.#'s of k.e.

If we use the same brass [I necked up my already-formed 8x57 > 9.3x57 PPU brass to .375, which resulted in the brass increasing its net case capacity from 65.2 grains of H2O to 69.2 grs.

Plugging those numbers in to QL & using the old Hornady .375" 270 gr. RNSP bullet, which is similar to Kynoch's & Westley Richards' original bullet used in the .375 N.E. Rimless, an almost full case of RL15 results in 2,340 fps, at pressures of ~44,000 psi. This yields k.e. of 3,284 ft. #'s.

So, ~200 ft. #'s of k.e. difference, in favour of the .375 vs. the 9.3x57.

Momentum, on the other hand, favours the heavier mass & better ballistic co-efficient of the 285 grain 9.3 bullet over the .375's 270 gr. bullet. Not by much, mind, eg. 75.2 #ft. vs. 71.7 @ 100 yds.; that lead is maintained or bettered all the way out to distances you have no right to shoot at game with cartridges such as these.

Is it worth it?

Only you can make that decision, BUT, consider that you can buy a read-made, ready to shoot Husqvarna rifle for $250-400. The lower-priced rifles are built on the M96 actions, which are, I grant you, weaker than the later M98-actioned rifles, BUT, even the M96 is stronger than the Mannlicher-Schoenauer actions Holland & Holland, Jeffery & Westley Richards used to build their .375 Rimless N.E. rifles on. Hornady dies for the 9.3x57 will set you back ~$100.00. Bullets for the 9.3 will run you ~$80.00/100 [I bought 1,500 back when they were $28.95/100, a whole lot more than when Norma PPDC 285 grain bullets were going for $16.95/100 from Ammomart.

Bullets for the .375 Rimless will run you ~$100.00/100 [I considered the cartridge because I scored 1,000 270 gr. Winchester PPT & 500 300 gr. Winchester FMJRN bullets at the Calgary Gun Show a dozen or so years back & figured my shoulder would not survive that many shot from my Whitworth in .375 H&H.

CH4D can make you dies for the .375 @ $116.00 US plus shipping, plus wait time [the last time I ordered dies they did not have in stock took 8 months]. A reamer from PT&G will set you back ~$300.00 Cdn landed; expect to wait 6-8 months for those as well.

Brass is the same for both cartridges as they are made up by necking up 8x57 brass.

HOWEVER, should you want properly headstamped brass, Norma 9.3x57 brass will cost you ~$2.00 each, while .375 N.E. will run you ~$4.00 US each.

After doing all of this research, I keep enjoying shooting my 9.3x57 rifles, while my still-in-process .375 N.E. Rimless 2 1/4" sits forlorn at the back of the gun safe.

Don't get me wrong; I still enjoy shooting odd-ducks, like a Stevens 45 in .25-25, one in .25-20 Stevens Single Shot, a .256 Fraser Flanged [aka 6.5x53R], a .298 Westley Richards Minex, a .44-77 Rolling Block. I'm just getting pickier on what I spend $'s & time on.

My $0.02 Cdn.
 
jamesharrison said:
I had the same fascination with the cartridge for a long time, due, no doubt, to my reading of a bunch of the old Africa & Indian safari books; I even had an action & a very loose M96 barrel [0.373" grooves] fitted to a Turk M98 [large ring / small thread] action & a Husqvarna sporter stock for it.

Then I started doing some critical research. [Wouldn't be the first & likely won't be the last time I did things back-@$$-wards.

I currently have & very much enjoy shooting 4 different Husqvarna 9.3x57 rifles [2 Model 146 & 2 Model 46], which will eventually go to my 2 daughters & sons-in-law in Alberta.

I have found that, notwithstanding the stronger M98 based rifles, both those & the M96 based rifles enjoy [best accuracy, long case life] a fairly mild load of 48.0 grs. of RL15 behind PPU 285 gr. bullets. They yield from just under 2,100 fps in the loosest of the M96 barrels, to just shy of 2,200 fps in the tightest M98 barrel [both chronographed]. That yields from 2,800 to 3,050 ft.#'s of k.e.

If we use the same brass [I necked up my already-formed 8x57 > 9.3x57 PPU brass to .375, which resulted in the brass increasing its net case capacity from 65.2 grains of H2O to 69.2 grs.

Plugging those numbers in to QL & using the old Hornady .375" 270 gr. RNSP bullet, which is similar to Kynoch's & Westley Richards' original bullet used in the .375 N.E. Rimless, an almost full case of RL15 results in 2,340 fps, at pressures of ~44,000 psi. This yields k.e. of 3,284 ft. #'s.

So, ~200 ft. #'s of k.e. difference, in favour of the .375 vs. the 9.3x57.

Momentum, on the other hand, favours the heavier mass & better ballistic co-efficient of the 285 grain 9.3 bullet over the .375's 270 gr. bullet. Not by much, mind, eg. 75.2 #ft. vs. 71.7 @ 100 yds.; that lead is maintained or bettered all the way out to distances you have no right to shoot at game with cartridges such as these.

Is it worth it?

Only you can make that decision, BUT, consider that you can buy a read-made, ready to shoot Husqvarna rifle for $250-400. The lower-priced rifles are built on the M96 actions, which are, I grant you, weaker than the later M98-actioned rifles, BUT, even the M96 is stronger than the Mannlicher-Schoenauer actions Holland & Holland, Jeffery & Westley Richards used to build their .375 Rimless N.E. rifles on. Hornady dies for the 9.3x57 will set you back ~$100.00. Bullets for the 9.3 will run you ~$80.00/100 [I bought 1,500 back when they were $28.95/100, a whole lot more than when Norma PPDC 285 grain bullets were going for $16.95/100 from Ammomart.

Bullets for the .375 Rimless will run you ~$100.00/100 [I considered the cartridge because I scored 1,000 270 gr. Winchester PPT & 500 300 gr. Winchester FMJRN bullets at the Calgary Gun Show a dozen or so years back & figured my shoulder would not survive that many shot from my Whitworth in .375 H&H.

CH4D can make you dies for the .375 @ $116.00 US plus shipping, plus wait time [the last time I ordered dies they did not have in stock took 8 months]. A reamer from PT&G will set you back ~$300.00 Cdn landed; expect to wait 6-8 months for those as well.

Brass is the same for both cartridges as they are made up by necking up 8x57 brass.

HOWEVER, should you want properly headstamped brass, Norma 9.3x57 brass will cost you ~$2.00 each, while .375 N.E. will run you ~$4.00 US each.

After doing all of this research, I keep enjoying shooting my 9.3x57 rifles, while my still-in-process .375 N.E. Rimless 2 1/4" sits forlorn at the back of the gun safe.

Don't get me wrong; I still enjoy shooting odd-ducks, like a Stevens 45 in .25-25, one in .25-20 Stevens Single Shot, a .256 Fraser Flanged [aka 6.5x53R], a .298 Westley Richards Minex, a .44-77 Rolling Block. I'm just getting pickier on what I spend $'s & time on.

My $0.02 Cdn.
Click to expand...
Pretty much the response I was hoping for.

My original plan was a matched pair of 275 Rigby and 375 rne rifles but my vision is crapping out on me and forcing me to change my plans from express sights to optics for anything but close range. I figure the 9.3 or 375 would be the better choice for express sights with likely a quick detach optic
I couldn't find any of the lighter 375 cal jacketed bullets either. 270gr being the lightest.
I do already load for the 9.3x62
 
My 4 9.3x57 rifles wear the following sights:

M146: Kahles Helia Super 27S2 [2.3-7x36] with German #4 reticle
M146: Kahles Helia Super 15S2 [1.5-4.5x26] with German #4 reticle
M46: Bausch & Lomb BALVAR 1.5-6x20 with Duplex reticle
M46: Open sights only, but fixed rear has been replaced with a 3 blade folding [from a BRNO, IIRC] & a German flip-up ivory night bead.

I really enjoy the M46's. They seem so much lighter & are better balanced / easier to carry than the M146's.

My Holland & Holland in .318 is VERY similar to my Husqvarnas; just MUCH less expensive.

I have a custom .275 Rigby, well actually a 7x57, but there's ZERO difference, as the Rigbys chambered in that cartridge Back in the Glory Days [pre-WW1] were made entirely by Mauser [as evidenced by the German proof marks denoting a complete rifle]. It is made up on an intermediate M98 action [as were a lot of Rigbys in .275].

I've found that any of my 7x57 rifles [I've owned 4, 1 in a Ruger #1S as well as 3 different sporters] all detested the light 139-140 grain bullets, but they were all throated for the 175 grain heavy bullets. They all liked ~150 grain bullets, the ~160 grain bullets even more & adored the old 175 grain RN bullets.

Your 2 companion rifles should handle 99% of your needs [the .275 for light & far stuff], the 9.3x57 for the "bayonet charge" stuff.

I designed 2 cast bullets for my 9.3's; 1 a 285 gr. BRTORNFPGCTL, the other a 360 grain in the same style. The heavy one will do anything the old .360 No. 2 N.E. will do with its 320 grain bullets, as far as penetration is concerned & those bullets had a much better reputation than the 300 grain .375 bullets. Even the basic 9.3x57 loaded as I do will better the old .400/360 N.E. loadings.

My Husqvarna Model 649 [9.3x62 on an FN commercial 98 action] wears a Kahles Helia S 1.1-4.5x24 with German #4 reticle, as does my Whitworth Safari in .375 H&H.

Where I hunt in this part of the Canadian Shield, there are no long shots; 75 yards is the farthest you can see in the Black Spruce swamps, typically, it's more like 35-50 yds.
A lot of the lighter 375 bullets are meant for the higher velocities attainable with Magnum catridges in that bore size. They will likely not expand correctly at the .375 Rimless 2 1/4" attainable velocities. That or like the old Hornady 220 grain, which was meant for .375 Winchester velocities, they will expand too much.

Sorry for the long-winded diatribe.
 
brybenn said:
Pretty much the response I was hoping for.

My original plan was a matched pair of 275 Rigby and 375 rne rifles but my vision is crapping out on me and forcing me to change my plans from express sights to optics for anything but close range. I figure the 9.3 or 375 would be the better choice for express sights with likely a quick detach optic
I couldn't find any of the lighter 375 cal jacketed bullets either. 270gr being the lightest.
I do already load for the 9.3x62
Click to expand...
I have access to loads of the Speer .375 235 Hot-Cors... they are a notably tougher bullet than you would expect with a C&C SP... Speer says this particular bullet has a thinker jacket, particularly toward the base, for a stiffer "cup." The standard 235 TSX is better at higher speeds... I shoot that one in my .375 WSM.
 
I think about one of these in a mannlicher or Moderna (tm) a lot. Like a lot a lot. One of the few cases where I am actually envious of Ardent, not just in his mind

I also think this thing is never going to get built, op has been rebarreling his custom Stephen's as long as I've been on this board
 
hoytcanon said:
I have access to loads of the Speer .375 235 Hot-Cors... they are a notably tougher bullet than you would expect with a C&C SP... Speer says this particular bullet has a thinker jacket, particularly toward the base, for a stiffer "cup." The standard 235 TSX is better at higher speeds... I shoot that one in my .375 WSM.
Click to expand...
I was thinking the speer 235gr was for the 375 win. That's my mistake. Im leaning alot more toward the 9.3 now though
 
jamesharrison said:
My 4 9.3x57 rifles wear the following sights:

M146: Kahles Helia Super 27S2 [2.3-7x36] with German #4 reticle
M146: Kahles Helia Super 15S2 [1.5-4.5x26] with German #4 reticle
M46: Bausch & Lomb BALVAR 1.5-6x20 with Duplex reticle
M46: Open sights only, but fixed rear has been replaced with a 3 blade folding [from a BRNO, IIRC] & a German flip-up ivory night bead.

I really enjoy the M46's. They seem so much lighter & are better balanced / easier to carry than the M146's.

My Holland & Holland in .318 is VERY similar to my Husqvarnas; just MUCH less expensive.

I have a custom .275 Rigby, well actually a 7x57, but there's ZERO difference, as the Rigbys chambered in that cartridge Back in the Glory Days [pre-WW1] were made entirely by Mauser [as evidenced by the German proof marks denoting a complete rifle]. It is made up on an intermediate M98 action [as were a lot of Rigbys in .275].

I've found that any of my 7x57 rifles [I've owned 4, 1 in a Ruger #1S as well as 3 different sporters] all detested the light 139-140 grain bullets, but they were all throated for the 175 grain heavy bullets. They all liked ~150 grain bullets, the ~160 grain bullets even more & adored the old 175 grain RN bullets.

Your 2 companion rifles should handle 99% of your needs [the .275 for light & far stuff], the 9.3x57 for the "bayonet charge" stuff.

I designed 2 cast bullets for my 9.3's; 1 a 285 gr. BRTORNFPGCTL, the other a 360 grain in the same style. The heavy one will do anything the old .360 No. 2 N.E. will do with its 320 grain bullets, as far as penetration is concerned & those bullets had a much better reputation than the 300 grain .375 bullets. Even the basic 9.3x57 loaded as I do will better the old .400/360 N.E. loadings.

My Husqvarna Model 649 [9.3x62 on an FN commercial 98 action] wears a Kahles Helia S 1.1-4.5x24 with German #4 reticle, as does my Whitworth Safari in .375 H&H.

Where I hunt in this part of the Canadian Shield, there are no long shots; 75 yards is the farthest you can see in the Black Spruce swamps, typically, it's more like 35-50 yds.
A lot of the lighter 375 bullets are meant for the higher velocities attainable with Magnum catridges in that bore size. They will likely not expand correctly at the .375 Rimless 2 1/4" attainable velocities. That or like the old Hornady 220 grain, which was meant for .375 Winchester velocities, they will expand too much.

Sorry for the long-winded diatribe.
Click to expand...
I appreciate the time spent typing. I also hunt in thicker woods when I head north. Mostly for bear as the deer hunting down where I am is the best in the province. Bow and muzzleloarders only though
I was under the belief the lighter 375s were made for the 375win. The old guy I used to shoot with in the quarry had a 375 win and used the speer bullets but I only saw him shoot rocks and old propane tanks.
Ive though for years a 275 Rigby and 375rne and a nice double in 9.3x74r and my 458wm would cover me world wide. Once my house is paid off my priorities are the kids college account African safari and finer guns.
I have lots of other rifles but they're in chassis setups or synthetic stocks
Did you get the flip up night sight and express rear from New England custom?
I also prefer the German #4 my eyes aren't what they used to be. I moved my 458x2" and model 96 9.3x62 cuz I just couldn't shoot good groups with the iron sights against a dark target
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom