9.3 bullet test started. pics posted in #1

BUM,
this is still online do not worry for scans.

w w w .fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152.pdf

the more i read the more i think Ruger used it to create their guide or alaskan rifles, dont you think?

a short 9.3 is a good way too.

water and plastic jugs had made some nice results too and if we add the double jello it may be more interesting ...
 
Last edited:
9.3mauser said:
Ok, here's what I have:
285 gr:
Woodleigh RN
Norma Alaska:
Nosler Partition
Hornady's I think you already have.

250 gr.:
Woodleigh PP.
Nosler Accubond I think you already have
247 gr. RWS Cone Pt.
258 gr. RWS H-Mantle- this is loaded ammo but I could pull half a dozen
232 gr. Norma Oryx- again loaded ammo, and I only have 40 rds

I like the gelatin idea. Gives you a chance to look at the damage, rather than just an expanded bullet.
Click to expand...

received your parcel thanks a lot.
 
BlackLabelBrad said:
I always find these bullet testing threads to be quite interesting and I have a bunch of 9.3 bullets on hand, I'm willing to donate some for the cause.

I have:
- 285 gr PRVI SP
- 286 gr Nosler Partition
- 286 gr Hornady SP
- 270 gr Speer SP
- 250 gr Nosler Accubond
- 250 gr Hornady GMX
Click to expand...

gmx received.
thanks a lot.
 
Was looking around the net regarding 9.3 bullets and found these pictures, calibers used for the test is 9.3x66, 9.3x62, and 9.3x57

This website has a lot of very good information.

http://forums.nitroexpress.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=94935&page=0&fpart=all&vc=1

93-bullet-test-P68.jpg

93-bullet-test-P69.jpg

93-bullet-test-P70.jpg

93-bullet-test-P71.jpg

93-bullet-test-P72.jpg

93-bullet-test-P73.jpg

93-bullet-test-P74.jpg

93-bullet-test-P75.jpg


I also found the translation of the article, from the same website I found the pictures:

"A rough translation of the 9,3mm bullet test written by Alf Martin Bråten published in Jeger Hund & Våpen" October 2004."

---------------------------------------------



"IN 99 OUT OF 100 CASES, YOU WILL KILL A MOOSE WITH ALL THE BULLETS AVAILABLE ON THE

MARKET. BUT I DON'T WANT TO WAIT FOR THAT 1 EXCEPTION, SO I CHOOSE MY BULLETS CAREFULLY.




Although an old timer, the 9,3mm has not expired from age yet. We have even recently

witnessed new creations in this caliber, such as the 9,3x66, which for all practical

purposes can be compared to the older 9,3x64.

Still, the most popular variant of this caliber is the 9,3x62, and also yet another older

variant that won't give up; the 9,3x57.

With the variations in velocities attained with these different rounds, it is obviously

difficult to make bullets that work optimally in all 3. We are after all talking about a

span in velocity difference of roughly 150m/s.



The test. I gathered together 25 different types 9,3 bullets. The test dealt with

checking the expantion and depth of penetration at 15 meters with the 9,3x66 (which was

also used to represent the 9,3x64). This was to to stress the bullets to their maximum

capabilities. I borrowed a new Sako 75 from Ing. Rolf Aaberg for this. The test medium

was a stack of wet telephone catalogues with a dry catalogue put in as #2. This is a

tough challenge, as a some lead is often lost in the dry catalogue.

Next, the bullets were tested in 9,3x62 (which also was used to represent the 9,3x74R).

The test was exactly as described above, but with about 50m/s lower velocity.

Finally, all bullets were tested to find their lowest expansion distance/velocity. Study

the results. Choosing a bullet that is known to be the toughest isn't necessarily always

the best choice. Especially if using a caliber with moderate velocity.

Do not read the expansion data as absolute, but more as a guideline. If you find a bullet

that you think would be potentially interesting for your use, then try it out yourself.

Most likely you will obtain a different velocity than I did, and thus the data will not

be identical.



My choice. And I mean MY choice. I can't pick the ideal bullet for you, as you have to do

this yourself depending on which 9,3 cartridge you use, your personal wishes, and

particular needs. It's more than enough to pick my own favorites amongst the ones I

tested. My own criteria is that it will be use for general hunting, and I demand that the

bullet doesn't fragment/seperate. I prefer more penetration over expansion diameter (the

9,3 has a relatively large diameter to begin with), and I sometimes experience occasional

long shots, so trajectory is also a factor for me. Since my barrel is 18.5 inches, the

chances of finding something suitable narrowed itself down? We'll see.

To begin with I mentioned that all of these bullets will kill a moose. At least 99 times

out of 100. So when I put aside many of these bullets, it is not because they are bad.

However, since the options are so many, and I only really need one bullet, I have sorted

them quite harshly.

The first thing I did was cut out all bullets that easily loose their core. Basically,

this is all of those that aren't reinforced in some way that makes them hold together.

This leaves quite a few still, so I continue to look. To achieve a good combination of

penetration and large expanded diameter requires a high retained wight. A glance at the

tables for retained weight (and thus penetration and diameter) in 9,3x62 shows that the

number of suitable light bullets of modern construction are quite large. I find variants

here that have just as much penetration when expanded as the traditionally heavy bullets.

And since I also appreciate a decent bullet trajectory for all around use, my choices

naturally fall on the lighter bullets.

I can for example say that my trajectory criteria is that when shooting 5 cm high at 100

meters, I don't want the bullet to shoot lower than 5 cm below my point of aim at 200

meters.

That leaves me with the PBP 220 grain, Rhino Solid Shank 235 grain, Brenneke TOG 247

grain and Barnes X 250 grains (Nosler BT is already weeded out since it is prone to

seperation). If I accept a few more cm of drop at 200 meters, I can also use the Swift A

-Frame and Woodleigh Weldcore RN SN in 250 grain.

All of these are superb bullets, and are generally suitable for my demands. But from past

experience, I know that the Barnes X leaves an unwanted amount of copper fouling in my

barrel. The Brenneke TOG looses 20% of it's lead, and is also hard to get a hold of. The

Rhino has doesn't expand at lower velocities, although the importer claims that a new

slightly softer type will soon be available. And the Woodleigh could penetrate better in

My opinion.

So I am left with the PBP and the Swift. One is as good as the other. The PBP could

ideally expand at lower velocities than it does in my barrel, but it has a better

trajectory than the Swift. So that makes it a tie.

I don't care much about price, but if you are than my tip would be the Lapua Mega, which

is the tests best resulting conventional bullet. The Nosler Partion, Normas Oryx, and the

Sako Hammerhead are the tests least expensive "Super bullets".


-----------------------------------


Some additional information about the picture texts:

Trajectory: The figures are for a range of 200 and 250 meters for each of the 3 tested

cartridge, with a standard muzzle velocity and sighted in to impact 5 cm high at 100

meters.


----------------------------------


The comment text in each bullet evaluation:

"Inntr." = Penetration
"Diam." = Expanded diameter
"Restvekt" = Remaining bullet weight
"Eksp.Grense" = Distance when velocity becomes so slow that it will not expand reliably.


------------------------------------


PBP 220grain: The tests only Norwegian produced bullet. Simply a top notch hunting bullet

for the 9,3x64/66 and 9,3x62. Monometal copper.
+Strength
+Penetration
+Diameter
-Reluctant to expand when the velocity is very low.

-------

Norma Vulcan 232 grain: Conventional lead filled bullet. Holds together surprisingly

well, but can't take too much before coming apart.
+Price
-Seperation risk
-Little penetration

--------

Rhino Solid Shank 235 grain: "Semihomogeneous(semi-monometal)" South African produced

bullet with a small portion of bonded lead in the front. High remaining bullet weight and

large diameter. A little stiff at low speeds, but the producer promises a "extra soft"

variant soon.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Reluctant to expand when the velocity is very low.

-----------

Brenneke TOG: Brenneke's new generation of bonded bullets. Expands willingly in all 9,3mm

cartridges, but looses a bit of weight.
+Balanced penetration and diameter.
-Looses some weight/some shrapnel.

-----------

Barnes X 250 grain: Homogeneous/monometal bullet that gives maximum penetration combined

with a large expanded diameter. Willingly expands at the velocities of all 3 tested

calibers.
+Strength
+Penetration
+Diameter
-Often leaves a lot of fouling in the barrel.

------

Nosler Ballistic Tip 250 grains: A conventional bullet with a solid rear part of the

jacket. It has good flight characteristics, but is a little reluctant to expand at 9,3x57

velocities.
+Ballistics
+Price
-Very varying results regarding loosing lead/shrapnel.

--------

Swift A-Frame 285 grain: The bullet has a solid partion between the top and bottom in

addition to being bonded. Looses very little lead and willingly expands. A bullet that

never fails.
+Strength
+Penetration
-None that are obvious.

---------

Woodleigh Weldcore RN SN 250 grain: This Australian is bonded and is a good choice for

those who prefer expanded diameter rather then maximum penetration.
+Strength
+Diameter
-None that are obvious.

--------

Rhino Solid Shank 250 grain: The 250 grain bullet from Rhino is simply too solid and does

not give acceptable expansion. The producer promises a "extra soft" variant will be

available soon.
+Strength
-Very unwilling to expand.

(Note from ErikD: I read a similar test in a Swedish magazine published this months, and

the Rhino 250 grain got the same results as before. Which leads me to believe that they

have not released a "softer" version yet.)

--------

Speer 270 grain: A traditional lead filled bullet that is cheap and generally usable at

lower velocities. However, it is not a safe bet when bone is hit.
+Price
+Penetration
-Seperation risk


-------

Lapua Naturalis 270 grain: Earlier reluctency to expend appears to have been dealt with,

because now this bullet is impressive. It gives moderate penetration, but delivers an

unusually large expanded diameter, and 100% retained weight. The length of the bullet

does steal a little case capacity though.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Long length of bullet.


-------

Swiss Jagt CDP 286 grain: Has a constuction very similar to the Nosler Partion, but is

undoubtedly more solid. This bullet has also been made to expand more easily as the years

have passed, and does well both when it comes to penetration and diameter.
+Penetration
+Diameter
-None that are obvious.


--------

Woodleigh Weldcore PP 286 grain: Bonded bullet with "Protected Point". Gives a lot of

penetration due to not so much expansion at high velocity, but gets opposite results at

lower speeds (?!?!?). Is not very willing to expand, and is thus not very suitable for

the 9,3x57 and is even a bit too stiff for the 9,3x62 also.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Reluctant to expand
-Looses a little weight/shrapnel


--------

Nosler Partion 286 grain: An old classic that has gotten a lot of competition. The

partion between the front and rear guarantees weight retention, but generally the front

part looses all it's lead. The published retained weights include lead that is often

found together with the rest of the bullet.
+Penetration
+Price
-Shrapnel



----------

Rhino Solid Shank 286 grain: This Rhino is also way too stiff, which results in no

expansion in 9,3x62. But be patient, as a "Extra soft" variant is also promised.
+None
-No expansion


-----------

Norma Alaska 286 grain: A conventional bullet with a good reputation, but can't stand up

to the more modern bullet constructions. Does not hold together well at higher speeds or

under stress.
+Price
-Risk of seperation.


--------

Norma Oryx 286 grain: A bonded bullet that stays together very well. It is soft, which

results in a large diameter at higher speeds. Works well in 9,3x57 too.
+Diameter
+Penetration
-Some shrapnel.



--------

Lapua Mega 286 grain: Conventional lead/copper bullet with a good reputation. The jacket

has a thicker portion in the middle, which locks the core to the jacket. The test showed

good results. A lot of bullet for the money.
+Price
+Well balanced diameter/penetration
-Seperation potential


----------

Sako Hammerhead 286 grain: A bonded bullet that can handle most situations. Shows

impressive penetration and diameter. It also expands willingly at all relevant

velocities.
+Price
+Penetration
-Some shrapnel.



--------

Barnes X 286 grain: Barnes X shows once again a high level of technical qualities. The

diameter and penetration is second to none. But I have too much varied experience when it

comes to copper fouling to make it my first choice.
+Penetration
+Diameter
-Copper fouling.



--------

Sellier & Bellot 286 grain: A cheap bullet of conventional construction. Can probably

kill both moose and red deer, but the core seperates from the jacket too easily. This is

probably a great bullet to use for practice. The importer can not promise any more this

year.
+Price
-Seperation risk



---------

Partizan 286 grain: It can probably kill most things, but with a very great risk of the

core seperating from the jacket. No matter what, it's the tests cheapest bullet. You can

buy 15 of these for the price of 1 of the more expensive bullets.
+Price
-Rik of seperation



---------

Swift A-Frame 300 grain: This bullet weight is best suited for the 9,3x64/66, but I have

added the data from the 9,3x62 also. It is a bullet that works under all conditions, but

low speed and moderate BC doesn't exactly help the trajectory.
+Strength
+Penetration
-Short range bullet.


--------


Rhino Solid Shank 300 grain: This bullet is in the same catagory as the previous (Swift

A-Frame 300 grain), but this one delievers a large diameter at the cost of lower

penetration. It's need for velocity to expand reliably, and to get decent trajectory,

diqualifies it from being useful in the 9,3x62.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Penetration
Short range bullet.


---------

Woodleigh Weldcore RN SN 320 grain: Actually a bullet for the old .360NE Nr2, but works

in 9,3x64/66 as an alternative in dence bush.
+Strength
+Penetration
Diameter
-Short range bullet.



-----------------------------------------------------------

"Bråten Exclusive"

As you can see, one of the tests bullets is designed and produced in Norway. This peaked

my curiousity and interest, and resulted in me using these PBP (Performance Bullet

Production) bullets quite a lot these last few years. Both for hunting and for testing.

Thus it is my pleasure to tell you that although I quite easily picked out a couple of

favorites amongst the tested bullets, my real favorite is a slightly different variant.

Since my 9,3x62 has a 18.5 inch barrel (I sacrificed length when I put on a moderator to

keep the overall length down), I have to accept a slightly reduced muzzle velocity

compared to a more conventional barrel length. Therefore the PBP 220 grain is a little

reluctant to expand at my preferred distances. In my opinion.

This resulted in me wanting to modify these bullets so they would expand reliably at a

lower velocity. I discussed this with Kjell Tonheim at the company Arms & Ammo (who

produce the PBP), and he shortly made up a handful of bullets designed to my wishes and

specifications.

The modification was to expand the existing hollowpoint to a slightly larger diameter in

addition to making it slightly deeper. The result was a bullet that was more willing to

expand at lower velocities (longer distance), while at the same time more material at the

end of each expanded petal lessened the likelyhood that they would break off at shorter

ranges. This variation was naturally named "Bråten Exclusive" and functions perfectly in

my rifle.

So it is fully possible to have your bullets custom made if you wish. The price however

is something you'll have to discuss with Tonheim.


----------------------------------------------------------

Test Method:

I am sometimes asked if I get the correct bullet expansion by shooting at short range

with a reduced load. This in comparison to shooting at genuine distances. With reduced

velocity, there will always be a reduction in the rate of the bullet rotation, taking

into consideration that the barrel twist is the same.

I am aware of, and find this topic worth discussing, and thus I have tried out both

methods. Up till now, I have found only negligible differences.

This time I brought the Rhino 250 grain bullet with me out in the field, after having

tested it's expansion with reduced loads at short range. The short range test showed me

that expansion stopped at around 650 m/s. The BC of this bullet is .307, and if we put

this info into the computer, with a muzzle velocity of 760 m/s we will find that the

velocity will be reduced to 650 m/s at a distance of about 150 meters.

After checking that muzzle velocity was 760 m/s, I shot at a stack of telephone

catalogues at a laser measured 150 meters. The result was 2 bullets that looked exactly

the same.

There are however some variables that can create difficulties and varied results. First

of all, you must be in full control of the velocity. A variation here will give a large

difference in the end result. Secondly, the result is dependent on an accurate BC. Then

there is the fact that different test media will show varied results to one degree or

another.

The hard part though is that some bullets can produce a reasonable amount of expansion

within a rather large specter of velocities. Thus, you end up having to use common sense

when deciding if the expansion has reached an acceptable level, and this can make the

science less exact.

Finally, in regards to expansion tests with hunting bullets, I do not claim that wet

paper is the same as live flesh and blood. But it is the most easily used and practical

that that I have available. This goes for both test methods.

So with that in mind, I would say that this test method gives a good idea of what is

happening. And knowing what is happening is good to know. Remember that Norwegian law

demands that expanding bullets be used for hunting."

(note that the last picture with two Rhino Solid Shank show that these 2 bullets acted

exactly the same using both test methods: fast/long distance + slow/short distance)
 
Last edited:
Interesting article. I wonder if he would see better performance with the TSX since he was using original X bullets and had fouling problems like so many other people. Overall his test was pretty fair and balanced and yielded predictable results. I'm curious to see if our intrepid testers have problems getting the 286 TSX up to 2350 as I did or if their rifles behave differently. If they can get the speed then the TSX will be hard to beat. If they can't then the 250 TSX will probably come out on top for a balance of penetration, speed and expansion.

What I really want to see is how the Matrix bullets stack up. Given the results on game I think they'll be the bullet to beat in the "bonded" category, if we choose to break the results down like that.
 
BigUglyMan said:
Interesting article. I wonder if he would see better performance with the TSX since he was using original X bullets and had fouling problems like so many other people. Overall his test was pretty fair and balanced and yielded predictable results. I'm curious to see if our intrepid testers have problems getting the 286 TSX up to 2350 as I did or if their rifles behave differently. If they can get the speed then the TSX will be hard to beat. If they can't then the 250 TSX will probably come out on top for a balance of penetration, speed and expansion.

What I really want to see is how the Matrix bullets stack up. Given the results on game I think they'll be the bullet to beat in the "bonded" category, if we choose to break the results down like that.
Click to expand...

I had pretty much settled on the 270 gr Matrix as my hunting bullet, but have heard from a couple of guys who used the 290 gr on two moose and two bears this fall. It may be the real deal to get both expansion and penetration.

Looking forward to the test results, too.
Ted
 
Why not? said:
I had pretty much settled on the 270 gr Matrix as my hunting bullet, but have heard from a couple of guys who used the 290 gr on two moose and two bears this fall. It may be the real deal to get both expansion and penetration.

Looking forward to the test results, too.
Ted
Click to expand...

That was my choice from Marshall, a few of which I sent on for the test.
 
Why not? said:
Now that is a great report, Dan, with lots of information. Thanks very much for posting it.

Did you do the translation work?

Ted
Click to expand...

No, I did not translate the article, someone on that other site put his Norwegian to use and translated it.

I tried out my own penetration test today with the 285 PPU and the 286 Hornady toady at approx. 100 yards on 1/2" steel. (A full metal jacket from a 30-06/8x57 barely makes it thru). The PPU penetrated about half way thru the steel while the horandy almost made it thru approx 85-90%. The load used was what you provided me( 2440fts). From the look of things, the horandy will do pretty good on the test.
 
Last edited:
hello all,

i do not forget you.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a396/TilleyMan/IMG_5668.jpg
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a396/TilleyMan/IMG_5671.jpg
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a396/TilleyMan/IMG_5659.jpg
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a396/TilleyMan/IMG_5660.jpg
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a396/TilleyMan/IMG_5664.jpg
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a396/TilleyMan/IMG_5667.jpg
taken from here.
h t t p ://forums.nitroexpress.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=94935&page=0&fpart=all&vc=1

i always take with a pinch of salt the results that im not doing lol ...

more seriously the norwegian article is really interesting i had the copy long time and a translation partially made so the real one is even better of course.

but there is a but ...

how come that the PRVI is less efficient that the Lapua Mega?
they are really the same bullet, cant wait to see my results ...

Dan: im surprised by your result on the Hornady bullet, that is one of those that i can t wait to see how it goes. all the reports i ve heard so far was a really weak bullet seems not ...

cant wait to see the accubond and some others of course.

h t t p ://forum.nosler.com/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=30251

cant wait to see my reloading guru to start the process.

all the best.

Phil

sorry was not able to post correctly the pictures but you need to see them ...
 
Why not? said:
I had pretty much settled on the 270 gr Matrix as my hunting bullet, but have heard from a couple of guys who used the 290 gr on two moose and two bears this fall. It may be the real deal to get both expansion and penetration.

Looking forward to the test results, too.
Ted
Click to expand...

pretty sure you will be involved in too ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom