Anyone here actually using the 9.3x66 - input required
- Thread starter Whelen B
- Start date
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
I'm interested in it too. Nice to see you embracing the extra 8 thou. 
Got so tired of reading his and Sitton's articles that I quit buying those gun rags. Maybe I should thank them, saved me a pile of money!It's a lengthened 9.3x62 with the shoulder moved forward (same angle) with a longer case length of 2.6" and a COAL of 3.340". It fits five into a Sako rifle's belly and works with a standard .473" bolt and the "M" action. Factory ammo sends various 286gr bullets out at 2559. Not as powerful as the x64 version which is a different critter.
A supplier has told me I can get the new Sako brass at present but it is spendy.
Any real life experience with it out there?
You know, it is interesting when one considers that the 9.3X62 has been killing really big game for more than 115 years with the 286 gr bullet loafing along at a tad over 2350 fps....and that it can be easily loaded to over 2500 fps with good accuracy to well beyond 300 yd.
BTD. We regularly clean the pigs off the rail at 300 meters with 286 gr bullets, and they do it with authority, much more reaction than with a 300 Mag!
Oddly enough, I was talking with BUM earlier this evening about this, and related to him that there is noticeably more recoil in my rifles, all of which weigh less than 8 1/2 pounds with scope, when loaded to 2500+.
I have no problem with anyone who wants 2600 fps, but have been amply satisfied with 2400 for quite a few years now.
Ted
BTD. We regularly clean the pigs off the rail at 300 meters with 286 gr bullets, and they do it with authority, much more reaction than with a 300 Mag!
Oddly enough, I was talking with BUM earlier this evening about this, and related to him that there is noticeably more recoil in my rifles, all of which weigh less than 8 1/2 pounds with scope, when loaded to 2500+.
I have no problem with anyone who wants 2600 fps, but have been amply satisfied with 2400 for quite a few years now.
Ted
Thank Big
You forget the "cool" factor. I like that new Sako thing.
You know, it is interesting when one considers that the 9.3X62 has been killing really big game for more than 115 years with the 286 gr bullet loafing along at a tad over 2350 fps....and that it can be easily loaded to over 2500 fps with good accuracy to well beyond 300 yd.
BTD. We regularly clean the pigs off the rail at 300 meters with 286 gr bullets, and they do it with authority, much more reaction than with a 300 Mag!
Oddly enough, I was talking with BUM earlier this evening about this, and related to him that there is noticeably more recoil in my rifles, all of which weigh less than 8 1/2 pounds with scope, when loaded to 2500+.
I have no problem with anyone who wants 2600 fps, but have been amply satisfied with 2400 for quite a few years now.
Ted
You forget the "cool" factor. I like that new Sako thing.
Last edited:
My factory 9.3 x 64 gives me about 2660 with a 286gr and 24 inch bbl.
From my readings, it sounds like the x66 does not get you much further. Cool factor aside (cause it would be), I think it is one of those cases of diminishing returns.
I still prefer the x62 for all round rifle. Many of the african magazines consider the x64 too fast for effective use on game. Heavy and moderate velocity is still their rule of thumb.
From my readings, it sounds like the x66 does not get you much further. Cool factor aside (cause it would be), I think it is one of those cases of diminishing returns.
I still prefer the x62 for all round rifle. Many of the african magazines consider the x64 too fast for effective use on game. Heavy and moderate velocity is still their rule of thumb.
A couple years ago I bummed a couple cases off a guy at the range (and made sure I returned them at the cost per case!!) and did a few measurements against some lapua 9.3x62 cases, using water and a seated bullet with a groove cut lengthwise, in order to get the most accurate comparison.
I don't have the notes handy, but I recall the difference was around 3 grains, or a little less than 4 percent.
Using the 1/4 rule (increase in case capacity increases velocity by one fourth of the percentage of capacity increase at equal pressures), this indicates 25 or so fps potential.
My understanding is that the 9.3x66 was simply intended as a 9.3x62 +P, loaded to modern pressure with the body lengthened in order to justify a 'new' cartridge and prevent it from being used in a 9.3x62 rifle
I don't have the notes handy, but I recall the difference was around 3 grains, or a little less than 4 percent.
Using the 1/4 rule (increase in case capacity increases velocity by one fourth of the percentage of capacity increase at equal pressures), this indicates 25 or so fps potential.
My understanding is that the 9.3x66 was simply intended as a 9.3x62 +P, loaded to modern pressure with the body lengthened in order to justify a 'new' cartridge and prevent it from being used in a 9.3x62 rifle
Did they say at what range they consider it too fast?
"every 300 Magnum becomes a 30-30 at some range"
The articles that I read in the past (from African published magazines) did not specify exact ranges but just that at normal savanna type hunting (which I took to mean 50-150 yds ), the penetration was not significantly improved by the x64 velocity.
If I recall, they also argued that the drop of the bullet with the extra 200 ft/sec is not greatly improved at those normal ranges.
I recall they preferred the x62 to the x64 in buff hunting. The bullet is more predictable, ..that sort of arguement.
I will have to try and look up those articles.
If I recall, they also argued that the drop of the bullet with the extra 200 ft/sec is not greatly improved at those normal ranges.
I recall they preferred the x62 to the x64 in buff hunting. The bullet is more predictable, ..that sort of arguement.
I will have to try and look up those articles.
I am on my way to the range in a few minutes to try 57 gr of RE15 with the 286gr Hornady. Have killed tons, literally, of moose, caribou and bear with the 286 gr Norma PPDC, but my supply has dwindled down to nothing, so going to check these out. Guessing 2300 or so. Will continue the hijack when I report back.
Whelen B , if you get a '66 let me know. There is a part box of 300 gr Spitzer Barnes Originals in my loading room I'll send your way.
Ted
Whelen B , if you get a '66 let me know. There is a part box of 300 gr Spitzer Barnes Originals in my loading room I'll send your way.
Ted
Just got back from the range: 286 Hornadys ahead of 57gr RE15 and CCI 200 primers averaged 2270 fps in my old long-throat Husqvarna. This was a starting load, and pretty mild. Guessing 60 gr will be about right, which is where the Normas worked very well.
The point here is whether the 3 gr, which is 5%, more capacity of the '66 case will make a really significant difference in performance. We'll see what happens with the heavier charges in the '62. I am quite interested in hearing some actual velocity figures for the 9.3 SAKO round.
Have a good weekend Guys!
Ted
The point here is whether the 3 gr, which is 5%, more capacity of the '66 case will make a really significant difference in performance. We'll see what happens with the heavier charges in the '62. I am quite interested in hearing some actual velocity figures for the 9.3 SAKO round.
Have a good weekend Guys!
Ted
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
So I take it you didn't get a bear last night Ted?
FWIW my x62 burns 62.5gr of RL15 to get the 286 Norma to 2350.
FWIW my x62 burns 62.5gr of RL15 to get the 286 Norma to 2350.
Never got away. Ended up visiting a friend in the hospital.
I'll post what it takes to get there in mine. Might end up using 3031. It does very well in the '62.
Yours is a Husqvarna too, right? Everyone I have seen has almost 3/4" of freebore. Those Swedes are pretty smart cookies!
Ted
