Getting a 9.3x57
- Thread starter flyinlead
- Start date
That article did leave me rather unimpressed also.
Shot my M96 with fellow CGN member Ton45-II a couple of weeks ago with some Norma Factory 286grs SP ammo.
Both rifle and ammo from Tradeex, of course
He chronographed three rounds, 1972fps, 1972fps and 1976fps.
We each tried two shots, standing at 25yds, with iron sights into the same target.
Those four shots were around a 2 inch group
Most of the rest of the box went to introduce some new people to caliber.
Shot my M96 with fellow CGN member Ton45-II a couple of weeks ago with some Norma Factory 286grs SP ammo.
Both rifle and ammo from Tradeex, of course
He chronographed three rounds, 1972fps, 1972fps and 1976fps.
We each tried two shots, standing at 25yds, with iron sights into the same target.
Those four shots were around a 2 inch group
Most of the rest of the box went to introduce some new people to caliber.
Last edited:
You must remember that the original factory ammo was designed for the old Model 88 Comission rifles, and only developed sround 37,000 cup, IIRC. That is why the velocities are so low.
It is not difficult at all to reach 2200 fps in both later rifles safely with good case life.
Ted
It is not difficult at all to reach 2200 fps in both later rifles safely with good case life.
Ted
Yes, I appreciate that. Just wanting everyone to understand why the velocities are as low as they are.
That was the reason I had Bevan King build the two rifle he did back then. I saw a lovely 88 with a full rib barrel and gorgeous wood here in Whitehorse. Started thinking about what the cartridge could do in a stronger action. Bevan and I talked about it, and he said he would buy a reamer if I had two barrels done up. Thus began the journey.
Again, Ball C2 is magic in this cartridge.
Ted
That was the reason I had Bevan King build the two rifle he did back then. I saw a lovely 88 with a full rib barrel and gorgeous wood here in Whitehorse. Started thinking about what the cartridge could do in a stronger action. Bevan and I talked about it, and he said he would buy a reamer if I had two barrels done up. Thus began the journey.
Again, Ball C2 is magic in this cartridge.
Ted
So is H335 and to just a little less W748 ... pretty constant.
That's the kind of average result you can expect with very little effort with PPU 285 and H335 combo, 8 shots, 50 meters, with original open sights. Some rifles shoot much better than that, though.
The problem which often occurs with higher velocity is the need to correct the original sighting. As these rifles were only offered with fixed rear sights, many come to the sight adjustment "problem".
These rifles were originally sighted to hit 4" higher than the aiming point @ 120 meters, with a 285 grains bullet @ 2067 fps. The resulting groups should not be over 7 centimeters, so, just less than 3" for 5 shots.
The velocity you recorded is pretty "standard" in most of the rifles with factory ammo.
That's the kind of average result you can expect with very little effort with PPU 285 and H335 combo, 8 shots, 50 meters, with original open sights. Some rifles shoot much better than that, though.
The problem which often occurs with higher velocity is the need to correct the original sighting. As these rifles were only offered with fixed rear sights, many come to the sight adjustment "problem".
These rifles were originally sighted to hit 4" higher than the aiming point @ 120 meters, with a 285 grains bullet @ 2067 fps. The resulting groups should not be over 7 centimeters, so, just less than 3" for 5 shots.
The velocity you recorded is pretty "standard" in most of the rifles with factory ammo.
Last edited:
That is very nice shooting with iron sights, Baribal. Presume you are using a six o'clock hold. If so, those sights are right on with your load. Have you chronographed that?
My rifles both were drilled and tapped for scope mounting when Bevan did the barrel job, and shot somewhat better than that at 100 using Ball C2 load giving over 2200. Sighted in three inches high at 100 yd, they were around six inches low at 250 with the 286 gr Norma PP Dual Core.
The Husqvarna FN I still have does the same with a 3X Leupold on board.
Ted
My rifles both were drilled and tapped for scope mounting when Bevan did the barrel job, and shot somewhat better than that at 100 using Ball C2 load giving over 2200. Sighted in three inches high at 100 yd, they were around six inches low at 250 with the 286 gr Norma PP Dual Core.
The Husqvarna FN I still have does the same with a 3X Leupold on board.
Ted
Last edited:
all the accuracy I want is to be able to hit a moose in the boiler room-and my thinking is that 285 gr of privipartizan soft lead moving around 2000 fps is going to pack a pretty big thump.I'd like to hear more accounts of actual effects on a moose hit with these loads-were-did they go right down,go 50 yards-or need follow up shots?
Ted,
In this particular rifle (this one is a M/46) the load gives just above 2130 fps. This velocity gives me the oppotunity to still use the sights but extends the trajectory a bit. Hitting 2.127" high @ 50m gives me a zero of about 165 meters, when holding at 6 o'clock.
Ratherbefishin
As I mostly hunt moose with one of my 9.3X62 or .358 NM, I did not have the opportunity to put a moose down with the X57. But I can tell you this; a quartering moose hit through the lung with a 270 or 285 grains, even with a MV of 2200 fps, acts like being hit by a train. 2000 fps will drop them dead pretty fast too.
There was a survey made in 2004/2005 in Finland, Sweden and Norway on caliber effectiveness on moose (distance before collapsing after the shot, distance and number of shots and all...) which was not conclusive for the X57 (neither for the X62....) but this does not seem to be representative of reality... mine anyways ..
There's quite a few guys here who used the X57 on moose and bear on a regular basis and I can say it drops bear like if they were made of stone (or almost), just like the X62. Others will chime in and give you more feedbacks.
In this particular rifle (this one is a M/46) the load gives just above 2130 fps. This velocity gives me the oppotunity to still use the sights but extends the trajectory a bit. Hitting 2.127" high @ 50m gives me a zero of about 165 meters, when holding at 6 o'clock.
Ratherbefishin
As I mostly hunt moose with one of my 9.3X62 or .358 NM, I did not have the opportunity to put a moose down with the X57. But I can tell you this; a quartering moose hit through the lung with a 270 or 285 grains, even with a MV of 2200 fps, acts like being hit by a train. 2000 fps will drop them dead pretty fast too.
There was a survey made in 2004/2005 in Finland, Sweden and Norway on caliber effectiveness on moose (distance before collapsing after the shot, distance and number of shots and all...) which was not conclusive for the X57 (neither for the X62....) but this does not seem to be representative of reality... mine anyways
..There's quite a few guys here who used the X57 on moose and bear on a regular basis and I can say it drops bear like if they were made of stone (or almost), just like the X62. Others will chime in and give you more feedbacks.
Alright, she came in the mail yesterday afternoon, I couldn't wait to get into that package. Buying old guns is fun because there is a lot more mystery about what will be in the box... not just another shiny stamped out plastic thing that looks identical to the next million.
Its a little rough, but for $225 I am not complaining. Its still a beautiful gun in my opinion. Some day I will refinish the stock. Needs recoil pad asap.
This one had the barrel chopped to 20.5 inches and has no front sight. Thats ok because I wanted one in a carbine length and planned on mounting a scope anyway.
I dry fired it twice and could not believe how nice the trigger is! First you have to pull through all that initial creepy travel, but then it hits "the spot" where the sear actually starts to disengage. Thats the nice part, its really light and pretty crisp. Trigger must have been reworked at some point or are they all like this? Either way I am pleased. It feels like no more than 3 lbs but I don't have a trigger pull gauge.
Now my big issue here- mounting the scope. I had a nikon monarch 1.5-6x42 all ready to go. A little big and beefy for this trim rifle with its 30 mm scope tube, but an amazing piece of quality optics. And the bolt handle won't clear the eye piece, even in pretty high rings. (the objective was floating like 3/8 inch above the barrel)
So I put an old cheap 4X bushnell on also perched way up high on high rings, and the handle just barely clears.
I thought the bolt handle was supposed to be modified for scope, what gives? Maybee some of you guys can check out the bolt handle in the pics and tell me what you think. Has this one been bent for a scope? Is there anything that can be done for it or any replacement that would work better?
Here it is down in the man- cave, please excuse the clutter, no time for artsy shots
Its a little rough, but for $225 I am not complaining. Its still a beautiful gun in my opinion. Some day I will refinish the stock. Needs recoil pad asap.
This one had the barrel chopped to 20.5 inches and has no front sight. Thats ok because I wanted one in a carbine length and planned on mounting a scope anyway.
I dry fired it twice and could not believe how nice the trigger is! First you have to pull through all that initial creepy travel, but then it hits "the spot" where the sear actually starts to disengage. Thats the nice part, its really light and pretty crisp. Trigger must have been reworked at some point or are they all like this? Either way I am pleased. It feels like no more than 3 lbs but I don't have a trigger pull gauge.
Now my big issue here- mounting the scope. I had a nikon monarch 1.5-6x42 all ready to go. A little big and beefy for this trim rifle with its 30 mm scope tube, but an amazing piece of quality optics. And the bolt handle won't clear the eye piece, even in pretty high rings. (the objective was floating like 3/8 inch above the barrel)
So I put an old cheap 4X bushnell on also perched way up high on high rings, and the handle just barely clears.
I thought the bolt handle was supposed to be modified for scope, what gives? Maybee some of you guys can check out the bolt handle in the pics and tell me what you think. Has this one been bent for a scope? Is there anything that can be done for it or any replacement that would work better?
Here it is down in the man- cave, please excuse the clutter, no time for artsy shots
Last edited:
dgradinaru
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- British Columbia
Its a nice gun, the trigger is called 2 stage- so i think that makes your gun a sporter, which used to be a military rifle at one time. the bolt is unaltered so you will need the highest possible rings from weaver or maybe get a smaller scope- like a older weaver. the safety will be pretty hard to work as its not modified for scopes. but over all that would be a great moose gun. i really like the stock.
i my self bought the 8x57 mauser in a sporter with a 98 action in mint condition- for my all around rifle.- gotta like European rifles and cals.
i my self bought the 8x57 mauser in a sporter with a 98 action in mint condition- for my all around rifle.- gotta like European rifles and cals.
Last edited:
Hard to say for sure only with those two pictures, but my guess is that it's a shortened model 46A. HVA did not use ex-military actions for their sporting rifles, only in-the-white ones, freshly out of the manufacture line, but they used the two stage trigger.
If you provide S/N we can date it for you. Check out the Husqvarna sticky thread for matching models.
If you provide S/N we can date it for you. Check out the Husqvarna sticky thread for matching models.
I thought it may have been military because it has the thumb notch, do they all have this? I will PM you that SN, Baribal
I like the stock as well, thats one reason I bought this one.. it has lots of character and some neat grain and colour in it. Should be nice when refinished.
I will be getting that bolt handle bent or cut and welded or whatever they do.. scope is already too high up there. will have to replace the safety with one of the low swing types. Would Western gun parts sell those?
Can't wait to shoot this baby, thanks to "Why Not?" I have a set of RCBS dies and 20 9.3X57 brass on the way
I like the stock as well, thats one reason I bought this one.. it has lots of character and some neat grain and colour in it. Should be nice when refinished.
I will be getting that bolt handle bent or cut and welded or whatever they do.. scope is already too high up there. will have to replace the safety with one of the low swing types. Would Western gun parts sell those?
Can't wait to shoot this baby, thanks to "Why Not?" I have a set of RCBS dies and 20 9.3X57 brass on the way
Last edited:
Make sure that whoever does the bolt handle job knows what they are doing. The best way is to have a new handle welded on. You can have the original forged to a low profile, but they always end up very short in length. Not the best for a hunting rifle that you may want to bring into action quickly.
Ted
Ted
They other way to modify the bolt handle is to carefully grind the outside hump where the handle turns downward and scallop it to clear. I've done this on several 96s and 98s and it works fine, just don't take too much off. You end up with a nicely shaped scalloped flat on the outside of the handle from where it turns downward to about 1/2 way down the shank. Sorry if the explanation isn't clear, but I'm not where I could send you a photo. If you can look at a commercial Parker Hale bolt you would see what I mean. Anybody out there have a PH that could put up a photo of the bolt handle?
Hmmm yes, I have thought about the bolt handle and I think I would do what you advise, Why Not?, because I want a nice long handle on there that is easy to work and has lots of clearance from the scope so that my fingers are not interfering. Are there any smiths that you would recommend for this work? I assume I could just send somebody the bolt and not the whole gun.
Grinding it myself would be an option, but I don't want to mess it up and then give something to a gunsmith that is hard to work with because I took too much material off or something. And it might not quite be enough to do it.
Baribal, thanks for dating the gun and giving me all that info. So 1943 is when this rifle came to be. The story is that husqvarna bought military actions from Carl Gustafs up until the end of WW2, but they were all brand new when they were birthed into these fine sporting rifles.. no surplus stuff. Thanks for clarifying that.
Just got a couple hundred pounds of wheel weight lead today, should have lots of fun when reloading and casting equipment comes in.
Grinding it myself would be an option, but I don't want to mess it up and then give something to a gunsmith that is hard to work with because I took too much material off or something. And it might not quite be enough to do it.
Baribal, thanks for dating the gun and giving me all that info. So 1943 is when this rifle came to be. The story is that husqvarna bought military actions from Carl Gustafs up until the end of WW2, but they were all brand new when they were birthed into these fine sporting rifles.. no surplus stuff. Thanks for clarifying that.
Just got a couple hundred pounds of wheel weight lead today, should have lots of fun when reloading and casting equipment comes in.
Actually, you are missing a part of the story, which is in fact more complicated than that;
HVA bought part of the remaining stock of M/94 actions when CG stopped the production of the M/94/96 rifles (+/- 1925, but they assembled limited runs until 1932).
HVA used their CG actions until 1937 (Model 46 1927-1937). The Model 46 was only made in 9.3X57.
Then they started buying M/98 actions from FN (1937-1941 Model 146 and Model 246 9.3X62 1939-41) until the supply dried because FN plant was took over by the Germans in 1940.
In 1941-45 they used their own made M/38 actions to build the Model 46A (your rifle) and model 46AN (9.3X62, 1942-43). They also offered the model 46B in 6.5X55 from 1941-42.
After the WWII (1944-1946ish) they continued using their own M/38 actions for their new model 640, at the begining using actions with the thumb cut-out (and the M/46 style stock) then ending up using the "commercial" or "solid wall" version of the M/38 with a new stock (the "beaver tail" fore end).
Then, the FN M/98 actions became available again. They started using them again but did not change the model designation (Model 640), so it stayed around from 1946 'til 1953, when they introduced their own 1640, but some 640 showed up later than that (remaining stock).
The dates I gave through P/M were for the military M/94/96/38 production, the civilian production used pulled out of the line actions from both CG and HVA.
HVA bought part of the remaining stock of M/94 actions when CG stopped the production of the M/94/96 rifles (+/- 1925, but they assembled limited runs until 1932).
HVA used their CG actions until 1937 (Model 46 1927-1937). The Model 46 was only made in 9.3X57.
Then they started buying M/98 actions from FN (1937-1941 Model 146 and Model 246 9.3X62 1939-41) until the supply dried because FN plant was took over by the Germans in 1940.
In 1941-45 they used their own made M/38 actions to build the Model 46A (your rifle) and model 46AN (9.3X62, 1942-43). They also offered the model 46B in 6.5X55 from 1941-42.
After the WWII (1944-1946ish) they continued using their own M/38 actions for their new model 640, at the begining using actions with the thumb cut-out (and the M/46 style stock) then ending up using the "commercial" or "solid wall" version of the M/38 with a new stock (the "beaver tail" fore end).
Then, the FN M/98 actions became available again. They started using them again but did not change the model designation (Model 640), so it stayed around from 1946 'til 1953, when they introduced their own 1640, but some 640 showed up later than that (remaining stock).
The dates I gave through P/M were for the military M/94/96/38 production, the civilian production used pulled out of the line actions from both CG and HVA.
I've picked up several very good rifles very cheap because the bolts were butchered-some I was just able to grind and polish,others had material added by welding then grinding and polishing.Some I flattened out the bolt ball like a Remington,they all work well and look just fine.Grinding a radius on the bolt handle often accomodates a medium sized scope bell.Since my 9,3x57 is considered a shorter range rifle,low powered scopes are all you need anyway-I like the older 4X M-8 Leupolds
