New praise for the fat X62

Baribal

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
57   0   0
New article in Gun Digest from Tom Turpin

http://www.gundigest.com/ammunition-reviews-articles/greatest-cartridges/greatest-cartridges-9-3x62-mauser-effective-on-about-everything

Greatest Cartridges: 9.3×62 Mauser, Effective on About Everything

In the late nineteenth century and well into the twentieth, the continental Europeans and the United Kingdom were busy expanding their spheres of influence around the world. No continent experienced these expansions more than Africa.

The Dutch were busy in South Africa, the Portuguese in Mozambique, the Belgians in Zaire, the English in Kenya and Rhodesia, the French in Central African Republic and the Germans in Namibia and Tanzania as primary conquests. Most had a few other involvements as well.

The English produced heavy caliber rifles as well as ammunition for them, suitable for the largest and most dangerous game the Dark Continent had to offer. Alas, while the UK products were excellent and reliable, they were quite expensive, out of the budget range for the average farmer/colonist.

The German colonists living in German SW Africa and German East Africa were very active in complaining to the home country for their need for affordable rifles and ammunition suitable for use against Africa’s big and dangerous game animals.

Germany was already producing what was to become the best bolt-action rifle available with their Mauser Model 98. They just didn’t have a powerful enough cartridge to fit in a standard Model 98 length, to do battle against Africa’s dangerous fauna.

Early in the twentieth century, a gunsmith by the name of Otto Bock, took on the task of developing such a cartridge. In 1905, he introduced the results of his developmental efforts, the 9.3×62mm cartridge – also known as the 9.3×62 Mauser.

The cartridge featured a 9.3mm bullet diameter (.366”) loaded into a 62mm long rimless case. The cartridge was originally loaded with a 285-grain bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2150 fps. It fit nicely in a Mauser 98 action, and operation and feeding was excellent. Later, the cartridge was juiced up a bit, and loaded primarily with a 286-grain bullet with a muzzle velocity of around 2400 fps.

The CIP established a Maximum Average Pressure of 56,500 psi. In modern strong rifles, there is no reason that it could not be safely loaded to 60,000 psi, providing around 2500 fps, if such was deemed desirable. The cartridge became exceeding popular in Europe and in Africa, and still is today.

On this side of the Atlantic though, it scarcely ruffled a feather. Until recently, the last five years or so, no American manufacturer made a rifle for it, no American ammunition company loaded ammo for it, and the major American reloading components folks offered neither bullets nor brass for the 9.3×62. If someone happened to have a rifle so chambered, he was totally dependent upon European sources for loaded ammunition and components.

Things have changed considerably in the past few years. Thanks largely to the efforts of writers like John Barsness, Chub Eastman, Phil Shoemaker, and to a much lesser extent, my modest efforts, the cartridge is gaining popularity by leaps and bounds. And, well it should. It is one hell of a cartridge.

Even old John “Pondoro” Taylor, Anglophil that he was, even had good things to say about the 9.3×62 cartridge. He wrote in African Rifles and Cartridges, “I have never heard any complaints about the 9.3mm. Its penetration is adequate for anything. It has never had the write-up that certain other calibers received from time to time. Men just take it for granted and it goes steadily on its way like some honest old farm horse. In spite of all the more modern magnums and ‘supers,’ the 9.3mm still remains the favorite medium bore of many experienced hunters.”

Today, factory loaded ammunition is available from Federal, Barnes, Hornady, Nosler, and I believe that Winchester has been loading it for some time for European consumption, but, to my knowledge, none has been sold in this country. Bullets are available from a variety of bullet makers in weights from 232 grain (Norma) to a whopping 320 grains (Woodleigh) and about every stop in-between those extremes.

I can’t imagine a better cartridge for chasing elk in heavy timber, rooting a mad brown bear out of the alders, or laying on the winters meat supply by taking a moose in the willows. There is no whiz-bang about the cartridge.

As Pondoro Taylor put it, it’s just a workhorse of cartridges, effective and useful on about anything.

And at the bottom, he shows my comparative picture of the many rounds from Wiki...
 
i shoot a 405 winchester in the 1885 rifle. damn thing kicks and is loud as hell. i'd probably go with the 9.3 if i had a choice. was looking at the ruger number one in 9.3x74 and especially the cz in 9.3x62. 405 hits like a train, but maybe is overkill for most things. always liked the medium bores best.
 
i shoot a 405 winchester in the 1885 rifle. damn thing kicks and is loud as hell. i'd probably go with the 9.3 if i had a choice. was looking at the ruger number one in 9.3x74 and especially the cz in 9.3x62. 405 hits like a train, but maybe is overkill for most things. always liked the medium bores best.

Ruger #1 also is chambered in 9.3x62, just came out recently. Prophet river firearms might have some in the near future.
 
Funny that Internet-trendiness thing didn't happen with the "New King".

You sound as if a cartridge gaining interest due to gun forums is a bad thing?

The New King was a new introduction, the Intraweb already existed when it came around, and of course the www was set on fire when it was released. But so did gun magazines as new releases are always the most exciting thing for a magazine to write about. The 280AI and the 9.3 were both old cartridges that people started talking about and they had a resurgence in popularity.

There has been dozens of old cartridges (and rifles ) become fashionable once again due to shooters seeing one on gun forums. AccurateReloading has inspired lots of guys to get double rifles, build big bores chambered in esoteric cartridges etc. Even the 45/70 benefitted from forums although some gun magazines were championing the 45/70 Version 2 when most shooters had no computer.

But yeah...In North America, I doubt many other than real enthusiastic shooters would have heard of the 9,3 or 280AI otherwise.
 
The one part of the article that makes me smile is . . .

"The CIP established a Maximum Average Pressure of 56,500 psi. In modern strong rifles, there is no reason that it could not be safely loaded to 60,000 psi, providing around 2500 fps, if such was deemed desirable."

As if Joe Average handloader can safely tweak a load based on pressure alone, with no consideration of the brass in question or the powder chosen. Predictions of such and such a velocity based on such and such pressure are all very nice, but it doesn't apply in any meaningful way, and folks shouldn't take it too seriously. When working up loads for my 9.3X62 rifle, pressure signs appeared on the brass long before Quick Load suggested I'd have a problem. And the reason isn't hard to figure out, there's a difference between 9.3X62 brass that has been converted from .30/06 and the slightly more cavernous Euro 9.3X62 brass. If you're shooting across a $100 Chrony and intend to keep adding powder until your 286s hit 2500 fps, you might want to hire a volunteer to pull the trigger.
 
AccurateReloading has inspired lots of guys to get double rifles, build big bores chambered in esoteric cartridges etc...


I gotta get me one of those esoteric cartridges... mine are all of the exoteric variety...



I suppose there's nothing wrong with vanilla.
 
The one part of the article that makes me smile is . . .

"The CIP established a Maximum Average Pressure of 56,500 psi. In modern strong rifles, there is no reason that it could not be safely loaded to 60,000 psi, providing around 2500 fps, if such was deemed desirable."

As if Joe Average handloader can safely tweak a load based on pressure alone, with no consideration of the brass in question or the powder chosen. Predictions of such and such a velocity based on such and such pressure are all very nice, but it doesn't apply in any meaningful way, and folks shouldn't take it too seriously. When working up loads for my 9.3X62 rifle, pressure signs appeared on the brass long before Quick Load suggested I'd have a problem. And the reason isn't hard to figure out, there's a difference between 9.3X62 brass that has been converted from .30/06 and the slightly more cavernous Euro 9.3X62 brass. If you're shooting across a $100 Chrony and intend to keep adding powder until your 286s hit 2500 fps, you might want to hire a volunteer to pull the trigger.

I agree with you. Anyways, there's no need to make it a poor man's magnum. And I must add that today there's no need to use reformed '06 brass neither...
 
The one part of the article that makes me smile is . . .

"The CIP established a Maximum Average Pressure of 56,500 psi. In modern strong rifles, there is no reason that it could not be safely loaded to 60,000 psi, providing around 2500 fps, if such was deemed desirable."

As if Joe Average handloader can safely tweak a load based on pressure alone, with no consideration of the brass in question or the powder chosen. Predictions of such and such a velocity based on such and such pressure are all very nice, but it doesn't apply in any meaningful way, and folks shouldn't take it too seriously. When working up loads for my 9.3X62 rifle, pressure signs appeared on the brass long before Quick Load suggested I'd have a problem. And the reason isn't hard to figure out, there's a difference between 9.3X62 brass that has been converted from .30/06 and the slightly more cavernous Euro 9.3X62 brass. If you're shooting across a $100 Chrony and intend to keep adding powder until your 286s hit 2500 fps, you might want to hire a volunteer to pull the trigger.

Can you adjust the QL formula to take in account the different size brass (add the different brass H2O capacity) or does QL just use a standard capacity for each cartridge? (Like about 75gr for the 9.3)
 
Back
Top Bottom