School me on 9.3x57 vs 9.3x62 and TradeEx rifles

Suther

Suther

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
27   0   0
Location
Fraser Valley
So I see these purdy guns over on trade-ex for what looks like a helluva good deal, but they come in some funny european calibers...

I am definitely interested in one of these. I want a shorter range, heavy hitter for a bush gun. These seem like the perfect option. Everything today is all about small and fast, and I wanna try bigger and slower. (my standard rifle is a 270... small and fast...) This would be a deer-bear-moose-elk-bison gun most likely (I think it would be the only gun I have that is capable of bison in BC. Requires minimum 30cal 180 grain bullet with 2000ft/lbs of energy at 100 yards. The only other thing I have that might make that is handloads in my 303...)

So what can you tell me about these calibers and the TradeEx rifles that come in these calibers? Specifically the older ones like the Husqvarna M96 sporters, and not the new ones (Zastava M70s or whatever they are.)

It seems I can get a 9.3x57 for about $100-150 cheaper than a 9.3x62 for a similar condition gun (crack behind tang, some minor surface rust and/or handling marks) although the 9.3x57 you can spend a bit more for a nice specimen. A nice 9.3x62 m96 is less common (I assume cause you guys snatch 'em up as soon as they go up...)

I also read the x62 are the same rifle as x57. They have just been rechambered. Also they may have something done with their magazine to accept slightly longer cartridges? Can anyone in the know elaborate on what may have been done?

One idea I had was to get a x57 and get it reamed to x62 later. This would likely bring the cost up to the same or more as just buying a x62 plus I may run into magazine problems with particularly long x62 cartridges.

Another idea is to just get the x57 and rock it. What are you experiences with it? I have read everything from people get 2400fps with 270grain speers, to people only get 2250fps with 232grain bullets.... I guess the gun ultimately decides whats safe and whats not but what sorta loads do you guys use in your 9.3x57?

I also plan to start reloading, but dont yet (hopefully within a month, but you know how timelines go...) so that is a minor factor. I hear you can't get 9.3x57 ammo anywhere. I can only assume x62 ammo is also not common, but you can at least find it some places?

So I've written a story here...

Opinions? Im leaning towards just get one rechambered to 9.3x62, but I feel like I can get a much nicer gun with a x57, and I could just get it rechambered later... What do you think??
 
The way it sounds, the M/96 or 38 is not the best choice for you. If you want to push it hard, the action is not the best choice. You'll be much better served by a m/98 or other modern action for this.
The idea I perceive is that you want to make a fighter jet out of a WWI biplane. Going cheap is not the way to go if you want to beat the #### out of both rounds.

Now, some of these are rechambered (m/46 and 46A) some are originally chambered for the 9.3×62 (m/649 and 46AN).

And, no, the two rounds are not the same; the X57 operates @ 40 000 PSI while the X62 is set @ 57 700 PSI. Case capacity also make a big difference.

The ammo for both rounds is available. The only source for the X57 is Norma, while many manufacturers (now including Winchester, Remington and Hornady) makes the X62 ammo.
 
Last edited:
It seems that you want to optimize the potential of the cartridge, although the requirement of 2000 ft-lbs at 100 yards is easily surpassed by either 9.3 cartridge. I'd hold out for a 9.3X62 that's built on a 98 action. The 98 isn't as cute or as slick as the smaller 96 action, but it is very strong, and considered by many to be the epitome of bolt actions for big game rifles. A factory sporting rifle is more desirable than a sporterized military rifle, but their cost reflects the fact. A Husqvarna 1600, a Brno ZG-47, or a new CZ-550 would be among my preferences, but they don't come cheaply, and you have choices in the Tradex pages that are under $500.

If you intend to rechamber a X57 to a X62, you might as well just purchase a 9.3X62 sporting rifle to start with. The cost of rechambering will also have to include lengthening the magazine to accommodate the longer cartridge, and this puts your relatively inexpensive milserp into the same price range as a 9.3X62 sporter. If you start with the sporter, your rifle won't be gone for months, while you wait to get it back. If you like the 9.3X57 rifles better, get one, and use it as is, then later, when finances allow, purchase a 9.3X62 sporting rifle if you still think you need one, you might not.
 
Boomer said:
It seems that you want to optimize the potential of the cartridge, although the requirement of 2000 ft-lbs at 100 yards is easily surpassed by either 9.3 cartridge. I'd hold out for a 9.3X62 that's built on a 98 action. The 98 isn't as cute or as slick as the smaller 96 action, but it is very strong, and considered by many to be the epitome of bolt actions for big game rifles. A factory sporting rifle is more desirable than a sporterized military rifle, but their cost reflects the fact. A Husqvarna 1600, a Brno ZG-47, or a new CZ-550 would be among my preferences, but they don't come cheaply, and you have choices in the Tradex pages that are under $500.

If you intend to rechamber a X57 to a X62, you might as well just purchase a 9.3X62 sporting rifle to start with. The cost of rechambering will also have to include lengthening the magazine to accommodate the longer cartridge, and this puts your relatively inexpensive milserp into the same price range as a 9.3X62 sporter. If you start with the sporter, your rifle won't be gone for months, while you wait to get it back. If you like the 9.3X57 rifles better, get one, and use it as is, then later, when finances allow, purchase a 9.3X62 sporting rifle if you still think you need one, you might not.
Click to expand...

So far as the M98 and the 9.3x62 goes, Tradeex does stock that caliber in their Zasatva Mausers, and far cheaper than some of the other options....
 
Boomer, just as a side note, all of the Husqvarna rifles chambered in both 9.3X57 or 9.3X62 are commercial rifles, not ex military. For the M/46 and 46A (9.3X57) they used in the white M/94 actions made by Carl Gustav and for the 46AN and the 649 (both 9.3X62) they used in the white M/38 and "commercial" M/38 with solid left wall.
 
Got a rifle and ammo from Tradeex, a Husky 96 in 9.3X62, could not be happier, easy shooting rifle, accurate, and reliable...
Total cost for rifle and ammo ( 100 rounds of Privi 286 gr) all in, was just north of 500.00... JP.:d

SAM_4113_zps1007a695.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]
 
Baribal said:
Boomer, just as a side note, all of the Husqvarna rifles chambered in both 9.3X57 or 9.3X62 are commercial rifles, not ex military. For the M/46 and 46A (9.3X57) they used in the white M/94 actions made by Carl Gustav and for the 46AN and the 649 (both 9.3X62) they used in the white M/38 and "commercial" M/38 with solid left wall.
Click to expand...

By the way, that Husky 1640 you have in the EE is good value for the money if anyone is interested.
 
TRADEX are good people to deal with I have bought from them A+. The 1600 series looks good, they have 30-06 and 8x57 either caliber loaded with 180gr and up (handloads in 200gr) would serve you well.
A better selection of ammo and bullets.
enjoy
 
Rechambering 9.3 x 57 to 9.3 x 62 is not really financially sound, unless you can do it yourself, since you can get a x62 rifle for $100 - $150 more in the first place.

The major differences you have read about regarding 9.3 x 57 velocities reflect 100 year old loadings versus what guys are actually loading to nowadays. Most handloaders load to the pressure the rifle can take, as far as I can tell. So, if the same rifle is available in 9.3 x 57 (40 000 psi) and 9.3 x 62 ( 57 700 psi), then clearly the action can take the higher pressure and there is no reason to water down your 9.3 x 57 to 40 000 psi. When you load both rounds to the same pressure, you've got about 125 fps difference between them, in my experience.
 
Boomer said:
By the way, that Husky 1640 you have in the EE is good value for the money if anyone is interested.
Click to expand...

Well, the 1640 is for sure a very good one, but in that caliber (and like, say, the .358 NM) they don't come cheap... and the 1640 metallurgy is much, much better than the M/96 family, for sure, on par with any modern action.

As for increasing the pressure of the X57, yes, 125 fps above the Norma "standard" is still likely safe, but running 300 fps above (like running a 270 grainer @ 2400 fps) may not be that safe.. And I don't say the action won't take it (for some time, anyways), but pray for never having a case head failure.
Then, when using a, say 649 in it's original chambering of 9.3X62, keeping it within specs is a good practice. The very long throat these chambers have will keep velocity lower anyways and reaching rocket like speed will need even more pressure to be achieved.

I have not removed a lot of the late "commercial" M/38 actions, but from what I saw they seem to be somewhat harder than the old M/94 or 96 which are made of a very soft core under a hard case hardening. That was the way Mauser designed his rifles to avoid brittle receivers.
 
Last edited:
Why not? said:
I think you should contact Baribal, here http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1144453-Husqvarna-1640-9-3X62-and-Small-Ring-M98-9-3X57, and make a deal with him on the '62.

You won't be sorry.
Ted
Click to expand...

If I had that kinda money for this it would be easy to find something in x62 and just go with it, like the aforementioned Zastava m98 rifles.

Instead I am looking for something that is more like half that price. You can find Husqvarna m96 sporter rechambered to x62 for under $350, and the x57 for as little as $225. For that sort of price I can get the rifle and get set up to reload for it for less than a new Zastava and still have enough left over for a used scope.

I guess one of my big questions is whos actually got a x57 and what do you think of it? Do you wish you had a x62? How many have gone the rechambering route down the road? I have read elsewhere that you can just seat the bullet a bit deeper to deal with the short magazine of the m96?(obviously while working up a load)

Alternatively does anyone with a x62 feel like its too much gun sometimes? (I know I know wtf is too much gun.... lol)
 
Suther,

i have a 9.3x62 and my wife a x57. with a 250 grains the x57 is a good cartridge but this is not a 9.3x62 and will never be.

a x57 is like a good 358 win with heavier bullet and a 9.3x62 is a 9.3x62 so well above.

not the same use for sure.

i wont rechamber one especially with all the x62 available on the market.

and a 9.3x62 is not too much of a gun for sure.
 
Suther said:
If I had that kinda money for this it would be easy to find something in x62 and just go with it, like the aforementioned Zastava m98 rifles.

Instead I am looking for something that is more like half that price. You can find Husqvarna m96 sporter rechambered to x62 for under $350, and the x57 for as little as $225. For that sort of price I can get the rifle and get set up to reload for it for less than a new Zastava and still have enough left over for a used scope.

I guess one of my big questions is whos actually got a x57 and what do you think of it? Do you wish you had a x62? How many have gone the rechambering route down the road? I have read elsewhere that you can just seat the bullet a bit deeper to deal with the short magazine of the m96?(obviously while working up a load)

Alternatively does anyone with a x62 feel like its too much gun sometimes? (I know I know wtf is too much gun.... lol)
Click to expand...


Hear you loud and clear, Suther, and you make perfect sense.

I have rifles in both calibers, and have used both on big game for over 30 years; bears, mountain caribou bulls which are the size of mature elk, and moose. Used the 9.3X57 in a Model 46 to put a moose in the freezer in 2013. One shot, running flat out at close to 100 yd with a 286 gr Matrix round nose. Noel, who posts on here, was impressed to say the least. :)

I handload the 286 gr in the '57 to a bit over 2250 fps, and the difference between it and the '62 on game is negligible. Think about this, the original factory loading for the 9.3X62 was around 2150 fps, and that load was used on all the African game. It was around ten years later that the factory load was increased to 2360, which put it close to the 375 H&H in power.

My 46 is a tad over six pounds, and swings and points like a fine bird gun. The factory irons and a Timney trigger set at three pounds are enough to regularly whack the clanger at 200 meters.







You won't feel feel handicapped with a 9.3X57 and handloads, however you will appreciate a recoil pad in such a dainty rifle.

Best,
Ted
 
Last edited:
I'm plenty happy with the Husqvarna 46a I got from Tradeex. The loads I use in this 9.3x57 include Norma brass & not reformed 8x57 stuff so I don't need to inside turn the case necks to fit the Bullet Barn 280 grainers I launch from 'er. For me, this is a plenty potent & accurate cartridge to work with.

I'll soon be fitting the beasty with Warne bases topped with a vintage Weaver K2.5 scope with Command Post reticle held in low rings. A Timney trigger is on the way as well.:)
View attachment 25999
 
SHELL SHUCKER said:
I'm plenty happy with the Husqvarna 46a I got from Tradeex. The loads I use in this 9.3x57 include Norma brass & not reformed 8x57 stuff so I don't need to inside turn the case necks to fit the Bullet Barn 280 grainers I launch from 'er. For me, this is a plenty potent & accurate cartridge to work with.

I'll soon be fitting the beasty with Warne bases topped with a vintage Weaver K2.5 scope with Command Post reticle held in low rings. A Timney trigger is on the way as well.:)
View attachment 25999
Click to expand...

Why would you have to neck turn the 8x57 brass? Is that only specific to the bullet you load, or is it standard practice for using 8x57 brass to make 9.3x57?
 
Suther said:
Why would you have to neck turn the 8x57 brass? Is that only specific to the bullet you load, or is it standard practice for using 8x57 brass to make 9.3x57?
Click to expand...

An amigo of mine got the same model as mine from Tradeex and found that with the brass he was using (Re-sized 8x57) he had to inside turn the necks to better fit the .368" Bullet Barn projectile so as to allow for smooth chambering of the cartridge in his rifle. Un-reamed loads required forceful chambering.

I reckon that would not be an issue with jacketed .366 bullets, but I found for cast loads using a .368 boolit in Norma 9.3x57 brass that there was no issues with bullet seating/neck distortion or chambering. The rounds drop in clean & they shoot great.

Norma brass being pre-formed to this chambering must account for this.:)
 
This is my 9.3x62, a nice Husqvarna 1600 that I picked up from Accuracy Plus (they have a nice one there now)
The scope is an old El Paso Weaver V-7 with a post and crosshair. Very light, at just over 7.5 pounds with the scope, and accurate.
SAM_3190_zps23178d61.jpg


SAM_3201_zpsad3d8aad.jpg
 
I'd think twice about rechambering a 57 to a 62. If the reamer neck diameter is not exactly the same size as the neck in your chamber you may end up with a ring on the neck of your brass. I've heard of this happening more than once. I have several rifles in 9.3x57 and 9.3x62 from Tradex. They are nice rifles. Also have a 57 that was rechambered to 62 and also a 62 that was rechambered 9.3x64 but have not shot either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom