Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
The Sakop 9.3x62 brass fired in a new Styer bolt rifle mesured .472" head X .454" shoudler and had a capacity of 78gr. water.
; .454" shoudler is pretty much standard for most Ackley cases on the '06 and others. I made the brass for my 9.3x62 by necking down my cses to take the smaller bullet, loading them up and fireforming. The shoulder angle changed very little, and defintely wasn't 17 degrees- maybe 30.
; Most people don't realize the 9.3x62 is virtually an Improved design with minial body taper. It can be loaded as such and is not restricted to 1922 levels of performance.
; Speer goes to some length to show this with their data on the 270gr., and even then, their loads are quite soft, for the most part. Now, individual rifles will show different pressure with otherwise identical loadings, so one hould know what one is doing.
; My 24.5" 98 Sporter 9.3x62 delivered 2,518fps with 286gr. and 2,675fps with 270gr. Speers. It would do this only with BLC2 and these loads were safe to shoot in the summer time. LeeSpeed's rifle delivered some 80fps or so lower velocity than mine did for the same loads. Chronographs are wonderful tools for use in developing ammo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
OK- here's my favourite loads for the 9.3x62; My rifle was a M98 Sporter with side panels, I don't know what it's maker's name was.
: From my notes:- 24th March 1992 - no primer noted- probably CCI250
::60.0gr. W748 - fireforming WW'06 brass - 270 Speer- 2,268fps
::58.0gr. IMR4064 """""""""""""""""""""""""""""" - """"""""""""""- 2,300fps
::58.0gr. IMR4064 RWS 9.3x62 brass - """"""""""""""- 2,417fps
::60.0gr. IMR4064""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" - """"""""""""""- 2,489fps
:
:24/APR/1988 - Nore I started at 56.0gr. at 2,100fps and owrked up from there, slowly.
: 63.5gr. W760 - Fed 215 Normal 286gr. Yellow tip 2,332fps - 2.125" for 5 shots factory iron sights - 100 meters.
: 64.0gr. W760 - CCI250 - Speer 250gr. Spitzer - 2,372fps too slow, didn't accuracy test.
: 25/4/88 - 60.0gr. H322 - CCI200 - Speer 250gr. Spitzer - 2,610fps - 5 shots - 1,786" factory iron sights - 100 meters.
: 27/4/88 - 68.0gr. BLC2 - CCI200 - 2,588fps - es-33.7fps SD -11.7 - 1.40- 3 shots, .890"- 3 shots - 100 meters. Went up to 70.0gr. but didn't get any readings- too dark.
:
: 22 May 1992
: 65.0gr. BLC2 - 286gr. Norma Yel. plastic tip - CCI200 RWS case- 2,519fps av. accuracy- 1.27"to 1.45" for 4 shot groups. Safe max load in my rifle.
; 68.0gr. BLC2 - 270gr. Speer CCI 200 - CCI200 - RWS case - 2,675fps - average - bit warm for hot weather, dropped to 67.0gr.- still averaged 2,550fps in '06 brass, 2,600fps in RWS cases. 1.2" to 1.6" for 5 shot groups.
: Hodgdon data from 2007 shows 65.0gr. BLC2 with 270 Speer for 2,575fps.
: My rifle consistantly gave lower velocities/lower pressure that Speer's data showed.
; W30/06 brass had a couple grains greater capacity than RWS brassl, showing RWS brass was considerably thicker. Strength would depend on heat treatment - but RWS brass in other calibres shows greater strength, ie:8x68S.
; Model 96 Mausers have successfully been re-chambered to 6.5x68 as well as .264 Winchester magnum with no apparent ill effects. They seem to handle pressure identically to M98's. Their gas handling ports aren't as sofisticated as the M98's, however are still better than any American action. I, for one, am not afraid of my M96 Actions. My 6.5x55, a brand new unfired Carl G. of 1912, trimmed to 22" bl. runs 2,960fps with 129gr. Horandy's without any pressure signs and less case head expansion than Norma factory 156's. I also get 2,875fps with 140gr. Hornady and Speers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
No - never got to use the 9.3x62 for hunting. I was in the process of re-chambering and bead blasting it when it got absorbed into an ex-friend's (lathe location) divorce & it ended up on the floor of a flooded basement for a year in the locked house. The barreled action completely rotted out inside and out.
; I will be using the 270's in the 9.3x57, although I may cup-point them slightly to initiate expansion.
: At this time, I think the 9.3x57 wil make a nice, mild guide gun. At about 2,200fps, the 270's should work OK at the lower velcoties for deep penetration when needed, and for game back-up, a cup-pointed 270 should work just bingo on moose.
: My bro uses 250's in his M94 .356 with 250gr. Hornady's with flattened noses. So far, at only 2,150fps, they drop wounded moose pretty much instantly.
; Course, as with anything, you have to hit them right.
: Edited- Dave- you're right, the 9.3x62, to me, just 'craves' to loaded to it's potential. Since it has the same case capacity as my current .375/06IMP, at 78gr. water (or H380-less messy), it is absolutely amazing what it will do. I am currently putting 235gr. Speers out at 2,845fps from the blown '06 case, along with 225gr. Hornady spire points at 2,875fps, same load. To cut down on my bullet stock, I decided I needed the 235's or 225's for deer and the 300gr. for normal hunting or guiding. I'm putting Interlock 300's out at 2,470fps with the 300gr. Interbonds duplicating the velcoity and point of impact, along with the 3/4" groups at 100 meters. The 9.3x62 'should' be capable of these .375" ballistics as there isn't much difference in the expansion ratios top make a change there.
; I do find it interesting that many people seem to hold to old 'unstable' smokeless powder ballistics of the teens and 20's when loading the same rounds today. Too- some feel because a ctg. was loaded to X pressure in the 20's, it should be loaded to the same pressure levels today, even though powders available today don't have the same problems - develop better energy per grain - and my biggest beef - some feel the M98 & the M96 to be inferior actions. How many .270's, etc. were chambered up in M98's, not to mention the .338's, etc, all with working pressure normally in the 63,000PSI range. Why, with brass every bit as strong, can we not load the old slow movers to the same pressure levels as more modern rounds?
; Nice pictures, btw - could have been taken around here, 4 years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
Some other good reading on the military actions and pressure is in P.O. Ackley's Handbooks 1 and 2. These dwelve into his blow-up tests etc and sruprisingly enough, the strongest action he's ever tested of any action. It's not what you'd think. Loads that blew the rings off other actions, gave normal pressure signs in this particular military action.
: His writing covers case design and it's effects on bolt thrust, barrel strength etc. I am surprised when I hear that some people don't have them. I've had both copies since 1972.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
sé le viè - very interesting - so neither of you would use a military mauser or comercial mauser action for modern rounds?
: Are all those M98's sold comercially in .308Win., time bombs? - I've never heard of any of them blowing up over 35 years of shooting them. I have heard of Remintons and Winchesters blowing, though. So far, I've never stretched the lugs, on the bolt or in the action - maybe I'm playing with fire, maybe not.
: My very first match rilfe had a VZ 98 action, barreled and chambered in the 'full bore' ie:.308. Far as I know, that action is still going strong after 35 years as a .308 or whatever it's barreled to now.
: The first rifle gift I made to my brother was a Mauser 98 in .30/06. It did very well on long range deer with 150gr. at 3,100fps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
I personally wouldn't feed a perfect condition 95, 93 or 96 the same as I would a good 98 either. I also definitely wouldn't limit myself to 38,000CUP when Norma themselves load it to 47,000CUP. Since Husky chambered some 96's for the '06, what pressure did they have in mind?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
Points taken guys.
: About that third lug and gas ports, well, there were actions of similar 'pressure' design from other countries that lacked both. The 98 is the only twin front lug action I'm aware of that has that third lug. As far as being useful, I've never seen it, not that that means it hasn't happened, just that I've never heard of it doing anything but being there. Gas ports and such are good selling points for a maker to show a government official who knows nothing of rifles- sounds good is what I'm getting at.
; The Springfield actions early and newly made along with all the other modern actions lack the gas ports of the 98, and are no better than the m96 in handling escaping gas.
; If you want to see an action that you can't blow the bolt out of, look no further than the Lee Enfield, in any of it's post WW1 guises & even the #3. We tried to blow the bolts on a few and failed. We got a bolt to bend using a case full of bullseye and a bullet plugged barrel, but the action held and so did the barrel. Care to guess at the pressure? Not that that has anything to do with the Mausers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
Baribal - very nice. They sure look good without the thumb-cut, don't they. I couldn't see in the photo, but is the rear bridge without the clip slot? It would be rather superfluous.
The old addage that if one does not understand what headspace is and how to control it/correct it, one has no business handloading, comes to mind.
: My brand new, but used of course, 9.3x57 is case in point. It has too much headspace to shoot with any brass (factory ammo) one wishes to reload. The headspace isnt bad enough to create ignition problems - probably - but is severe enough to require proper case care for the first loading' and firing to move the shoudler to where it should be. The thread on "oversize chambers" comes to mind.
: I concurr that some readers of threads might do some foolish things, but isn't that the natural order of selection in progress? Sorry - couldn't resist that. You are correct, we should be careful how we word posts.:eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
Baribal - are the clips for the 9.3x62 the same as those for the 6.5x55?
: I noticed my pile of .308 clips from Canadian Military ammo(DCRA
) works just fine with the 9.3x57, as they should.
: I-too liked using the clips with the 6.5, which is why I used a B-square mount on the rear sight. The 6.5 just had too much usable range to be restricted to irons. Then I sold it to my moose hunting buddy for his daughter - he got the last 2 clips I had for the 6.5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
Last evening, I found one more 6.5 clip. I didn't know I had 3. Guess I'll have to give that one to Keith, or maybe keep it as I may get another 9.3x62. Although, with the .375/06IMP, I've already got a fast 9.3.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top