Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Good 9.3mm Hunting Bullet

I've used 250gr Accubonds and they perform well, however, they are un obtainable around here for the last few years.
Any suggestions on a good bullet? Sometimes the ranges can get out to 400+ yards.

What are you hunting? I'm liking the looks of the Norma 232gr Oryx. CFE223 can push it 2700fps... Reasonably flat.

Dowdle sports and outdoors shows some in stock. Worth a peek. 250 Accubonds that is.

Since it appears Nosler isn't going to make any 250 AccuBonds in the foreseeable future, I'd go with the 250-grain Barnes TTSX. Its BC is almost as high as the AccuBond's, and availability is good.

The 232 Oryx can be driven a little faster, but the BC really sucks.

MD--
I bought the couple of boxes of Oryx 232 gr bullets you posted in the classifieds. I am glad to have them as practice bullets, but they are really stubby little things.

Which 9.3?
I've been using Norma 232 grain Vulkan for deer and bear in 9.3x57.
PRVI makes an inexpensive 285 grain and Speer a 270 grain that expands reliably at x57 speeds on deer and black bear.


Nosler technicians told me not to use the 250AB in 9.3x57 unless I keep the shots under 100 yards.

If you're shooting any of the bigger 9.3s, the Nosler 250 is probably the most accurate I've tried and has an excelent BC.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Axtell,

Not knowing what your hunting with this bullet but I've had great performance with the 250TSX [60 grs Varget] on moose.

Sorry, mainly hunt moose with it. I've loaded up some TSX's last year but didn't shoot anything with them, I run them 2660 ft/s with RS Big Game powder.

What's up with Noslers decision not to produce the Accubond?

I didn't realize the TTSX had a much better BC than the TSX's I have loaded.
Will the TTSX perform properly down to 1800 ft/s, this is ~500 yards?

I contacted Barnes some time ago and was told the minimum expansion for the 250 TTSX was 1600 FPS

Not a writer and have not used the 9.3 but with other calibers my comfort level is 2,000fps for TSX and 1,800fps for TTSX if that helps. Can't imagine a problem as even a solid once they get over around .375 cal. will be a good game getter, if in doubt go for bone.

Nosler has a bunch of projects going right now, and I suspect the 250 9.3 AccuBond is a relatively low-demand item. It's probably on their production schedule before fall.

Are there any bad 9.3 hunting bullets? I was trying to think of how to answer his question, and could not come up with one that would not work.

The accubond and oryx have been good to me. Anybody use the Lapua Mega?

I shot a very large, crippled bull moose at 380 yards with my CZ Carbine [250TSX] and the recovered bullet had opened nearly to the bottom of the cavity and expansion measured at .720.

At 400 yards, yes.

People complain the Speer 270 is too fragile for full velocities in the 9.3 x 62.

I was wondering about the Hornady 286 Interlock for elk . Maybe someone has some ideas .

I couldn't answer because I shoot the wrong bullets for 400 yard hunting in my 9.3, just got in a little ago from working up the 280 gr BBW #13 solid load to an even 2400 fps, it's hitting dead on at 50 yards with the express sights.

The solid along with the 320 gr Woodleigh PP weldcore at 2400 fps makes for a formidable little combo.

I used the original 250 gr X in 2002 on a load of African plains game with great success whether small or large. I would use the 250 gr TSX today.

They shoot good groups at 2,260 fps in my 20" Mark X mannlicher. I think that the 286 grain Hornadys would penetrate deeply and break bones, but I would keep in mind the relatively low, 30-30 like, velocity and rather rounded trajectory.

Mjones,

I've only used the 286 Hornady in Texas, on a few animals up to and including the elk-sized nilgai, and it worked great, penetrating deeply and killing quickly. But that was with Hornayd factory loads, which as I recall was listed at the modern standard of 2360 fps. Didn't chronograph it, but the bullets dropped quite rapidly past about 200 yards--which is as far as I shot anything with it.

Suspect it would work fine at 2500 fps, which is safely possible with modern powders at .30-06 pressures, but I KNOW the 286 Nosler Partition works extremely well on all sorts of big game at 2500.

I use the 286 Barnes and everything shot has behaved appropriately. I've not done anything over 200 yards with it, though.

I settled on the 286gr. partition. It sure does get the job done and shot so accurately in my rifle that it was a no brainer... The price on these really make it a no brainer:

Buy these and you'll thank me later...

If I still had my 9.3x62mm, I'd buy 5 or 6 bags of these babies...

The 286 Woodleigh also shot well in my CZ but I didn't get to kill any critters with em.

My Ruger African shoots bugholes with the 250 grain Nosler Accubond using MuleDeer's RL-15 data, I sure hope they start making them again I only have 100 left! As a back up I would try the Barnes 250 grain TTSX, they shoot real good in my Ruger Alaskan.

I have often wondered how my 320 gr Woodleigh PP's at 2400 fps with a b.c. of .456 would compare to the 286 gr Partitions at 2500+ fps.

IIRC the Woodies are supposed to expand down to 1800 fps, I don't know about the Partitions, and of course this doesn't really matter in 99% of the hunting scenarios, only on the odd chance a buck or bull would appear a bit North of the 350 yard line.

These are what I use for Moose and bear. SPS blem.

SPS has 286 Nosler Partition blems on sale now.

The 286 Partition is a great bullet, one I've killed literally tons of big game with both in North America and Africa.

But the OP asked about an all-around bullets for ranges out to 400+ yards, and any 286 ain't it. Even when pushed to 2500 fps or so the velocity drops to well under 2000 fps at 400-450 yards, and the trajectory is getting pretty steep.

250 Accubonds can easily be started at over 2600 fps, and not only is trajectory very similar to the standard .30-06 180 load, making hits much easier even if not twirling the elevation knob, but velocity remains around 2000 fps even at 450.

Again, I know this from having killed tons of big game with the 250 AccuBond (and some with Barnes bullets, from the original X to the TTSX) on both continents. 250's are indeed a noticeably more practical bullet for ranges beyond even 250 yards.

All of this does NOT mean I don't use 286's, by any means. But from experience I do NOT choose them when ranges might stretch beyond 250 yards.

By weight? I chose the 250 gr X in 2002 for precisely the same reason. I may have to shoot out there a bit. I was getting 2650 fps and knew it shot pretty flat out to 300 yards, the farthest I shot it at the range. My longest shots on the hunt were just shy of 250 yards on an eland and a springbok. The bullet performed well on both.

Yes, by weight. Aside from North American hunting, my CZ 9.3x62 has spent a month in South Africa on a cull hunt, and 18 days in Tanzania on a more conventional hunt. The animals taken have ranged from under 100 pounds to well over 1000.

I have also used both bullets in the wildcat Charlie Sisk and I developed, the .350 Remington Magnum necked up. Since it has just about exactly the same powder capacity as the 9.3x62, it gets the same ballistics. Have used it from Alaska to South Texas.

I shot a very large, crippled bull moose at 380 yards with my CZ Carbine [250TSX] and the recovered bullet had opened nearly to the bottom of the cavity and expansion measured at .720. [/quote)

What was the muzzle velocity? Please and thanks.

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

Just ordered 100 of them, a lifetime supply.

I wish they had the 250 ABs.

Yes, of course, as that is what you do. Me, I was chasing oil and gas from beneath trying to find time to hunt.

Yeah, a lot depends on our profession!

I worked in the oil industry a little, way back during the early 80's Bakken boom--worm's corner and chain hand. But even then was doing a lot more hunting than most, especially during "long changes," since that was my eventual, uh, aim. The rigs were another way to pay for writing and hunting time....

From my personal experience and perspective in owning one 9.3 X 62 over the past six years, perhaps there are a few things I could, or should, add to this discussion.

First off, though, I'd like to say that anything stated by myself is with all due respect to those who have commented, and especially JB who has far more experience with the 9.3 X 62 that I do, or perhaps will ever have.

I'm not a professional in this business, and have had to make a living in another profession, so time and economics have not permitted that I engage in as many hunts in as many places as perhaps I should have liked to. However, wile being limited to eastern Canadian hunts in several provinces, that still covers a huge area (Ontario alone is contiguous to four of the Great Lakes and six of the United States of America, as well as bordering part of the Hudson Bay coastline. We also have an abundance of bird species, small game, medium game and large game, plus several predators)of which only a very small part has been hunted, or even visited, by myself.

I've been a hunter since about the age of fifteen and am now more than two months into my eighty-second year. I started reloading thirty-six years ago. Since then, I've handloaded every centerfire rifle I've owned. In fact, I've only purchased one box of factory ammo over that period, and that was due to owning my first .35 Whelen and wanting some brass for handloads.(The Remington fodder were the 250gr RNs that chrono'ed 2247 fps, average, while advertised at 2400 fps. That's one reason why I don't purchase factory ammo. I was able to get 2600+ fps from some of my 250gr handloads.)

Handloads, over the past 36 years, were made for -- starting from smallest to largest -- .22 Hornet, .223 Remington, .25-06 Rem., 6.5 x 55, .270 Win, 7-08, 7mm Rem Mag, 7mm Wby Mag, .308 Win (for a friend), .30-06, .308 Norma Mag, .300 Win Mag, .300 Wby Mag, .338 Win Mag, .340 Wby Mag, .35 Whelen, .356 Winchester (owned by my son), .375 H&H, .44 Rem Mag, .444 Marlin (for another son and also a friend), .45-70 (multiple, including several in a Ruger #1) and .458 Win Mag. There were often several in several of the afore mentioned cartridges. For example, six .300 Win Mags.

Now, that's not much compared to many on these forums, but I've never been a casual owner of rifles for the sake of saying "I own such-and-such a rifle..." Never a collector. I've owned rifles for one purpose only -- hunting! Therefore, all handloads have not been to produce tiny-little "bugholes" as bragging rights, but the most accurate loads I could safely produce from good to excellent hunting bullets at top velocities. Most of them would shoot MOA or better.

That brings me to comment on loads for my 9.3 X 62. I use one powder and two bullets for hunting. Make no mistake, I've tried several powders and six bullets. The bullets are in order of testing and use: (1) 286 Hornady at up to 2460 fps -- shot one bear at around 2400 MV using RL-15. (2) 270 Speer -- tried several powders and MVs. My rifle simply doesn't like that bullet. (3) 286 Nosler Partition at 2622 fps -- Powder RL-17. Shot a trophy quality bear. One shot and done. Bullet penetrated 30-inches and retained 211 grains. (4) 250gr Nosler AccuBond at 2715 fps using RL-17. Shot another bear with the same or similar results. Bullet made exit and made massive blood loss. (5) 232 Oryx -- RL-15 produces a good reduced and very accurate load at 2450 fps. Shoots five into sub-moa. Good load for woods hunting of medium game. (6) 320 Woodleigh. RL-17 produces well over 2400 fps but testing still in process. Have also tried H414 with reduced MV and better accuracy.

In summary: The two hunting bullets for myself are (or would be) First: The 286 NP and secondly: the 250 AB. Either will reach out to 500 yards with enough energy and velocity to handle a mature bull moose (2000 ft-lbs+). The best all-around powder has proven to be RL-17. It gives 170 fps over-and-above what I could safely obtain from RL-15, with apparently less pressure. QL also says it's safe based on the standards I set for my rifle which is a modern bolt-action with a 22.5" barrel. There is no more evidence of excess pressure than I've ever witnessed in all the magnums I've ever handloaded -- the non-magnums also included. It is THE best medium-bore rifle I've ever owned when measured by several factors that are meaningful to me as a handloading-hunter.

Bob

www.bigbores.ca