Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters JB - 375 H&H vs 338 WM vs 9.3x62

Curious what difference in killing / stopping power you have seen and known from others, on large game....large bears as well as game in Africa.

I'd suspect when using all with comparable bullets with good construction and good SD, they might be similar to modest ranges.

Does the 9.3 give up anything to say 250 yds in effectiveness? Do you prefer 250 or 286 in 9.3? What about 375 and 338? Thanks.

I have yet to notice any difference in "killing" power between the 9.3x62 and .375 H&H when the 9.3 is handloaded to modern pressures, of around the .30-06's 60,000 PSI. The .338 has not killed as quickly, on average, and I have used all three cartridges considerably, both in North America and Africa--as also seen hunting partners use them considerably as well.

When the 9.3 is handloaded with a 250-grain bullet to 2650-2700 fps (especially the 250-grain AccuBond) its just as easy to use at 300-400 yards as the .338 with 250's at 2650-2700 fps--but again seems to kill somewhat better, even with heart-lung shots.

From this I tend to believe that bullet diameter and, especially, weight do make some difference at this level. The .338 bullets weighed at most 250 grains, with many in the 200-230 grain range. The 9.3s were split between 250 and 286-grain bullets, and the .375's were all 260-300 grains.

All of which is partly why I've used the 9.3 a lot in recent years, and my .338 and .375 have mostly gathered dust. Have found it a fine compromise between the .338 and .375.

I used the .375 with 300 grain partitions at 2550 alot for 12 years. I killed a bunch of deer with it, as well as various mountain goats and brown bears. In 2013 I got my first 9.3 and began using it with 286 grain partitions at 2400. Since then I have used it on deer, mountain goats, and one big brown bear. As far as bullets smacking critters, I cannot see a lick of difference between the two. The only difference I see is I now have a ".375" that's lighter, seems to kick less and holds more ammo, six instead of four.

The capacity issue may not matter for some, but for me there have been times dealing with bears using the .375 that those two extras would've been greatly appreciated. I have had times with multiple deer where all six rounds got used in rapid succession.

Yep, my .375 (a remodeled Mark X Whitworth Mauser) weighs 9 pounds with scope. My custom-stocked 9.3x62 (a CZ 550) weighs 8 pounds with scope. The 9.3 kicks a little less, and holds five in the magazine....

[quote=Mule Deer]The 9.3 kicks a little less, and holds five in the magazine....[https://youtu.be/9x7Uth3ovF8/quote]

Mule Deer, does your 550 allow 5 in the Mag and also allow you to load one in the chamber with 5 down? My 550 will accept 5 in the Mag, but there’s no room in the Mag to allow that last little bit of depression in order to move the bolt forward. The culprit seems to be the shoulder of the case.

I tied the same thing with a standard FN Commercial 98. No problem with 5 x 30-06 rounds, but no way with 5 x 9.3x62.

Thoughts?

I have struggled with the issue which you have presented. I believe the 9.3-62 loaded to 60,000 psi comes really close to a 375 H&H especially when both are loaded with Barnes TSX bullets. I picked the H&H.

Occasionally a traveling hunter will find himself separated from his carefully assembled handloads and will be forced to use commercial ammo. In the 375 H&H there are many pretty good to great factory choices. Recently I was forced to use factory stuff and was able to buy some SAKO 375 H&H loaded with 270 TSX. Worked really really well, as well as my handloads.

The factory 9.3-62 is relatively wimpy. That stuff isn’t in the same league as the best handloads and usually isn’t loaded with the best available bullets. I want to have access to ammo with the best bullets. For the same reason I wouldn’t want a 375 Ruger. There you are stuck with the Hornady factory stuff and their softs are mediocre plus the magazine capacity is 3. I am unaware of any other factory ammo for the Ruger.

The resident Alaskans and Yukoners love the 9.3 but they never get separated from their handloads.

Lastly, you will hear lots of guys say this or that is pretty close to a whatever. But it still isn’t the “whatever”. The 375 H&H is a worldwide standard for many good reasons.

Those observations on terminal effects/results are helpful when comparing the so-called medium bore cartridges. Thanks John.

Jason

Forgot, the 338 is ok for use as a big gun in NA but it isn’t a 375, not even close.

Ok, gotta ask..

So where does the .35 Whelen fit in the mix, assuming modern pressures?

Had a 338. Sold it. Have a 375 H&H and have used it quite a bit. Have a 9.3x62 and love it. Since I got the 9.3 I haven't taken the 375 into the field. Load the 9.3 with 286 gr bullets and go. Mine holds 5 in the magazine and one up the snout. My 375 holds 2 in the mag and one up the snout. Seriously thinking about selling my 375 and all my loading components for it and just using the 9.3 since I don't see another trip to Africa in my future.

Imho if Africa is in the equation the 375 is the answer hands down. Last time over I used 350gr Woodleighs. They move the 375 from medium bore a lot closer to big bore effectiveness. If Africa is not in the mix, there is not much difference between 270, 286, and 300gr bullets in .366 or .375 diameter.

jaycee,

My 550 will take five 9.3x62 rounds in the magazine and allow the bolt to close, but just barely.

Used a 550 Magnum in .416 Rigby for almost 20 years, and could get three in the magazine and close the bolt with it, but some other people couldn't with theirs. But early on I did a little file work on the magazine follower, when working over the action to make it feed absolutely perfectly, which may have made the difference. Also switched to a different magazine spring at the same time.

Am wondering if a different follower and/or spring would make a difference in your 550?

Rick,

"I have struggled with the issue which you have presented. I believe the 9.3-62 loaded to 60,000 psi comes really close to a 375 H&H especially when both are loaded with Barnes TSX bullets. I picked the H&H. Occasionally a traveling hunter will find himself separated from his carefully assembled handloads and will be forced to use commercial ammo. In the 375 H&H there are many pretty good to great factory choices. Recently I was forced to use factory stuff and was able to buy some SAKO 375 H&H loaded with 270 TSX. Worked really really well, as well as my handloads."

This is partly why I haven't sold my .375 H&H--along with the fact that some countries (and provinces in RSA) allow the 9.3 on buffalo, and in others the .375 is minimum. But have found even those rules are pretty flexible, as my PH in Tanzanian in 2011 allowed me to hunt buffalo with the 9.3x62, after what he saw it did to tougher plains game--and the government game scout went along with it.

However, I normally take two rifles to Africa, partly for back-up if one gets irreparable problems, and when buffalo are in the mix, both rifles are buffalo-capable. In Botswana in 2003, for instance, I took both a .375 and a .416.

The other factor is that, knock on wood, I have so far never been separated from either my rifles or ammo on any African trip, or for that matter any long trip (though some of my friends have been). In fact, the only time it happened was when traveling from one end of Montana to the other. A couple of friends and I went on a bird and deer hunt one year, and we all met in one place and put all our gear in the largest vehicle, a 3/4-ton pickup with a slide--in camper. One of the friends was supposed to grab all my gear from one side of my pickup, while I grabbed the stuff on the other. He missed my ammo bag, apparently because it slid into an obscure corner, but luckily I was using a 12-gauge shotgun and a .30-06, so it was no biggie!

SBTCO,

The .35 Whelen is a fine round, especially for anything in North America, the 9.3x62 has a much better selection of bullets over 250 grains--and many Whelens have the traditional 1-16 rifling twist, which won't handle some of the heavier .35 bullets. Due to the 9.3's slightly larger bore and powder capacity, it can also get an easy 100-150 fps more with the same bullet weights.

Thanks MD,

I haven't killed anything with any of the above but do have 98 Mauser in .35 Whelen I picked up on a trade and hope to get it going in the future.
The 9.3 does sound like fun, though (guys gotta cover his bases!).

John,
I would use a 9.3-62 if I always had “JB” ammo loaded with Barnes TSX 286 grain bullets for buffalo or 250’s, with TSX or E-Tips for lions. Actually, I suspect that those two 250’s would work pretty well on buffalo. As you know, results on buffalo aren’t about ballistic numbers but are about marksmanship. Most hunters shoot more accurately with less recoil.

In RSA and Namibia there are many residents who are really “over the moon” about the 9.3-62.

Incidentally, one of the most experienced lion hunting outfitters likes big 30’s for his clients. The clients are accompanied by two PH’s both of whom carry .500 Nitro doubles. He says the .500’s really crumple lions at about 25 feet. Good fun for the PH’s.

Best to you,
Rick

Very good info JB, and others. I had a 338/06 in the past and WM, the WM was a bit more on the shoulder end than I wanted, and I too enjoyed the greater magazine capacity as well, just because. It hammered some WT Deer with 200 BTs at 2910, hit 2670 with 225 PTs. All 1/2 MOA in a Hart barreled 700.

John, I had assumed that the diameter and weight would be a plus for the larger bore sizes.

No doubt about the factory ammo part, if Murphy's law hit....and yes it can and does.

Great info everyone, appreciate the input by all. To me the 9.3 must seems like a very practical no-nonsense medium bore, with tolerable recoil for many, and great killing power. I was impressed to see the performance you are getting with the 250s John vs say in a 338 WM. Very efficient! No doubt as bore size grows, one often gets more speed for a given bullet weight and capacity.

I've always felt 2 metric rounds that have stood the test of time very well, are the Swede and 9.3. Now doubt the 7x57 has it's place as another outstanding performer. All better with modern components. Curious can '06 brass be used safely and formed to 9.3x62 ?

John, what accuracy does your CZ give? How are the triggers? Any link to a pic of that custom stock? Thanks everyone!

I've used both in Akaska and I prefered the 338. That of course was my experience

I believe there is a piece of the puzzle missing here.....and that's the old tried and true .30-06.. I've been to Africa twice and haven't cared to hunt the big bears of Alaska but have been followed by a "griz" while hinting on horseback in Wyoming. No.....I wasn't forced to defend myself but the guide said to be prepared. I had a .30-06 on that mule deer hunt and wasn't at all concerned about the effectiveness of the .30-06 (loaded smartly with 180 grain accubonds)

So, in my book the stating point is the .30-06 and from there we look upward.

I've built a .338-06 and a .35 Whelen and also built a 9.3X62 and just to make things fun, I also built a .375 H&H. Most of this is a matter of talk as the only thing I've used any of these guns for is to kill a very nice whitetail buck in Wisconsin at well past 350 yards with the .375 H&H.

There is an old saying: Once you've been amongst them, there is no such thing as "too much gun". This, I believe, as having been amongst them I can attest to the immense threat an elephant can pose simply by being there! So given absolutely no experience hunting anything requiring more than a .30-06 I'm comfortable that for me if "it" requires more than a .30-06, the next real step up is the .375 H&H. Yes, there is no argument that the .338 and the .35 Whelen and the 9.3 X 62 are powerful rounds, but the .30-06 is also a powerful round. If we want to step up, let us not take baby steps.....lets get the .375 and go hunting..

I'm sure many here will take issue with this but in my mind it makes good sense!

65BR,

My CZ shoots extremely well, with just about any load averaging 3/4 of an inch or less for three shots at 100 yards, and some even smaller. The trigger is very fine, but I found when adjusting the single-set pull, the set feature went away when the pull was adjusted light enough--leaving a crisp single-pull weight of about 3 pounds.

Here it is in the custom stock, one of Kilimanjaro Rifles' laminates made by sawing a thin slice out of the middle of the blank, then reversing the slice and gluing the blank together again. Despite the dense, fancy grain, the stock is so slim it weighed half a pound less than the rather bulky CZ factory stock of very plain wood.