Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: mudhen] #13783565 04/30/19
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,985
satx78247 Offline
Campfire Guide
Offline
Campfire Guide
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,985
mudhen,

The reason that members don't like posting sources is:

1. Many people, who request "sources", want to waste the person's time looking for exact sources.
(Frankly, I used to go do the sort of searching to prove a point but QUIT, when I figured out how few people really needed/wanted the information.)
2. SOME "requesters" just want to argue about something OR they are just trolling.
3. SOME "requesters" want the requested information but are too slothful to do their own research & would prefer that someone else go do the work for them..
4. SOME "requesters" ask for sources just to try to avoid revealing that their opinion just might be incorrect.
or
5. Any number of other possibilities.

It's my OPINION that BEFORE a member asks for sources that they should do their own research & see if the original commenter is correct.

yours, tex

Last edited by satx78247; 04/30/19. Reason: add

"VICTORY OR DEATH"

William Barrett Travis, Lt.Col., comdt.
Fortress of The Alamo, Bejar
F'by 24, 1836
300 BP

Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: icedog] #13783676 04/30/19
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 57
gumfighter Online Content
Member
Online Content
Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 57
My copy of Big Bore Rifles and Cartridges was published in 1991 by Wolfe. It covers a lot of loading data and author's experience with the cartridges and bullets used on big game. Bob Hagel has numerous articles in it.. I think a lot of the articles were published in Handloader. I can't figure out how attach pics from my computer to my reply, but I can email pics of the cover.

palessiumich.edu

Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: satx78247] #13783771 04/30/19
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 13,810
mudhen Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 13,810
Originally Posted by satx78247
mudhen,

The reason that members don't like posting sources is:

1. Many people, who request "sources", want to waste the person's time looking for exact sources.
(Frankly, I used to go do the sort of searching to prove a point but QUIT, when I figured out how few people really needed/wanted the information.)
2. SOME "requesters" just want to argue about something OR they are just trolling.
3. SOME "requesters" want the requested information but are too slothful to do their own research & would prefer that someone else go do the work for them..
4. SOME "requesters" ask for sources just to try to avoid revealing that their opinion just might be incorrect.
or
5. Any number of other possibilities.

It's my OPINION that BEFORE a member asks for sources that they should do their own research & see if the original commenter is correct.

yours, tex

Somehow, I suspect that Mule Deer has spent considerably more time than you have researching the history of cartridge development.

When a member states a "fact" that is at odds with the results of another member's research and personal experience, that member is certainly entitled to ask for source(s) that identify the origin of the conflicting statement as well as sources that support the conflicting statement.

It's not a matter of being lazy or argumentative--it's an attempt to nail down pertinent information. It's called learning.

Last edited by mudhen; 04/30/19.

Ben

Some days it takes most of the day for me to do practically nothing...
Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: icedog] #13783930 04/30/19
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,985
satx78247 Offline
Campfire Guide
Offline
Campfire Guide
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,985
gumfighter,

THANKS for trying.

Fwiw, I was once privileged to meet Mr. Hagel, when he was a lecturer at the MP Field Grade Officer's Refresher Course in 1981 at Ft. McClellan, AL. = NICE guy, was he. - After his presentation was completed, he insisted on taking the ones of us who were his escorts out for supper, which is unusual.
(Most VIPs treat escorts/LEO/security personnel as if we are "invisible", "beneath them" & "unimportant")..
IF memory serves correctly, Mr.Hagel passed away about 15 years ago.

Note: The NICEST people that I ever had to provide security for were US Senator John Warner & his then wife, Elizabeth Taylor-Warren, who spent a weekend at our post on a Congressional "fact-finding trip". = A TRUE Virginia, of the old school, gentleman was the Senator & she was not only polite/friendly but tried to make our mission easier. - NOT what I expected a major Hollywood star to act like..

yours, tex


"VICTORY OR DEATH"

William Barrett Travis, Lt.Col., comdt.
Fortress of The Alamo, Bejar
F'by 24, 1836
Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: icedog] #13783950 04/30/19
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 183
sixfive Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 183
A quick thanks to everyone who provided their experiences with the lighter weight Norma bullets. I appreciate it!

Alpha

Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: mudhen] #13783971 04/30/19
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,985
satx78247 Offline
Campfire Guide
Offline
Campfire Guide
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,985
mudhen,

FYI, I was NOT talking about "Mule Deer" (in my post to you, as I suspect that you knew), who is a nice guy, but rather about several members here on the forum, who fit what I said to a tee. = I remember one "requester" in my early days on the forum, who kept insisting that I go find the original sources, to include the exact quotes, that I had mentioned in passing in a comment.

When I did post the sources (I looked them up in our college library), the member then said, "I don't agree with those sources. Go find other sources.". When I looked for/found/posted other sources, he then demanded more & different sources. = Like I said, some people just want to be argumentative & are happy to waste everyone else's time, refuse to believe that they just might be wrong on any subject OR they want to start "a flame war".
(One of the gun forums, that I've belonged to for over 13 years, has finally lost patience with & banned numerous such haters, "keyboard commandos" & trolls.).

In case you haven't noticed, we have our ration of TROLLS on this forum, as well as some "who know NOT & know NOT that they know NOT". . Thankfully those drones are far outnumbered by many GREAT/helpful members.

yours, tex

Last edited by satx78247; 04/30/19. Reason: clarity/addenda

"VICTORY OR DEATH"

William Barrett Travis, Lt.Col., comdt.
Fortress of The Alamo, Bejar
F'by 24, 1836
Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: icedog] #13789927 05/03/19
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,291
Hook Online Content
Campfire Regular
Online Content
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,291
I would also like to thank those who shared their experiences using the lighter bullets in this caliber. I love these older calibers and try to use the traditional bullets types that they made their reputations with. When it comes to the 9.3X62 though, I was given a bag of 232 gr bullets along with it and I'm just too cheap to not use them up. Fortunately, they shoot to about the same POI at 100 yards as the 270 and 286 bullets I've tried, so I can pretty much use them all interchangeably for hunting.

Tex, I am also starting the process of working a load for some 280 gr gas checked cast bullets. First outing was using 5744 and reduced H4895 loads. They were midrange loads, probably in the 1600 fps range, and were in 3-4 MOA. I would love to hear about the loads you have for this caliber. If you prefer not to share your loads out on the open net, feel free to pm me. If I can come up with something that shoots really well, the jacketed bullets may get awful lonely sitting on the shelf....

Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: icedog] #14151980 09/24/19
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,667
GSSP Offline
Campfire Guide
Offline
Campfire Guide
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,667
After screwing up the accuracy for the 250 AccuBond and 286 Partitions in my beloved custom Pre 64 M70, I tried the 250 E-tips which helped but the 250 TTSX put the "A" back in accuracy for my rifle, running 2550 fps. Headed out for elk in less than 2 weeks.

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]

Alan


[Linked Image]
Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: icedog] #14151991 09/24/19
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,667
GSSP Offline
Campfire Guide
Offline
Campfire Guide
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,667
Hey Mule Deer,

How far out, impact velocity wise, would you take the 250 TTSX?

Thank you,

Alan


[Linked Image]
Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: icedog] #14152545 09/25/19
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,683
pabucktail Offline
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,683
Alan, if I remember right it's 1600 fps, but I can't find my notes so I'd recommend calling Barnes to make sure. Each bullet they make seems to have specific and varied minimum expansion velocities. I found this out while researching what bullet to use for reduced loads for my son's 9.3.

Bravo

Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: smithrjd] #14159651 09/27/19
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 676
Elvis Offline
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 676
Originally Posted by smithrjd
With the Norma Oryx 232's, I seated them about a caliber into the case, no way they would hit the lands. Way to short. No where near the mag limit either.


I seat them about half a calibre deep but my 9.3x62 is a single shot so the rounds aren't subject to recoil.

Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: icedog] #14160606 09/28/19
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 93
OttoG Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 93
I used the 232gr Vulkan at 2,600fps on some deer and a moose calf - worked well

I then changed to the 232gr Oryx at same velocity and shot 2 bulls and a cow moose over 2 years. The oryx was OK but on the last bull I overstretched it shooting a hard angling bull at a full run because I thought I had wounded it (actually I clean missed). The bullet penetrated the left ham, excited, entered the abdomen and stopped against the diaphragm. The bull was shot an hour later. The recovered oryx was virtually a disc and had lost very little weight.

It was an unfair test but I'm not convinced that in this weight bonded is better. Sure it loses less weight but the frontal area means that penetration is no better than the vulkan which by shedding weight as the jacket peels back reduces frontal area. Some supposition but I did test in paper and observed this

Last edited by OttoG; 09/28/19.
Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: Dirtfarmer] #14164875 09/29/19
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,205
sidepass Online Content
Campfire Guide
Online Content
Campfire Guide
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,205
Originally Posted by Dirtfarmer
Originally Posted by VernAK
Originally Posted by smithrjd
That's JB's loads that I have used when I first got a CZ 550 in 9.3X62. Never had to look any further.



John saved me money and time by publishing that data......60 grs of Varget and the 250 TSX works just fine.

Varget works well in my 9.3 as well as in two 22-250s with heavier bullets.

Yep, John saved me money, too

But, this Fire business in general has cost me more than I've saved... blush

laugh

DF

Applies to many of us l'm sure. Varget rocks in my 308 Win also.

Last edited by sidepass; 09/29/19.

Never take life to seriously, after all ,no one gets out of it alive.
Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: icedog] #14204509 10/15/19
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 6
404Viejo Offline
New Member
Offline
New Member
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 6
IIRC Mauser claimed the 9.3x62 was their own invention; they did refer to it as "our 9.3x62" in pre WW II catalogs. Again IIRC, the tradition of Otto Bock being given credit for it started with Frank Barnes and his first edition of Cartridges of the World. One of the other forums, possibly African Hunting, had quite a discussion several years ago on who came up with the round, and it ended with Mauser as the winner.


All the best - Dave


Strongly held opinions aren't necessarily the same as well informed opinions
Re: JB ... your 9.3x62 loads? [Re: 404Viejo] #14240716 10/29/19
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 562
yukonphil Offline
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 562
Originally Posted by 404Viejo
IIRC Mauser claimed the 9.3x62 was their own invention; they did refer to it as "our 9.3x62" in pre WW II catalogs. Again IIRC, the tradition of Otto Bock being given credit for it started with Frank Barnes and his first edition of Cartridges of the World. One of the other forums, possibly African Hunting, had quite a discussion several years ago on who came up with the round, and it ended with Mauser as the winner.



this is only in North America about 9.3x62 mauser in europe they say 9.3x62 with development done by a gunsmith with the name of Otto Bock.

in the time of our gun registry i had a rifle registered with 9.3x62 mauser for caliber i tried to explain to the shop where i buy there is no such a thing. useless needless to say lol.

Page 3 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  RickBin, SYSOP 

RR1
Who's Online Now
636 registered members (10gaugemag, 01Foreman400, 160user, 1234, 12344mag, 75 invisible), 2,954 guests, and 346 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
RR2/3










Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2020 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
 
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3
(Release build 20190728)
PHP: 5.6.40 Page Time: 0.066s Queries: 15 (0.004s) Memory: 1.1413 MB (Peak: 1.4015 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2019-12-07 22:20:39 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS