Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 9.3x62's disappearing

Not trying to argue but the 9.3 can use a 325 gr bullet also. I am just saying the 9.3x62mm can do it with less recoil at moderate velocities with bullets designed to take down heavy game. The heavy bullets I see for the .338 are VLD like you said which I don't think are designed for deep penetration in heavy game. That is where the round or blunt nose bullets shine

Not trying to be antagonistic at all, just stating facts. Swift makes 275 A-Frames and Woodleigh among others makes 300 FMJ and 300 RN SP for extreme penetration with the 338 Win Mag. It can achieve higher velocities and more energy down range with those weights than the 9.3x62 can.

The .338 is a great round but just doesn't have the nostalgia of the Mauser round. I really don't think the game will know the difference but if I were going to go after Elephant I would go with the proven 9.3, not that I am going Elephant hunting any time soon). The new Rigby Highland Stalker in 9.3x62mm would be the perfect "one rifle" to hunt Africa. I like the idea of a lighter rifle that has the proven power to just plain work and not beat the crap out of you. For just plains games I might go with a .338 but it would probably be a .338-06

So! And with a whole lot more recoil too.

I don’t know what a whole lot more is but in a 7.25 lbs rifle with 300 gr loads below are some approximates:

338 Win Mag
Recoil Impulse: about 4.7 lbs-sec
Recoil Velocity: about 21 fps
Recoil Energy: about 49 ft-lbs

9.3x62
Recoil Impulse: about 4.3 lbs-sec
Recoil Velocity: about 19 fps
Recoil Energy: about 42 ft-lbs

While the 338 Win Mag shows a bit more, both are fairly stout in a 7.25 lbs rifle setup. Both being close to what a 375 H&H yields in a 8.5 lbs rifle with 300 grain loads.

Super cub,

Stop that damn logic. This is no place for logic and common sense.

-Bisley

I have owned a 338 Win mag and also a 375H&H as well as a 9.3X74R and now a 9.3X62 The 9.3X74R and 9.3X62 are both loaded with the same bullets at the same speed as measured over my Chronograph (ok . almost the same speed, within about 20 FPS)

My 338 was used with 22 grain Horandys, 250 grain Hornady RN and 250 grain Nosler Partitions. The 225 grain Hornadys broke up badly and penetration was poor, but the 250s were good and the 250 Gr Noslers were perfect.

But I sold my 338 after several kills and went back to my 375H&H. The 338 always worked well with good bullets, but to be honest, it didn't seem to kill elk any better then my 3006 or 270. No worse, but no better or faster.
My 375 does hit harder. Why?.................well I have my theory but I won't go into it now. It's just what I have seen, and I have seen a LOT of elk killed in over 50 years of hunting and guiding for them.

In the last 10 years I have been getting familiar with the performance of the .366" 286 grain bullets and I have to say, I can't see ANY difference between the 9.3X74R and 9.3X62 loaded with good 286 grain bullets and the 375H&H loaded with good 270 grain bullets.

I don't say that the 9.3s make hits at 400 and longer distance as easy as my 338 did, because the 338 is flatter shooting. But when it come to killing elk and a few bison I have seen killed in the last 10-15 years, the 9.3 does average a better showing then my old 338 did. Again the 338 was not bad in any way, but the 9.3 is doing better.
So when comparing the 9.3X62 and 9.3X74R to the 338 we have to define what's being compared. The 338 is easier to make longer range hits with, and it works very well, but at the distances I have killed ALL my elk at, and seen about 98% of the elk I have guided for( 400 yards and closer) the 9.3X62 does seem to put them down faster.

So everyone can make their own choices, but I made mine already and mine was made based on actual use and eye witness kills.
I have the 9.3s now but sold my 338

szihn, Thanks for sharing your experience. I came to the same conclusion, with less real data to back my opinion up. For medium bore rifles, I now have settled on a couple of .375's, a 9.3x62 and a 9.3x74R. I skipped over the .338 because its "extended range" abilities are of no interest to me since I have no desire to shoot an unwounded big game animal that is over 300 Meters away. I am perfectly satisfied.

Well perhaps not perfectly, I do still fool around with a .35 Whelen and a .450-400 Nitro Express 3".... :-)

I appreciate your insight. Mine was always a comparison of 338 Win Mag with 9.3x62 as which is a more versatile chamber as a medium bore. A 9.3 with 286s at 2,450 fps and a 338 Win Mag with 275 A-Frames at 2,550 fps are fairly comparable on large game. At 500 yards with various 160gr - 225 gr loads the 338 Win Mag will hang with 300 magnums at that distance. Again I like the 9.3, my point was simply the 338 Win Mag is by far a much more versatile medium bore chamber providing use on a multitude of game under a multitude of field conditions.

Rossimp makes some points that are worth consideration. The truth is that the 338 flies flatter but makes a smaller diameter hole, so the effect of tissue displaced may favor the 9.3 but the ease of hitting may favor the 338 and a hit in the middle with the smaller bullet is going to beat a hit on the outside of the boiler room with the larger bullet. In 100% honesty the ability to hit (for example) a 12" target 100% of the time at X range is not about either gun but more about who is doing the shooting. I missed my 2019 elk with my 9.3X62. I missed the elk, My rifle put that round right where I aimed it. Not where I wanted to aim it.................but where I aimed it. Why? I didn't practice with that round enough, and I guessed at it's point of impact and I guessed wrong. The bull did NOT give me a 2nd chance.
So if I had been using my old 338 would I have killed that bull? Probably because I used to shoot my 338 out to 1000 yards for fun and I knew where to hold. BUT that is NOT a "plus-point' for the 338 over the 9.3. It's simply proof that I need to practice what I preach and shoot a rifle enough to know where to hold and have the skills to do it. That was not the fault of the round or the rifle or the scope or anything else other then....ME! So if I could have snapped my fingers for that one shot and made any rifle I wanted appear in my hands at that moment, would I have chosen my old 338?
No, I would have chosen my old 270 or maybe my 300H&H. Why? Because at that range I KNOW where to hold with either one of them especially the 270, which I have shot so much it's on it's 3rd barrel.

But the argument is that the 9.3 works well with a shorter barrel and holds 2 more rounds in the mag. Does that matter? Not really. Not to me anyway, but if it matters to another man then it matters and his desires are just as important as mine. That's why he can choose.

The 9.3 does put elk on the ground faster then my old 338 did. Again...is that important? Well not really
It the 338 drops them in 5 seconds and the 9.3 does it in 2-3 seconds most hunters would ask the real world question................."So what"? Simplistic to be sure, but also the essence of truth. 2 more seconds of running is not going to make a lot of difference. A downed elk in 15 -20 seconds compared to a downed elk in 2 seconds is a big deal to anyone who has ever seen how far an elk can get in 20 seconds. But a 2-3 second difference is not truly important.

So the real truth is that we should all carry what we like and learn to use them well.

Ross, szihn,

The ole nine three is a cartridge that should be exempt from over thinking, ballistic one upsmanship and hypothetical thinking out loud.

There is no real world reduction in recoil over a 338 mag. Mild loads like a standard 286 grainer at 2300-2350 are enjoyable to target practice with.

My full power 300 grain/2400 fps loads from a 7 lb 4 oz rifle recoil severely. 10-20 rounds and I'm done.

Regarding round count:
If you hunt treeless areas at below zero weather with five caribou a day bag limits, I say nay to a three down gun. 30 mph winds, heavy winter clothing, longish shots, you will miss. Pulling up on a herd, 3 caribou for 5 bullets was my best.

Regarding longer shots. I rarely shoot too far. But here are three animals taken at longish shots. The ole nine-three, with big flat based bullets was not a handicap:

Bull caribou 350 yds open sights
Cow caribou 400 yds 1.5-5 power scope
Bull moose 500 yds 1.5-5 power scope

Very nice. 350 yards with open sights is some kind of awesome shooting. You surely know your weapon well. I’m betting you’re one helluva of a chef too.

Brad, I'll hang up my ole nine three if you take me elk hunting. That's some dmn good eatin food. A buddy from Utah brought me 1lb of elk back strap. I ate the whole package in one setting. Good variation from the doldrums of caribou.

For my .1%, I'd probably borrow a 308 winchester carbine for that steep stuff. Load me up some swift or nosler 200 grainers over Mr 2000 please.

In trade, I'd put yah on a moose. I'd loan you an ole nine three. I'd ask yah to take out the front quarter bones, so we don't have to quarter him in a swamp hole. No romanticized one shot one kill bullsht. Keep hitting that front end.

A Koyukon Athabascan Indian who puts away 60-70 inchers his whole life, swears by his 375.

The one time he used a 308 Winchester/180 grainers on a massive bull, he shot it five times square in the front end and lungs. It kept moving. Even after the fifth round.

Not disappearing in my house. I have a CZ 550 FS and a Tikka Forester in the same caliber. Hard to beat for Alaska big game.
270 for sheep and caribou 9.3 for everything else.
Erich