Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters New sako 370 Mag is just a 9.3 Whelen ?

I wonder if this is another one of those deals where handloaders are SOL due to the use of non-available powders. That issue pretty much ended any interest I had in the .338 Federal.

I don't believe this is the case here. In Sako's original factory load data, they used VV N-560 for all four of their offerings. The Federal stuff replicates their numbers so I figure they are using the same, or nearly identical, powder.

pab..,

If you mean the 370 Mag, I haven't a clue.

If you mean the 9.3 absolutely not. The 9.3X62 is as easy to load for as a 35 Whelan.

I've only used RL-15 with 286 & 270 gr bullets, but Nosler recommends VV N135 and IMR 4895 as well. With 250gr Noslers they recommend IMR 4064,Varget and VV N140. Those are all very easy to come by powders on my side of the planet. Surely there are others as well.

The round is NOT a 9.3 Whelan. The case is a bit bigger than an '06, bigger in circumferance, longer in the body and the rim appears a bit thicker as well. You CAN blowout '06 brass and make it work alto the neck is a bit longer.

Bottom line: bullets, brass, dies and many workable powders are easily available for the 9.3X62 even tho it's one of those 'scarry metric numbers'. Factory ammo (yuk) is even available thru Graffs.

Tho many disagree, I veiw it as a .375 lite and superior to the 35 Whelan. If you 'need' one, jump in there and don't look back.

In the Sako 85 the 9.3 X 66 (or 370 Sako magnum) is the most powerful round you can get - and still hold 5 in the magazine.

For the slight power advantage one would get with a .375 H&H over this particular 9.3 - you need to give up at least one round (or two - depending on the rifle) in the magazine.

Personally speaking, with a round that is this close to a 375 H&H (in speed, energy, and ballistic coefficient of the available rounds) - I'd much rather have the extra round (or two) available - especially, if I really needed them, in a hurry.

This thread brings back haunting memories of my education in South Africa. I was taunted endlessly while in school for the stupid designations made by Americans for all their "sizing"

Of course I had nothing to do with these designations, but I certainly took the blame as an American born student there.

The worst of all was the 30/06....... The typical comment: What idiot names a cartridge after the year it was made rather then the size or capacity it has? 38 special, what's special about a cartridge they can not even name accurately? I could go on and on but you get the point.

Getting back to the topic, I have no opinion on this .......... well maybe....... I guess it's a solution to a problem nobody has.

The world is full of new cartridges that are just fine and an answer to a question no one asked. My curiosity has lead me the other way. I've learned the 7X57,.303 Brit,300H&H and 9.3X62 absolutely do everything I'll ever need.

the 9.3X66 in a lever gun would be quite nice......

Yeah and should be easily doable. Kept hoping Remington would get it's double rifle off the ground and, maybe someday, make it in 9.3.

I agree and my curiosity has lead me to 257 Roberts, 7x57, 8x57, 270 Wby Mag, 45-70, and the 9.3x62. But I am not giving up my 30-30, 35 Rem, .270 Win, or 30-06.

It is strange that the older I get the more this old caliber interest me. I have also given up scopes for peep sights one some of these rifles.

With the ability to carry five in the rifle and have the
capability to kill anything the 375 will.

I want one and I want it now.

There are apparently a bunch of rifle/ammo marketers out there who haven't grasped the simple fact that most of the people who will buy a rifle chambered for some "new" round are handloaders. Instead of being sucked into buying some variation on the 9.3x62, most will buy a 9.3x62 and handload for it. Which makes it all the more puzzling why NO American company has chambered the 9.3x62 or loaded ammo for it. The 9.3x74R, yes, but not the 9.3x62.

I also cannot fathom why the marketers of any such new round would proclaim that handloaders cannot match factory velocities with available powders. They are just cutting of a bunch of potential sales.

I would be happy if Sako would just sell their rifles chambered to 9.3X62 in the USA.

JB,

Four years ago at a rep meeting in Maryland I sat at the dinner table with the Italians from Beretta. Pled my case for the 9.3's to be introduced to America. Those Italians at the table working here in America wanted it. It came down to the marketing geniuses in Italy to dis the idea.



Yes, and it's just stupid greed on their part.

i don't understand any manufacturer or importer not including their full line up of products. I have a 9.3x66 on order since last september and still have not recieved it. These things have a good profit margin. Why can't the importer call the manufacturer and order one up? I'll pay the extra shipping or what ever. In the industry i work, pulp and paper, an item can be here over night from where ever, you pay the shipping. when i hear ther may not be much demand for a certain caliber/ cartridge, so what it is just a rifle with a hole in the barrel, if its a dud i will take the chance. there are many 270 and 300WSM's on the shelf yet and maybe they want to get rid of those dud's before getting in new products, thats the importer I'm talking about.

The 9.3x62 has been a standard chambering for Sako in Canada for 20 years the 9.3x66 for 2 years, I thought the 62 was available in the US but not the 66. Factory velocity for 286 gr is 200 fps higher for the .370 than a 62.Handloading you could gain 100 fps in the 62 by loading to the same pressure as the .370 but loading data above 2350 for the 62 is hard to find. There are no .35 Whelen loads close to .370 ballistics. The .370 pushes a 286 gr. bullet to the same velocity, 2550 fps,as a .375 H+H 300 gr., with the same SD but with about 15 gr. less powder and 2 shot more magazine capacity. Sako does offer more bullet weight combinations in the 66 than Federal does for the .370

Mule Deer,
Beats me too ... I cant understand why Ruger can't do an M77 MkII in 9.3x62 given they already produce 9.3 barrels? Perhaps the hesitation is the lack of American loaded ammunition and hence they believe limited sales potential. Perhaps its a chambering issue knowing full well the dimensions aren't "just a 30/06 necked up", or perhaps medium bores just dont sell well??
In Australia ... the Tikka T3 9.3x62 sells steadily, not brilliantly, but steadily.
Cheers...
Con

I'd love to see what the 9.3/370 Sako would do with the 300-gr. Swift A-Frame. It's slightly "heavy-for-caliber", but only 14 grains more than the standard 286's. If you could get a legitimate 2400 FPS with that bullet, man, you'd have one hell of a big game cartridge that doesn't have a belt, without any bolt-face alteration, and with five down.

My reamer just arrived about a week ago, so I think this may move right to the head of the line, project-wise.

looking at prints it looks like the 64 with a larger base and shoulder should carry similar capacity to the 66. other than a bolt face mod why would you choose to build the 66?

just curious...

woofer

9.3x62,

There is some modern handloading data available for the 9.3x62, but only from certain gun writers (and the magazines they work for, notably HANDLOADER). The 9.3x62 can easily push 286's to around 2500 in a 24" barrel at 60,000 psi or so. The load I generally use is around 65 grains of Ramshot Big Game, but several powders will do it.

It has been two years since this cnversation. What has happened to the .370 Sako?