The 9.3x62 has been on my bucket list. I'd like to know from someone who shoots that cartridge loaded with 286 gr. bullets out of a T3X Hunter if the rifle weight seems too light or not for that cartridge. Spec's say the rifle out of the box is around ~6.5 lbs, so I figure all up loaded and wearing a scope is likely a touch over 7 lbs? How is it for off-hand shooting?

As a point of reference my H&H all up weighs a bit over 9 lbs and is a joy shooting the 300's and 350 grainers.

To muddy things up a bit, I recently learned my grandad's custom '06 built back in the 50's on a Springfield action may be coming my way soon. I recall that rifle easily weighing 9 lbs, so I'm also entertaining the idea of doing either a rebore or a rebarrel of that rifle.

Decisions, decisions....

Pud

HMMMMM

A modern rifle that can pretty much be guarantied to shoot well vs. a 50s classic with panache...….

My T3x 30-06 is around 7.5lbs with a Leopold 2.5-8 which is about as light as I want a 30-06. I would think that the 9.3 might have a bit heavier barrel and limbsaver offers a direct fit recoil pad that works. Not helping am I?

I can’t comment on the Tikka in 9.3, but I do have a Ruger Safari in 9.3x62 and it’s not overly heavy and shoots lights out with 286 grainers. Recoil is not bad at all, less than my Winchester 375 H&H for sure and a lot lighter as well. Not sure this helps, but that’s my experience.

I had a t3 in 338-06 and it was bored out from a 30-06. It felt a half pound lighter than my t3 in 6.5x55. I shot mostly 250gr bullets out of it. I had the limbsaver on it. Was not bad at all recoil wise. However, i find the same setup in 30-06 to be a very light recoiling rifle. I would put the limbsaver on it and you should be fine. If you actually find one of these in stock, let me know, I’d like to have one.

Kevin Robertson (Doctari) recommends that a 9,3x62 should weigh 10 pounds. So I had my custom 9,3 built to that weight all up. It is so beautifully balanced that I do not notice the weight despite being nearly 70 years old.

You mean something like this?


This is a 300WSM, which has more recoil than a 9.3x62mm. I've shot this one 50 times in a range trip. Recoil is not horrible, but I'd suggest a limb saver recoil pad. The t3x recoil pad is much better than the old t3, but the limbsaver is a step above the factory t3x pad. You'll like that 9.3x62mm at this weight. It will be much better for packing around in the field. Not quite as comfortable off the bench as a 10 pound rifle, but still quite manageable..

No doubt a 9.3x62 that light would be a handful, not something I would especially look forward to.

It would be a puzzy cat. Not as bad as the 300WSM I posted a pic above. And that one isn't even that bad..

Yea, based on my H&H's weight I'm leaning more towards a rebore. I've read Kevin Robertson's recommendation on rifle weight for the 9.3, but my 9 lb H&H is a sweetheart to shoot offhand.

I'm gonna give JES a call to discuss the particulars of the donor '06 and see if it's a good candidate for a rebore.

The rebore option with what you have sounds like a great plan to me.

My 8 lb 9.3x62 is pretty mild.

Is that all up weight with scope? A 7 pound 9.3x62mm without scope wouldn't be bad. Guys act like the 9.3 kicks like a mule. Sadly it doesn't. It's basically a 30-06 necked up to 36 caliber. You do the math. I've had one and it was mild mannered. Nothing like a 300wm or the like. Its not a magnum guys. It can be put into a light rifle and be quite handy....

Well that 59.0gr load of rl15 is pretty anemic. Now try 65.5gr of big game with a 286. Tends to wake up the 9.3x62. This is load data that muledeer has posted in the past. I used it the 286gr TSX and 285gr PPU bullets.

It gets the job done. Fu ck mule deer...


58.5gr is max in the Nosler book and it works just fine.. Maybe you should rethink a few things..

Dang what muledeer do to you..

If a guy wants a lightweight Tikka T3x, he can benefit from using a load like what I posted above. Excellent accuracy and a known proven killer. I actually shot that load out to 400 yards with excellent accuracy. Why shoot a load of 65gr's of powder when a load like the one shown above is a puzzy cat, accurate and deadly killer as far out as the 9.3x62mm is capable of? Anyone that says it is not capable, has no clue or has never used a 9.3x62mm...

BSA, are you sensitive or just a douche? John Barsness modernized the 9.3x62 by showing what it could do with perfect safety when loaded to modern pressures. He’s likely a large part of the reason for its increasing popularity. If you want to stick with traditional pressures, go ahead, it’s a free country and lots of stuff got killed over the years with those loads. But spare us the drama of your emotions about how others choose to load their 9.3s.

well their is this fella you might know him he’s alway fussing about powder and it metering. Well let me tell you big game meters like butter. RL15 doesn’t meter like big game.. Besides I have a bunch biggame and use my RL15 for my 375 H&H. 74.5gr RL 15. Fed 215 and 300gr tsx

Im 99% sure Muledeer took his 9.3x62 to Africa killed several animals with that big game load.

Pretty much just a douche. He really wants to be relevant.

An idiot from Oregon? Or a respected hunter/writer with more than one kill with a cartridge?

Quick momentum comparison:

286 x 2400 / 180 = ~3813

I used 60 grains of 15 with a 250 Accubond. It made about 2400 on the nose and was pretty gentle in my rebored Ruger. Stepping up to 2600 with the same Bullet is a bit more noticeable.

The Ruger is a couple ounces over 8lbs scoped. Might be a more of a handful with 286’s at 2400-2500 but probably not nasty. Just my experience with it.

I'm planning on loading for a 286 gr. (NPT, SAF) big game bullet and somewheres around a 200 gr. whatever for a varmint load.

Just gotta lasso the right rifle....

How did you come up with adding a scope, mounts and magazine full of cartridges to a 6.5 pound rifle adds up to "a touch over 7 lbs"? It takes a pretty light scope AND mounts to add only a pound to a rifle. Add five rounds to be magazine and the result is a rifle around 8 pounds.

My 9.3x62 weighs 8 pounds on the nose with scope, around 8-3/4 with a sling and full magazine. Even with .30-06-pressure handloads it recoils noticeably less than my 9-pound-scoped .375 H&H with typical 270 and 300-grain factory loads.

Yea, I figure just barely under 1 lb for scope and mounts based on the same setup I use on another rifle. However, I didn't really figure for 5 rounds in the magazine - gotta get used to what the 9.3x62 offers.

Good to hear that your 8-3/4 lb rifle all up recoils noticeably less - that opens up other possibilities for me to consider.

Thanks

About a decade ago, I loaded 64 grains of Alliant 2000 Mr in Lapua brass, using a 300 grain swift A-frame for 2460 fps from a 20.5" barrel. I stuck with that handload all these years. Put away a pile of moose and caribou with that load. The recoil was significant from a 7.25 lb rifle. Not really in the field, but sighting in. Shoulder was only good for about 10-15 rounds.

Anything less than 4 inches of eye relief on a scope, the light carbine rifle would ever so slightly introduce my eyebrow to the scope in the prone shooting position:

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/13539716/1

In the lady's original 1922 Oberndorf sporting Mauser, I've throttled down to 58 grains of Reloder 15 or 60 grains of Reloder 16.


This original type b sporting Mauser in the original stock weighs 7.25 lbs. Kind of hard to call the barrel a feather weight contour, since this gun was made long before the model 70, but it is a very thin contour 23.6” barrel. The stock is as thin as a stock could be. I don't understand how this almost 100 year old wood doesn't crack, as we shoot it frequently:

I think they had it right. I honestly wouldn't want a 9.3x62 any lighter than 7 lbs.

That's a beaut Mainer.