i'm about to start working on a load for my 9.3x62. graf brass, 270 speer bullets, hodgdon BL-C(2) powder(somewhere between 60 and 66 grns). my question is...should i use rem standard primers(9 1/2) or rem mag primers(9 1/2M)?(these are the only large rifle primers i have on hand). i don't load anything else that takes this much powder and i've never used BL-C(2) before. any advice is welcome...thanks...bud

Bud, I've always used Federal LR Gold Match
(?210?) without problems. Hope this help.
bye

ok...how about just one reply is a rem 9 1/2 hot enough to ignite 66 grns of BL-C(2) or should i use a 91/2Mag? thansk again...bud

thanks steve. our posts must have crossed somewhere in cyberspace. i think fed 210 primers are non mag primers so maybe i can get away with using standard rem 9 1/2's. anyone else? thanks again...bud

sorry. double post. this computer at work leaves a lot to be desired.

[ 10-28-2003, 19:19: Message edited by: budiceale ]

OK OK, I was doing dizinformazya
if this can help you in a different way, I load 56 grains of N135 Vithavuory, and more or less the same of N140, with a 286 grains bullet and Federal LR Gold Match primers. And I never had problems. They suggest, of course, Lapua Large rifle primers.
And looking on other manuals I have the same answer: normal primers.
Some time I used also CCI BRLR, without troubles.
I am afraid I'm repeating the same message:
use normal primers, they are enough
bye

some words remain in my finger Where I say "they suggest to use" I'm speaking about lapua people.
bye

thanks steve. i'll go with the std 9 1/2's. i have the most of them anyway...bud

Hi bud. Back in the 60's/'70's when the Balls were heavily coated, and harder to ignite, magnum primers were pretty much always recommended. Since then, they've been refined so much that just about any primer will work well.

All that said, there is still the possibility that one of them will perform better than the other, so, I'd try some of each with your starting loads, then use whichever works best for the rest of your load development with that powder.

In my 9.3x62, WLR primers seem to work best with all loads.

R-WEST

R-WEST...thanks...bud

Hey guys, I'm seriously interested in the 9.3 X 62. What performances do you get?...Am I right that this is essentially a .375-06?

I have no loading data nor any factory ammo data for this round.

Budiceale,

I just use win WLR primers I am not sure that a magnum primer is needed in the 9.3x62 but I may be wrong, I have been many times before

I use WLR primers in .375 H&H with no problems as well, so in the 9.3 they should be fine.

vapodog: pretty close. it's actually more of a ".366-06" .

[ 10-29-2003, 07:08: Message edited by: bill smith ]

1) 60-66gr of BL-C(2) sound like pretty stiff if not excessive loads for that powder and bullet. In fact, I can't get much past 61 gr of H414 with a 250 gr bullet, and H414 is considerably slower burning than BL-C(2).

2) I highly recommend H414 and Re15 for the 9.3x62 - I have obtained the best results with these two powders.

3) I have had good results with the CCI200, CCI250, GM210M, WLR, 210, 9.5, and 9.5M - I don't think it matters too much. I have finally come to the conclusion, for most all the rounds I load, that the primer is not as important a variable as some others.

Vapodog:
The 9.3x62 is like a 366-06, but in fact is not based on the 30-06 case. In fact, the 9.3x62 has a slightly rebated rim, very slightly larger body diameter, less taper, and further forward shoulder than its 30-06-based counterparts. It fall neatly between the 35 Whelen and 375 H&H for power, and is a very accurate round (at least in my experience). It is certainly more than enough rifle for anything on NA. It dates back to about 1905, and has a long and distinguished reputation as a dependable all-around rifle, which was used for decades by settlers in Africa on everything from duikers to crop-raiding elephants.

9.3x62...thanks for posting. i got these starting loads from stevespges. he says 60-66grns of BL-C for a 270 grn bullet. question...is "BL-C" the same as "BL-C(2)"? i assumed it is but now i'll definately check it out before i shoot anything. thanks again...bud

bud - Have you weighed the Graf's brass? I've used nothing but Lapua, which weighs in around 197 grains, and must be a little thicker than the RWS that Ray Atkinson uses - I know I sure can't get as much R15 in mine as he does in his

Just fired a batch yesterday using 62 R15 in the Lapua cases with WLR primers and 270 Speers at 3.310", for 2400 FPS and 3 shots just under 1.25" at 100 yards. While 1.25" for 3 shots doesn't sound that great, it is for me, especially with the breeze I was fighting, the bright sun from the left, facing (I TOLD my Dad he should have situated his house the other way, so my range wouldn't face the afternoon sun), plus, I just couldn't seem to get comfortable on the bags yesterday. There, that should be enough to explain my poor results . I was also firing a 280AI which will normally get under 1" pretty consistently, and had the same problem with it. Oh, well, we all have good days and bad days

If you try any of the 250 B-Tips or 232 Norma Oryx's (a great bonded bullet for the 9.3), give one of the 4895's a whirl. I'm using a batch of Mil-surp I4895 I got from Hi-Tech http://iidbs.com/hitech/ and it's performed supremely well in the 9.3x62 and 358 Win (another WAY underrated round).

R-WEST

Winchester WLR Primer

I have gotten the best results using the Winchester WLR primers.

we are back from the range but just had enough time to verify the zero's of my and my son's deer rifles. by then it was too dark for the chrono to work so i gave up. i did fire 4 shots from the 9.3, with open sights in horrible light with failing eyes, just to see what it felt like. recoil is not bad at all, but very respectable the 60, 61, 62, 63 grn loads showed no pressure at all. more "research" tomorrow.
R-WEST...these graf cases weigh between 197 and 199. one case went 200 grns. the cases i weighed were brand new, right out of the bag they shipped in.
is there some reason that WLR primers seem to be the favorite? i will give them a try but i was just wondering..are they better?...hotter?...stouter? just curious.
again, thanks to all for the help....bud

The WLR and its predecessor, the 8-1/2 - 120, have always had a reputation for being "hotter" than other standard primers. I'm no primer expert, I just try all the different ones and use the one that produces the best results with whatever combo I'm playing with at that time. Looking through my load notes for a wide variety of shootin' irons using Large Rifle primers, I see the WLR's showing up in the "Pet Loads" (stole that from Ken Waters, hehehehe ) sections by about a 5/1 margin over all the rest (F210M's are in second place).

All that doesn't answer your question, of course, since, if being "hot" was good, then the GM215M, F215 or WLRM should be even better, but they aren't, at least not in my 9.3 or any other '06 size case I've ever seen. Who knows, just one of them good matches, I guess.

All is not wine/roses with my fave primer, however - has anyone else noticed that they leave about twice as much gunk behind in the primer pocket as the other ones?

R-WEST