I must lead a simple life, I'll just stick with my 375 H&H and vary bullets as required. Time for a nap.
Best.

quote:

Originally posted by surefire7:
So, just for the fun of it, if two rounds is enough for the many double rifle owners, why not go all the way and shoot a single shot? Much lighter rifle.

If one says, ‘well, two is just for insurnace’, then wouldn’t three be better like Saeed’s rifle?

And if three rounds is better, then....

Anyone feel they have a corner on the truth out there?

I will repeat my earlier words...to each their own I say!

Ahh grasshopper! You're on to something! Some of the very early 4 bores were single barrel! I'm not altogether sure those were light rifles, though!

This is an enjoyable thread!

I am a great fan of the 8x68.

In the spring I will travel to Africa with a wildcat 9.3mm cartridge I developed, based on the 8x68 case head. The intent was to better the 9.3x64 and come close to 375 Weatherby ballistics in a standard length round. The result:

286 gr.
2,700+ fps

250 gr.
2,900+ fps

Easily loads down to 9.3x62 ballistics.

Good Hunting!

Alright, If we want to maximumize Rifle capacity and bring the 358 Thunder.

I offer the 375 Ruger full size case necked down to 358. Should do everything the Norma and STA does in a intermidate action and hold 4 down in a Winchester because of the lack of belt.

I sure someone has done it.

quote:

Originally posted by B L O'Connor:

quote:

Originally posted by surefire7:
So, just for the fun of it, if two rounds is enough for the many double rifle owners, why not go all the way and shoot a single shot? Much lighter rifle.

If one says, ‘well, two is just for insurnace’, then wouldn’t three be better like Saeed’s rifle?

And if three rounds is better, then....

Anyone feel they have a corner on the truth out there?

I will repeat my earlier words...to each their own I say!

Ahh grasshopper! You're on to something! Some of the very early 4 bores were single barrel! I'm not altogether sure those were light rifles, though!

Elementary Logic 101.

But this line of reasoning only goes so far of course. We could continue the experiment and take it to, say, 20 rounds, but who wants to carry a rifle holding that much weight!? And what situation would require that many? (Well, perhaps my shooting maybe!!)

So it reverts back to my last line...to each their own. Seriously.

Many double rifle users are quite content with only two rounds, and Saeed, and many Large bore Weatherby users are equally content with a magazine that holds only two rounds. In both cases, I think this reflects on their confidence in two things: their rifle/round choice and their shooting abilities. We must admire both qualities.

Not being a world class shooter myself, I find comfort in large capacity magazines, to an extent (see second paragraph), whether they may be needed or not. But who can predict such things? My personal preference is a (4) round magazine minimum. My Dakota Safari 404 Jeffery holds only (3) in the magazine. Sometimes we have to settle on manufacturer’s offerings. Depending on the size/weight of the cartridge, even more can be useful, like my wife’s (7) round 9.3 x62. But this is only due to our own personal likes on capacity vs. weight. It is right for ME. This does not imply it is right, or even good, for anyone else.

Those husky souls who carried around those 15 lb. rifles of yore were hairy chested men alright. And some were single shots as you mentioned! My Dakota Safaris in 458 Lott (which holds 4 in the mag.!) and 404 Jeffery both weigh exactly 8.5 lbs. Joy!

Thanks for playing B L

quote:

Originally posted by Steve up North:
This is an enjoyable thread!

I am a great fan of the 8x68.

In the spring I will travel to Africa with a wildcat 9.3mm cartridge I developed, based on the 8x68 case head. The intent was to better the 9.3x64 and come close to 375 Weatherby ballistics in a standard length round. The result:

286 gr.
2,700+ fps

250 gr.
2,900+ fps

Easily loads down to 9.3x62 ballistics.

Good Hunting!

Steve up North,

Happy you are enjoying the thread as much as I am!

Here’s how your cartridge invention stacks up with the Simpson formula:

WT. 286
VEL. 2700
CAL. .366
Calc.
E. 4628
M. 110
KO. 40

And,

WT. 250
VEL. 2900
CAL. .366
Calc.
E. 4667
M. 103
KO. 37

Both rounds exceed the formula nicely. Congrats!

Tell us how it performed when you return from Africa.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Alright, If we want to maximumize Rifle capacity and bring the 358 Thunder.

I offer the 375 Ruger full size case necked down to 358. Should do everything the Norma and STA does in a intermidate action and hold 4 down in a Winchester because of the lack of belt.

I sure someone has done it.

.

Excellent thinking LHeym500!

I’m waiting (not holding my breath) for Ruger & Hornady to bring this round to fruition. I’d buy it in a heartbeat. If Ruger is listening, I would request the rifle be based on their ‘new’ African, like the 275 Rigby and 6.5x55 that they have recently released (no muzzle brake & blued bolt), but perhaps with a bit heavier barrel!!

And yes, it has already been wildcatted, called the ‘358 Nukalpiaq’.

Surefire7: I'm very glad you recognize that I was just joking and took my tongue-in-cheek comments the way I meant them.

FWIW . . . I agree with you: to each his own. When I hunt deer (too seldom these days — age has a way of slowing one down!) I have 1 chambered and 4 down. And I abide by my self-imposed rule that if I can't be absolutely sure I can hit where I want to, I don't shoot (irrespective of distance).

My main interest these days is ground squirrel shooting. I doubt I'll ever face an angry, wounded, charging ground squirrel, though one never knows.

quote:

Originally posted by B L O'Connor:
Surefire7: I'm very glad you recognize that I was just joking and took my tongue-in-cheek comments the way I meant them.

FWIW . . . I agree with you: to each his own. When I hunt deer (too seldom these days — age has a way of slowing one down!) I have 1 chambered and 4 down. And I abide by my self-imposed rule that if I can't be absolutely sure I can hit where I want to, I don't shoot (irrespective of distance).

My main interest these days is ground squirrel shooting. I doubt I'll ever face an angry, wounded, charging ground squirrel, though one never knows.

And if you do, the four rounds in reserve can’t hurt.

Mine was always a 30-06 or a .338 Win..on occasion a .375 H&H or 9.3x62 or 64..Some others but mostly the .338 Win..Never figured the med. bore had to be anything but what catches ones fancy...

The only thing that comes to mind is it might be a good idea in certain areas, that it be big enough to kill a Lion, elephant or Buffalo in an emergency situation, and that happens more often than some think...The 30-06 would be my smallest, and Id want a few solids for it..That said Ive seen the 7x57 do good work on big stuff..Not all of Africa even requires a big bore..

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:


The only thing that comes to mind is it might be a good idea in certain areas, that it be big enough to kill a Lion, elephant or Buffalo in an emergency situation, and that happens more often than some think...

Hi Ray,

I agree wholeheartedly. Great point.

I still think the 9.3x66 would do nicely considering your insights, or a hand loaded ‘62. For me anyway...

286 gr. @ 2,550 fps. Damn close to a 375 H&H ballistically. A few grains less weight, a few more fps. Vel.

If you have some steel jacketed 220 grain Woodleigh solids, a .30-06 will do about as well as anything (given that the only way you will stop a determined charge at close range is a brain shot)

That's an entirely different issue than if you are expected to follow up on a wounded animal.

In elephant country I had considered a .375 to be my medium/light rifle. With 300 grain bullets, I've shot plains game out to over 300 yards all the way in to Buffalo at powder burn distance.

I've also used a .416 Rigby at standard loading velocity out to the same range. I've shot springbok to elephant with that.

The smaller bore guns come in a lighter package, and are more pleasant to shoot, and frankly, if I am able to bring the ammo I want, I'm not all that worried about a last ditch charge. The only thing I ever recall being charged by was an impala on its death run- I stepped out of its way- or some of those south park guinea fowl that require a .470 to settle their hash.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
The only thing I ever recall being charged by was an impala on its death run- I stepped out of its way- or some of those south park guinea fowl that require a .470 to settle their hash.

Thanks cr. I have hunted them (Guinea Fowl) in SA and Zim, and had no idea what peril I was in!

Luckily, the 470NE exceeds Simpson’s formula, and I will take your recommendation under consideration.

Then again, I do own a 505 Gibbs....

9.3x64 or maybe the forgotten 358 Norma

I do not think a Winchester unmodified will hold 4 down, but the 350 Rigby loaded to modern pressure 62000 psi, may be able to make the grade 275 grain bullet at 2500-2600.

I just do not like 225 or even 250 grain bullets in the 358. I like the balance of 275-310 grain bullets. Do modern monos or real tough bonded bullets need more than 250 grains? No, but I still want it.

Save the 250s and 225s for the 333 or 338 caliber.

If going to double you have the 375 Flanged Magnum 300 grain bullet at 2400 fps. I have shot that load in a nine pound double, and it is like shooting a 20 gauge.

Or the long forgotten 360 Number 2 which used a 310 grain .366 caliber bullet at 2200 fps. I may be wrong on velocity.

As one can cleary see, the options are many, The answer lies in marksmanship and bullet construction, not caliber. Almost every caliber mentioned in this thread is suitable for a med bore for Africa or anyplace else..

I like the 338 and 30-06, but if one did an extensive study on a computer or asked our redemmer, he would come up with a .375 H&H, of that I have no doubt...

There must be 10 or even 30 people on this thread whom I have corresponded with and passed on loads and article on the great 9.3X62

If I was able to live and hunt in Africa, I would be happy with my Simson Mauser 98 made before 1912. The rifle shoots so well with 5 or 6 different bullets - 286 gr Norma, Woodleigh, Lapua Mega, Hornady SP, 250 gr TSX etc. All of them shoot to same POA with the TSX250gr shooting an inch higher. The 320 gr Woodleig shot 4 inches lower.

Ganyana used it as his first choice on buffalo.

The comparison with 270gr or 300 gr bullets in 375 H&H really shows the value of this cartridge.

I thought the perfect medium bore was the 400 Whelen

medium and Africa the wonderful 9.3x62 .... if it works here for bison i do not see it not working on Buffalo or anything on that matter unless your PH say no in that case find another one ...

I use a .300WM or .280 Rem
Killed effectively many animals up to wildebeest and eland.

But only is you shoot a Blaser.
If you don't then you need a .375 HH

With modern powders and pressures, the 9.3x62 gets much closer to the .375 H&H. For example, using RL-17 powder, as Bob Mitchell and Ray Atkinson have shown, a 286 @ 2610, a 300 @ 2550, and a 320 @ 2450 are possible from a 22-23" barrel. 2000-MR powder doesn't lag far behind in performance. My light, handy CZ550fs with a 20.5" barrel gets 5 down in the magazine and, using RL-17, gets within 50-60 fps of the velocities listed above, since I can load to a COL of 3.45". Recoil is a bit brisk in this rifle, though!

quote:

Originally posted by bcelliott:
With modern powders and pressures, the 9.3x62 gets much closer to the .375 H&H. For example, using RL-17 powder, as Bob Mitchell and Ray Atkinson have shown, a 286 @ 2610, a 300 @ 2550, and a 320 @ 2450 are possible from a 22-23" barrel. 2000-MR powder doesn't lag far behind in performance. My light, handy CZ550fs with a 20.5" barrel gets 5 down in the magazine and, using RL-17, gets within 50-60 fps of the velocities listed above, since I can load to a COL of 3.45". Recoil is a bit brisk in this rifle, though!

Really?!

Those figures seem high for a 9.3x62 with a 22-23” barrel. But, I don’t reload, so what do I know?

Here’s the results for your loads from Simpson’s formula:

9.3x62.

WT. 286
VEL. 2,610
CAL. .366
calc.
E. 4,325.
M. 106.
KO. 39.

————————

WT. 320
VEL. 2,450
CAL. .366
calc.
E. 4,260
M. 112
KO. 40

————————-

Simpson’s Formula

WT. 275
VEL. 2,500
CAL. .358
calc.
E. 3,815
M. 98
KO. 35



These are indeed 375H&H ballistics!

338-06 and 210 TTSX!

quote:

Originally posted by surefire7:

quote:

Originally posted by bcelliott:
With modern powders and pressures, the 9.3x62 gets much closer to the .375 H&H. For example, using RL-17 powder, as Bob Mitchell and Ray Atkinson have shown, a 286 @ 2610, a 300 @ 2550, and a 320 @ 2450 are possible from a 22-23" barrel. 2000-MR powder doesn't lag far behind in performance. My light, handy CZ550fs with a 20.5" barrel gets 5 down in the magazine and, using RL-17, gets within 50-60 fps of the velocities listed above, since I can load to a COL of 3.45". Recoil is a bit brisk in this rifle, though!

Really?!

Those figures seem high for a 9.3x62 with a 22-23” barrel. But, I don’t reload, so what do I know?

Here’s the results for your loads from Simpson’s formula:

9.3x62.

WT. 286
VEL. 2,610
CAL. .366
calc.
E. 4,325.
M. 106.
KO. 39.

————————

WT. 320
VEL. 2,450
CAL. .366
calc.
E. 4,260
M. 112
KO. 40

————————-

Simpson’s Formula

WT. 275
VEL. 2,500
CAL. .358
calc.
E. 3,815
M. 98
KO. 35



These are indeed 375H&H ballistics!

Thanks for running those numbers. You're right, those figures do seem high! I don't know many people who are loading the 9.3x62 to its full potential like Bob Mitchell is, but my own experiments have proved that it is possible and safe. (As a side note, he has also maximized the .458 Win Mag.) Below are a few links to Bob's blog with data shown and discussed for several bullet weights in the 9.3x62. Incidentally, like Atkinson, Bob feels that the x62 is at its most balanced with a 286 grain bullet.

https://bigborefan.wordpress.c...upreme-loads-part-1/

https://bigborefan.wordpress.c...s-the-competition-2/

https://bigborefan.wordpress.c...trospect-first-part/

From my own experiments with this cartridge with top-end loads, it may be all the power I care to handle in a light rifle. Loaded down to factory ballistics or below, recoil isn't bad at all. I consider my CZ my do-it-all handy rifle.

quote:

With modern powders and pressures, the 9.3x62 gets much closer to the .375 H&H.

From my own experiments with this cartridge with top-end loads, it may be all the power I care to handle in a light rifle. Loaded down to factory ballistics or below, recoil isn't bad at all. I consider my CZ my do-it-all handy rifle.

I would agree with you on that sentiment. What I like about the 35 Whelen, is the great knock down power it has with little recoil. I feel the 9.3x62 with factory loads (286 gr. @ 2350 fps) are very comparable.

My 9.3x66 has noticeably more recoil if I use the factory loads that chronograph at 2,550 fps (286 gr.) with my very light AHR CZ rifle. I like the weight of that rifle, but to increase the velocity much more would take the joy out of using this rifle/round for me. At that point, for me anyway, it would make more sense to simply use my heavier 375H&H. Besides, the 9.3x66 exceeds the Simpson formula nicely in all three categories (E, M & KO):

9.3x66

WT. 286
VEL. 2,550
CAL. .366
calc.
E. 4128
M. 104
KO. 38

Agreed, surefire7. What is it about that last 200 fps that makes it so different? Must be the recoil impulse. My .458 Win Mag is the same--going from a 500 @ 2000 fps to a 500 @ 2200 changes the whole character of the rifle. It's definitely fun to wring out the last bit of velocity for performance sake, but I'm learning that it's not always so enjoyable to plink with!

quote:

Originally posted by bcelliott:
Agreed, surefire7. What is it about that last 200 fps that makes it so different? Must be the recoil impulse. My .458 Win Mag is the same--going from a 500 @ 2000 fps to a 500 @ 2200 changes the whole character of the rifle. It's definitely fun to wring out the last bit of velocity for performance sake, but I'm learning that it's not always so enjoyable to plink with!

One may think that only 200 fps shouldn’t make that much difference, but remember, these calibers are shooting some heavy bullets: 286 for the 9.3s, and 500 in the case of a 458 WM. It’s instructive to watch what happens to E,M & KO as velocities rise with heavy bullets as compard to much lighter ones, common in smaller calibers.

Very good point.

On magazine capacity:

A person shoots at an animal. 1 shot.
If it charges from 75-100 you can take a second shot fairly quickly. That is two shots.
Finally, if the animal is on top of you, you should get a third shot.
So three shots are needed.
If the animal does not charge but flees, you might get a second shot before it disappears. Again, not over three shots needed.

Beyond that, a person should carry extra ammo in an accessible manner and top off the rifle after shooting an animal and BEFORE any follow up tracking.

So I'm with Saeed on this. Three shots needed at any one time.

As for the caliber, the 9.3x62 or 35 Whelen are great calibers. I'd hunt with one.

But I would prefer a nice, light, accurate 338WM or 375Ruger for plains game. Sweet calibers. That's just me, enjoying the simplicities of life with tailored handloads. There are lots of great bullets and the great ones all work.

416Tanzan,

I pretty much agree with what you said and the scenario you presented. I think this is probably ‘the norm’.

For one animal.

None of us are ivory hunters anymore like Taylor, et al, or game rangers culling herds, so your point is well taken.

However, who can guarentee one that we will never shoot those three shots you mentioned, only to find another ‘buddy’ or two of his in the wings who take umbrage to our disturbance of the peace, or perhaps with a snare cut deep into his neck?

Common? No. Likely? No. Possible? I believe so, if even only in perhaps a rare occurance. But it only takes one time.

One can be prepared for this unlikely occurance, or one can ignore even it’s most remote possibility.

The weight of one or even two more rounds in my magazine does not tax my endurance.

I guess my mantra is still true for me at least, ‘to each their own’.

And this goes both ways. What is good for me, does not mean it is good for anyone else, so those who choose to hunt DG with only one round, or two or three or four etc. is fine by me. In fact, I will salute their spirit! But given a choice, I still prefer (4) or more in my magazine.

P.S. I’ve never used more than three rounds on a DG animal yet, but I am prepared if the situation requires more. But I’ve only been on (8) safaris so far, so I consider myself still a novice to African hunting, and the forum can take that information for what it's worth...

quote:

Originally posted by surefire7:
416Tanzan,

I pretty much agree with what you said and the scenario you presented. I think this is probably ‘the norm’.

For one animal.

None of us are ivory hunters anymore like Taylor, et al, or game rangers culling herds, so your point is well taken.

However, who can guarentee one that we will never shoot those three shots you mentioned, only to find another ‘buddy’ or two of his in the wings who take umbrage to our disturbance of the peace, or perhaps with a snare cut deep into his neck?

Common? No. Likely? No. Possible? I believe so, if even only in perhaps a rare occurance. But it only takes one time.

One can be prepared for this unlikely occurance, or one can ignore even it’s most remote possibility.

The weight of one or even two more rounds in my magazine does not tax my endurance.

I guess my mantra is still true for me at least, ‘to each their own’.

And this goes both ways. What is good for me, does not mean it is good for anyone else, so those who choose to hunt DG with only one round, or two or three or four etc. is fine by me. In fact, I will salute their spirit! But given a choice, I still prefer (4) or more in my magazine.

P.S. I’ve never used more than three rounds on a DG animal yet, but I am prepared if the situation requires more. But I’ve only been on (8) safaris so far, so I consider myself still a novice to African hunting, and the forum can take that information for what it's worth...

Another consideration is developing the habit of reloading and topping off before follow-up. One problem with 4, 5, and 6 rounds is remembering how many have been shot and making sure that they are replaced at the EARLIEST opportunity.

I have had experiences of complacency setting in when hunting not-very-dangerous-game (all wild animals are potentially dangerous) and running out of rounds because I only loaded one or two backups and didn't pay enough attention.

Since I like rounds with Rigby case-heads I have to accept smaller magazine loads. And I like a minimum .532" size for non-dangerous game because lions and buffalo my show up while tracking some hartebeests. Just me.

.338 WM or .375 Ruger.

BH63

I "almost" had a chance to hunt for a cull buffalo and a lioness one year. I had taken PG with the .35 WAI, .338WM, .340W, .375 H&H and .300WM. I did some trading with my gunsmith and he built me a .404 Jeffry (Jeffery?) on an opened up Model 98 Mauser. I had a custom, drop magazine and it was all in a synthetic stock ( Lone wolf Safari) to me, it recoiled like a .375 but hit like a .458. I was using 400gr softs in handloads ( 2400) and some factory 400 softs going around 2150 or so. Its been awhile, but...I had a few of the factory rounds fail to fire ( that long sloping shoulder) and I've had 2 9.3z62s do the same, with factory ammo. The cull hunt fell through, the .404 rifle was given to a Missionary friend of mine ( Aussie Water Buffalo)and I got rid of the 9.3x62s. Since I was 'already fireforming" for the 35 Whelen Ackley, I didn't want/need the added hassle of FF for the 9.3x62. In all fairness, I had a 3rd 9.3x62 ( a custom job) that was perfect, but did nothing my 35 WAI did ( elk, mule deer) so gave it away too. My point being is I love the "idea" of the 9.3x62 and especially that old .404, but it spooked the poop out of this OCD guy1 ha. I'd use a reliable .375 H&H/.458WM (belt) or the .375 Ruger ( sharper shoulder) if buff or cats are around, though I will never be going back over there. Anyone else ever had those kinds ofissues?

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by surefire7:
416Tanzan,

I pretty much agree with what you said and the scenario you presented. I think this is probably ‘the norm’.

For one animal.

None of us are ivory hunters anymore like Taylor, et al, or game rangers culling herds, so your point is well taken.

However, who can guarentee one that we will never shoot those three shots you mentioned, only to find another ‘buddy’ or two of his in the wings who take umbrage to our disturbance of the peace, or perhaps with a snare cut deep into his neck?

Common? No. Likely? No. Possible? I believe so, if even only in perhaps a rare occurance. But it only takes one time.

One can be prepared for this unlikely occurance, or one can ignore even it’s most remote possibility.

The weight of one or even two more rounds in my magazine does not tax my endurance.

I guess my mantra is still true for me at least, ‘to each their own’.

And this goes both ways. What is good for me, does not mean it is good for anyone else, so those who choose to hunt DG with only one round, or two or three or four etc. is fine by me. In fact, I will salute their spirit! But given a choice, I still prefer (4) or more in my magazine.

P.S. I’ve never used more than three rounds on a DG animal yet, but I am prepared if the situation requires more. But I’ve only been on (8) safaris so far, so I consider myself still a novice to African hunting, and the forum can take that information for what it's worth...

Another consideration is developing the habit of reloading and topping off before follow-up. One problem with 4, 5, and 6 rounds is remembering how many have been shot and making sure that they are replaced at the EARLIEST opportunity.

I have had experiences of complacency setting in when hunting not-very-dangerous-game (all wild animals are potentially dangerous) and running out of rounds because I only loaded one or two backups and didn't pay enough attention.

Since I like rounds with Rigby case-heads I have to accept smaller magazine loads. And I like a minimum .532" size for non-dangerous game because lions and buffalo my show up while tracking some hartebeests. Just me.

Wise words 416Tanzan!

I always try to top off my magazine when hunting DG before I advance. I have done it ‘when’ advancing (on the move), as it is usually my first thought after the initial firing is over.

You now have me wondering if I do the same when hunting just PG. Hmmm. I hope I do, as it is a good idea as you stated. I think I do, or do I? Well, good food for thought, and something that is now in my grey matter, thanks to you!

I like your idea of shooting .523” base cartridges even on PG, knowing that DG can show up at any time, especially in DG country. I don’t always do that, but sometims I have. Sometimes my medium PG rifle is a 338WM, 375H&H, or a 375 Ruger which I have yet to take on safari. But other times, my medium has been .473” carts like my 35 Whelen and 9.3x62. I plan to take my 9.3x66 and 338-06 in my next two upcoming hunts, so I’m not consistent like you are apparently. But my lower limit for a medium is .338 caliber. I have taken a 25-06, 7mm RM, and 30-06 to Africa, but their role was as a small bore in a (3)-rifle battery. As you said, ‘just me’.

Another "bad habit", at least it always seems that way to me, is to "unload your rifle" as soon as possible. I think its wise to wait and unload the chamber when one is back at the truck or cabin or horse. I just don't like having an empty chamber when in the field. Many say they don't trust the safety. I was trained by my dad as a boy "to have it on but don't trust it". IOW, don't point the muzzle at what you don't want to shoot! Later, as a soldier, same thing was drilled in. A man who can't be trusted with a loaded firearm just can't be trusted at all, in my most humble opinion, of course,

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Knight:
Another "bad habit", at least it always seems that way to me, is to "unload your rifle" as soon as possible. I think its wise to wait and unload the chamber when one is back at the truck or cabin or horse. I just don't like having an empty chamber when in the field. Many say they don't trust the safety. I was trained by my dad as a boy "to have it on but don't trust it". IOW, don't point the muzzle at what you don't want to shoot! Later, as a soldier, same thing was drilled in. A man who can't be trusted with a loaded firearm just can't be trusted at all, in my most humble opinion, of course,

I couldn’t agree more Jim!

I only unload when I return to the safari vehicle.

Some PHs may not allow this on safari, and that is OK. I just do not hunt with them.

I am also bothered when I watch on TV some female hunters on safari, and right after they have shot, someone, either a husband, boyfriend, father, tracker, etc., takes the rifle out of her hands and carries it to the kill. It seems to me, that if the huntress (or hunter) cannot be trusted to carry the rifle, then why did she/he have it in their hands in the first place? If they have not been taught the rules of gun safety before the hunt, then they should not be hunting yet, until that job has been accomplished IMHO.

I trust most safeties, but don't trust all people..The trick is don't point a gun at anyone you don't intend to shoot..I take the round out at the truck as a rule..

The 9.3x64, 375, are ideal and the 9.3x62 is so close to both, I include it for myself with my handloads..I have actually used the .338 Win more than any other med. bore for one reason , it penetrates more than the rest and it shoots a bit flatter..

In my .338 I like the 300 gr. Sierra BTSP for most plainsgame, but the 250 Nosler partitions is a better bet, and the 300 gr. Woodleigh in softs and solids is dandy, The cup point point North Fork, the flat nose solids in GS Customs and Northforks are great, as are the HVHPs..With these bullets and the above calibers your in good hands, which ever you choose.

I don’t have the African experience that Ray has, but I too have shot more African game with my 338WM (22) than any other caliber, and all with the 250 gr. NP. Nothing seems to survive a hit with this round/bullet, but I’ve never tackled DG with it either.

So, I like, and trust, the 338WM a lot.

But as Ray pointed out earlier, if one is in DG country, it’s nice to have a bigger medium in your hands, even if I haven’t always followed that rule. The 9.3 and 375 would make me feel better in that case.

I’m beginning to like my 9.3x66 the more I contemplate these thoughts:

338WM: 250 gr. @ 2,660 fps

9.3x66: 286 gr. @ 2,550 fps

By the Simpson Formula, the 9.3 wins.

Hmmmmm. Decisions, decisions...

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
I trust most safeties, but trust all people..The trick is don't point a gun at anyone you don't intend to shoot..I take the round out at the truck as a rule..

The 9.3x64, 375, are ideal and the 9.3x62 is so close to both, I include it for myself with my handloads..I have actually used the .338 Win more than any other med. bore for one reason , it penetrates more than the rest and it shoots a bit flatter..

In my .338 I like the 300 gr. Sierra BTSP for most plainsgame, but the 250 Nosler partitions is a better bet, and the 300 gr. Woodleigh in softs and solids is dandy, The cup point point North Fork, the flat nose solids in GS Customs and Northforks are great, as are the HVHPs..With these bullets and the above calibers your in good hands, which ever you choose.

quote:

Originally posted by surefire7:
I don’t have the African experience that Ray has, but I too have shot more African game with my 338WM (22) than any other caliber, and all with the 250 gr. NP. Nothing seems to survive a hit with this round/bullet, but I’ve never tackled DG with it either.

So, I like, and trust, the 338WM a lot.

But as Ray pointed out earlier, if one is in DG country, it’s nice to have a bigger medium in your hands, even if I haven’t always followed that rule. The 9.3 and 375 would make me feel better in that case.

I’m beginning to like my 9.3x66 the more I contemplate these thoughts:

338WM: 250 gr. @ 2,660 fps

9.3x66: 286 gr. @ 2,550 fps

By the Simpson Formula, the 9.3 wins.

Hmmmmm. Decisions, decisions...

The advice of an Octogenarian with extensive African experience should always be weighed with respect and in this case it is on target. However, this is a new generation and, yes, there are additional options and decisions. My experience in Africa is less than Ray's but probably spans almost as much time. I've never hunted elephant or hippo, lion only in defense.

Like Ray, I like larger bore when given a choice in dangerous game country, which covers a lot of African hunting. (Hey there were times when we shot spur-wing geese with a 270 or 222. Anyway, I regress.) I happen to like "4" over "3", in my case that means handloaded 416 over 375 'cuz I personally don't like the slowness of the 404 or 458 in factory loads. But even that is to regress.

What about plains game? Occasionally, shots around 300 yards have presented themselves, and on very very very rare occasions in wide open flat country I have taken game at 400 yards in Africa (e.g. a roan at 400yd with a 338WM). For that a person wants flatness, and velocity over 2400-2600 can be an advantage. At least it used to be an advantage, before the easy availability of laser rangefinders.

Nevertheless, for plains game I would choose a load that was over 2600fps. 2800fps is a nice velocity. Sometimes a person wants to shoot a little Tommy or oribi out at 300 yards. With that in mind, in recent years my son and I have opted for the 225gn TTSX in .338WM. (Yes, we have enjoyed great hunting and success with bullets like the 250NP, 300 Barnes [=~= 300gnWoodleigh], and 275 Speer [now discontinued].) We have only shot a handful of animals with the relatively new 225gnTTSX but have not recovered a bullet. This is a new generation of bullets and the monolithic bullets penetrate and even out-penetrate traditional bullets a rank or more heavier. For example, I cannot recommend the 250 gn or 300 gn Sierras in either 338 or 375. I have seen several lose their cores and would lack confidence in them if push were to come to shove. (If you hunt long enough in Africa push will indeed come to shove.) Maybe the Sierras have improved from four decades ago. I just lost confidence in the them and don't use them. And I don't need a better BC than the .514BC of the 225gnTTSX when hunting inside 300 yards or 400 at absolute tops. What this rambling means, and it is always fun to reminisce, is that for flatness and for penetration with real confidence we now have a 338WM shooting 225 gn TTSX as a dedicated plains game rifle. Flat, accurate, guaranteed penetration ('cepting hippo and ele that would need solids), and comfortable to shoot, even for wives or guests. Our 338's have averaged around 2825-2835fps. Ray gets more velocity in his with a little free bore, also a thoughtful extra. It's been decades since I've shot a buffalo with a 338, but they work great (250NP and 275 Speer) and I, too, can't see much difference between them and a 375 except legalities in some countries.

And legalities are perhaps a deciding factor in deciding on rifles. If you want to be open to any African country and you want to include dangerous game, then the battery must include a .375" or larger. One rifle or two? A plains game rifle can be practically anything one wants, but for buffalo on the license there must be a 375 or greater. Perhaps the outfitter can provide that "for the license." If the PH has confidence in your shooting, then he may give permission for you to use your own 9.3 or 338 should a buffalo herd interrupt a stalk on some taller game like hartebeest, roan, or eland. That is where your decisions will lie: 375 for anything in any situation, or a more favorite plains-game rifle, most of the time. Personally, we don't like to think below 338 for plains game, because . . . things happen in Africa.
(OK, I would let a grandkid hunt reedbuck or oribi with a 223 and a monolithic bullet, even 308 for hartebeest and bigger. A person can't be 100% consistent, options abound. )

PS: here is an image that I've shared before in other threads:



This is an oribi taken at 202 yards (yes, we lasered it) with a 416 Rigby and a 350gnTSX. It works. The oribi may have taken one step, or else momentum knocked him silly. Accuracy and reasonable flatness are recommended for the smaller game. And a comfortable rifle is nice.

I have owned and enjoyed rifles in 375 H&H, 9.3x62, 35 Whelen std and improved, 9.3x57, 338 WM.

I can't decide which I enjoyed more. If I HAD to decide, I suppose it would be the 338 WM, since I estimate that I carried and shot it more than the others. It's an awesome cartridge in my estimation. But they all are.

I still have one rifle each in 35 Whelen and 9.3x57, if that says anything.

BTW, I've never hunted Africa and never will. My prime experience was in Alaska, but that window has mostly closed too. I may get to hunt in Alaska again but it will be for the Sitka deer, within brown bear turf.

After playing with all those medium bores, I got the itch to experiment. So, I had a rifle custom made in a wildcat, which I still consider perfect - for me at least. It's a 338 WM case necked up to 9.3mm. I call it the 366 Alaskan, and had PacNor stamp the barrel such. It practically duplicates the 9.3x64 Brenneke. Same case capacity, so I have a reference for handloads. I have no practical use for it, but I like it. I would trust it for brown bear protection when hunting Sitka deer in SE AK, and the bears there are large - some near (plus or minus) 1000 pounds.

I'm with Saeed on magazine capacity. IMO anything over 3 rounds is in all probability superfluous. I've never NEEDED more than two rounds, although my 366 Alaskan holds four.

It's not a carbine length, but I certainly do appreciate a carbine. My 8x57 has a 20" barrel, and I like it a lot. In fact, I've never had a carbine that I didn't like. I actually prefer a carbine, but it would be silly to have a magnum 9.3 mm built with a short barrel. It's silly enough to have one built in the first place.