Rick R,
Those that use the 9.3x62 on Sambar generally feel its too soft on that sized game animal ... add to that that most animals are taken at under 100m, heavy scrub, often moving ... sounds like elk hunting doesn't it??!!
Cheers...
Con
http://www.performancebullet.no/filer/jv_okt2004.pdfThis is a translation I pulled from an Australian forum, no info on the Prvi though ... sorry!
<<A rough translation by Erik D on NitroExpress of the 9,3mm bullet test written by Alf Martin Bråten published in Jeger Hund & Våpen" October 2004.
---------------------------------------------
"IN 99 OUT OF 100 CASES, YOU WILL KILL A MOOSE WITH ALL THE BULLETS AVAILABLE ON THE
MARKET. BUT I DON'T WANT TO WAIT FOR THAT 1 EXCEPTION, SO I CHOOSE MY BULLETS CAREFULLY.
Although an old timer, the 9,3mm has not expired from age yet. We have even recently
witnessed new creations in this caliber, such as the 9,3x66, which for all practical
purposes can be compared to the older 9,3x64.
Still, the most popular variant of this caliber is the 9,3x62, and also yet another older
variant that won't give up; the 9,3x57.
With the variations in velocities attained with these different rounds, it is obviously
difficult to make bullets that work optimally in all 3. We are after all talking about a
span in velocity difference of roughly 150m/s.
The test. I gathered together 25 different types 9,3 bullets. The test dealt with
checking the expantion and depth of penetration at 15 meters with the 9,3x66 (which was
also used to represent the 9,3x64). This was to to stress the bullets to their maximum
capabilities. I borrowed a new Sako 75 from Ing. Rolf Aaberg for this. The test medium
was a stack of wet telephone catalogues with a dry catalogue put in as #2. This is a
tough challenge, as a some lead is often lost in the dry catalogue.
Next, the bullets were tested in 9,3x62 (which also was used to represent the 9,3x74R).
The test was exactly as described above, but with about 50m/s lower velocity.
Finally, all bullets were tested to find their lowest expansion distance/velocity. Study
the results. Choosing a bullet that is known to be the toughest isn't necessarily always
the best choice. Especially if using a caliber with moderate velocity.
Do not read the expansion data as absolute, but more as a guideline. If you find a bullet
that you think would be potentially interesting for your use, then try it out yourself.
Most likely you will obtain a different velocity than I did, and thus the data will not
be identical.
My choice. And I mean MY choice. I can't pick the ideal bullet for you, as you have to do
this yourself depending on which 9,3 cartridge you use, your personal wishes, and
particular needs. It's more than enough to pick my own favorites amongst the ones I
tested. My own criteria is that it will be use for general hunting, and I demand that the
bullet doesn't fragment/seperate. I prefer more penetration over expansion diameter (the
9,3 has a relatively large diameter to begin with), and I sometimes experience occasional
long shots, so trajectory is also a factor for me. Since my barrel is 18.5 inches, the
chances of finding something suitable narrowed itself down? We'll see.
To begin with I mentioned that all of these bullets will kill a moose. At least 99 times
out of 100. So when I put aside many of these bullets, it is not because they are bad.
However, since the options are so many, and I only really need one bullet, I have sorted
them quite harshly.
The first thing I did was cut out all bullets that easily loose their core. Basically,
this is all of those that aren't reinforced in some way that makes them hold together.
This leaves quite a few still, so I continue to look. To achieve a good combination of
penetration and large expanded diameter requires a high retained wight. A glance at the
tables for retained weight (and thus penetration and diameter) in 9,3x62 shows that the
number of suitable light bullets of modern construction are quite large. I find variants
here that have just as much penetration when expanded as the traditionally heavy bullets.
And since I also appreciate a decent bullet trajectory for all around use, my choices
naturally fall on the lighter bullets.
I can for example say that my trajectory criteria is that when shooting 5 cm high at 100
meters, I don't want the bullet to shoot lower than 5 cm below my point of aim at 200
meters.
That leaves me with the PBP 220 grain, Rhino Solid Shank 235 grain, Brenneke TOG 247
grain and Barnes X 250 grains (Nosler BT is already weeded out since it is prone to
seperation). If I accept a few more cm of drop at 200 meters, I can also use the Swift A
-Frame and Woodleigh Weldcore RN SN in 250 grain.
All of these are superb bullets, and are generally suitable for my demands. But from past
experience, I know that the Barnes X leaves an unwanted amount of copper fouling in my
barrel. The Brenneke TOG looses 20% of it's lead, and is also hard to get a hold of. The
Rhino has doesn't expand at lower velocities, although the importer claims that a new
slightly softer type will soon be available. And the Woodleigh could penetrate better in
My opinion.
So I am left with the PBP and the Swift. One is as good as the other. The PBP could
ideally expand at lower velocities than it does in my barrel, but it has a better
trajectory than the Swift. So that makes it a tie.
I don't care much about price, but if you are than my tip would be the Lapua Mega, which
is the tests best resulting conventional bullet. The Nosler Partion, Normas Oryx, and the
Sako Hammerhead are the tests least expensive "Super bullets".
-----------------------------------
Some additional information about the picture texts:
Trajectory: The figures are for a range of 200 and 250 meters for each of the 3 tested
cartridge, with a standard muzzle velocity and sighted in to impact 5 cm high at 100
meters.
----------------------------------
The comment text in each bullet evaluation:
"Inntr." = Penetration
"Diam." = Expanded diameter
"Restvekt" = Remaining bullet weight
"Eksp.Grense" = Distance when velocity becomes so slow that it will not expand reliably.
------------------------------------
PBP 220grain: The tests only Norwegian produced bullet. Simply a top notch hunting bullet
for the 9,3x64/66 and 9,3x62. Monometal copper.
+Strength
+Penetration
+Diameter
-Reluctant to expand when the velocity is very low.
-------
Norma Vulcan 232 grain: Conventional lead filled bullet. Holds together surprisingly
well, but can't take too much before coming apart.
+Price
-Seperation risk
-Little penetration
--------
Rhino Solid Shank 235 grain: "Semihomogeneous(semi-monometal)" South African produced
bullet with a small portion of bonded lead in the front. High remaining bullet weight and
large diameter. A little stiff at low speeds, but the producer promises a "extra soft"
variant soon.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Reluctant to expand when the velocity is very low.
-----------
Brenneke TOG: Brenneke's new generation of bonded bullets. Expands willingly in all 9,3mm
cartridges, but looses a bit of weight.
+Balanced penetration and diameter.
-Looses some weight/some shrapnel.
-----------
Barnes X 250 grain: Homogeneous/monometal bullet that gives maximum penetration combined
with a large expanded diameter. Willingly expands at the velocities of all 3 tested
calibers.
+Strength
+Penetration
+Diameter
-Often leaves a lot of fouling in the barrel.
------
Nosler Ballistic Tip 250 grains: A conventional bullet with a solid rear part of the
jacket. It has good flight characteristics, but is a little reluctant to expand at 9,3x57
velocities.
+Ballistics
+Price
-Very varying results regarding loosing lead/shrapnel.
--------
Swift A-Frame 285 grain: The bullet has a solid partion between the top and bottom in
addition to being bonded. Looses very little lead and willingly expands. A bullet that
never fails.
+Strength
+Penetration
-None that are obvious.
---------
Woodleigh Weldcore RN SN 250 grain: This Australian is bonded and is a good choice for
those who prefer expanded diameter rather then maximum penetration.
+Strength
+Diameter
-None that are obvious.
--------
Rhino Solid Shank 250 grain: The 250 grain bullet from Rhino is simply too solid and does
not give acceptable expansion. The producer promises a "extra soft" variant will be
available soon.
+Strength
-Very unwilling to expand.
(Note from ErikD: I read a similar test in a Swedish magazine published this months, and
the Rhino 250 grain got the same results as before. Which leads me to believe that they
have not released a "softer" version yet.)
--------
Speer 270 grain: A traditional lead filled bullet that is cheap and generally usable at
lower velocities. However, it is not a safe bet when bone is hit.
+Price
+Penetration
-Seperation risk
-------
Lapua Naturalis 270 grain: Earlier reluctency to expend appears to have been dealt with,
because now this bullet is impressive. It gives moderate penetration, but delivers an
unusually large expanded diameter, and 100% retained weight. The length of the bullet
does steal a little case capacity though.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Long length of bullet.
-------
Swiss Jagt CDP 286 grain: Has a constuction very similar to the Nosler Partion, but is
undoubtedly more solid. This bullet has also been made to expand more easily as the years
have passed, and does well both when it comes to penetration and diameter.
+Penetration
+Diameter
-None that are obvious.
--------
Woodleigh Weldcore PP 286 grain: Bonded bullet with "Protected Point". Gives a lot of
penetration due to not so much expansion at high velocity, but gets opposite results at
lower speeds (?!?!?). Is not very willing to expand, and is thus not very suitable for
the 9,3x57 and is even a bit too stiff for the 9,3x62 also.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Reluctant to expand
-Looses a little weight/shrapnel
--------
Nosler Partion 286 grain: An old classic that has gotten a lot of competition. The
partion between the front and rear guarantees weight retention, but generally the front
part looses all it's lead. The published retained weights include lead that is often
found together with the rest of the bullet.
+Penetration
+Price
-Shrapnel
----------
Rhino Solid Shank 286 grain: This Rhino is also way too stiff, which results in no
expansion in 9,3x62. But be patient, as a "Extra soft" variant is also promised.
+None
-No expansion
-----------
Norma Alaska 286 grain: A conventional bullet with a good reputation, but can't stand up
to the more modern bullet constructions. Does not hold together well at higher speeds or
under stress.
+Price
-Risk of seperation.
--------
Norma Oryx 286 grain: A bonded bullet that stays together very well. It is soft, which
results in a large diameter at higher speeds. Works well in 9,3x57 too.
+Diameter
+Penetration
-Some shrapnel.
--------
Lapua Mega 286 grain: Conventional lead/copper bullet with a good reputation. The jacket
has a thicker portion in the middle, which locks the core to the jacket. The test showed
good results. A lot of bullet for the money.
+Price
+Well balanced diameter/penetration
-Seperation potential
----------
Sako Hammerhead 286 grain: A bonded bullet that can handle most situations. Shows
impressive penetration and diameter. It also expands willingly at all relevant
velocities.
+Price
+Penetration
-Some shrapnel.
--------
Barnes X 286 grain: Barnes X shows once again a high level of technical qualities. The
diameter and penetration is second to none. But I have too much varied experience when it
comes to copper fouling to make it my first choice.
+Penetration
+Diameter
-Copper fouling.
--------
Sellier & Bellot 286 grain: A cheap bullet of conventional construction. Can probably
kill both moose and red deer, but the core seperates from the jacket too easily. This is
probably a great bullet to use for practice. The importer can not promise any more this
year.
+Price
-Seperation risk
---------
Partizan 286 grain: It can probably kill most things, but with a very great risk of the
core seperating from the jacket. No matter what, it's the tests cheapest bullet. You can
buy 15 of these for the price of 1 of the more expensive bullets.
+Price
-Rik of seperation
---------
Swift A-Frame 300 grain: This bullet weight is best suited for the 9,3x64/66, but I have
added the data from the 9,3x62 also. It is a bullet that works under all conditions, but
low speed and moderate BC doesn't exactly help the trajectory.
+Strength
+Penetration
-Short range bullet.
--------
Rhino Solid Shank 300 grain: This bullet is in the same catagory as the previous (Swift
A-Frame 300 grain), but this one delievers a large diameter at the cost of lower
penetration. It's need for velocity to expand reliably, and to get decent trajectory,
diqualifies it from being useful in the 9,3x62.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Penetration
Short range bullet.
---------
Woodleigh Weldcore RN SN 320 grain: Actually a bullet for the old .360NE Nr2, but works
in 9,3x64/66 as an alternative in dence bush.
+Strength
+Penetration
Diameter
-Short range bullet.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Bråten Exclusive"
As you can see, one of the tests bullets is designed and produced in Norway. This peaked
my curiousity and interest, and resulted in me using these PBP (Performance Bullet
Production) bullets quite a lot these last few years. Both for hunting and for testing.
Thus it is my pleasure to tell you that although I quite easily picked out a couple of
favorites amongst the tested bullets, my real favorite is a slightly different variant.
Since my 9,3x62 has a 18.5 inch barrel (I sacrificed length when I put on a moderator to
keep the overall length down), I have to accept a slightly reduced muzzle velocity
compared to a more conventional barrel length. Therefore the PBP 220 grain is a little
reluctant to expand at my preferred distances. In my opinion.
This resulted in me wanting to modify these bullets so they would expand reliably at a
lower velocity. I discussed this with Kjell Tonheim at the company Arms & Ammo (who
produce the PBP), and he shortly made up a handful of bullets designed to my wishes and
specifications.
The modification was to expand the existing hollowpoint to a slightly larger diameter in
addition to making it slightly deeper. The result was a bullet that was more willing to
expand at lower velocities (longer distance), while at the same time more material at the
end of each expanded petal lessened the likelyhood that they would break off at shorter
ranges. This variation was naturally named "Bråten Exclusive" and functions perfectly in
my rifle.
So it is fully possible to have your bullets custom made if you wish. The price however
is something you'll have to discuss with Tonheim.
----------------------------------------------------------
Test Method:
I am sometimes asked if I get the correct bullet expansion by shooting at short range
with a reduced load. This in comparison to shooting at genuine distances. With reduced
velocity, there will always be a reduction in the rate of the bullet rotation, taking
into consideration that the barrel twist is the same.
I am aware of, and find this topic worth discussing, and thus I have tried out both
methods. Up till now, I have found only negligible differences.
This time I brought the Rhino 250 grain bullet with me out in the field, after having
tested it's expansion with reduced loads at short range. The short range test showed me
that expansion stopped at around 650 m/s. The BC of this bullet is .307, and if we put
this info into the computer, with a muzzle velocity of 760 m/s we will find that the
velocity will be reduced to 650 m/s at a distance of about 150 meters.
After checking that muzzle velocity was 760 m/s, I shot at a stack of telephone
catalogues at a laser measured 150 meters. The result was 2 bullets that looked exactly
the same.
There are however some variables that can create difficulties and varied results. First
of all, you must be in full control of the velocity. A variation here will give a large
difference in the end result. Secondly, the result is dependent on an accurate BC. Then
there is the fact that different test media will show varied results to one degree or
another.
The hard part though is that some bullets can produce a reasonable amount of expansion
within a rather large specter of velocities. Thus, you end up having to use common sense
when deciding if the expansion has reached an acceptable level, and this can make the
science less exact.
Finally, in regards to expansion tests with hunting bullets, I do not claim that wet
paper is the same as live flesh and blood. But it is the most easily used and practical
that that I have available. This goes for both test methods.
So with that in mind, I would say that this test method gives a good idea of what is
happening. And knowing what is happening is good to know. Remember that Norwegian law
demands that expanding bullets be used for hunting."
(note that the last picture with two Rhino Solid Shank show that these 2 bullets acted
exactly the same using both test methods: fast/long distance + slow/short distance)
,
