Has any one ever been on Safari where the rifle carried by the PH was a 9.3x62?

Probably all of the clients of Ganyana who is the ultimate 9.3 fan.

LOL, our PH does not even carry a rifle, counts on his clients performance, unless the game is Lion or Buff, then he carries a .416. In our camp last May there were two 9.3x62s and one 9.3x64.

LLS

should I bring mine to the shoot in June for you?

Rich
DRSS
Knowledge not shared is knowledge lost...

I hunted with one who carried a Mannlicher in 9.3x64.

quote:

Originally posted by oldun:
Has any one ever been on Safari where the rifle carried by the PH was a 9.3x62?

Quit joking. This is something to use at close to moderate ranges againt: bear, big hairy piggie, elk, moose,.....
It proly seen some use against garden raiding jumbos. You know, distracted ole tusker was all happy eating cabbage and ole' German settler put one in through the ear canal.

I have met a few African PHs and farmers that use the 9.3x62 for their own PG hunting but use a heavier caliber for big game.

I asked the question after reading some of the silly comments on the big bore page where a comparison twixed the x62 and the 375 H&H are being made.
The x62 is not, never has been, never will be up to the 375 H&H. It can not safely push the 286 grain bullet fast enough to be as good and reliable a round as the Holland.

I have , and continue to use a 9,3x62 for all my own hunting. Since 1986 I have only shot two animals with anything bigger- a hippo with a .458 Lott and a buff with a 500/416. Until 2005 I carried my 9,3 exclusively on all dangerous game hunts. Appart from the first two mini culls I used a 9,3x62 for all the buffalo eradication hunts in matebeleland in the 1980's. I have never killed an elephant with anything bigger (have used 7.62 nato to kill 2 and wounded my first ever ele with a .458). I shot my first lion with an 8x57, my second with a .375, third with a .375 and 41 mag and have used a 9,3 happily on lion ever since.

Over the years I have often bought a bigger rifle- a .450NE, two .404's, a .458 Win. These rifles were always along as a 'back up" but I never shot anything with them- when things happened I had the 9,3 in my hands.

I then had trouble with an elephant whilst I was in a ground blind guiding a bow hunter. (july 2005). We were lucky

I bought the .458 Lott and tried it on a crop raiding hippo at night. After 9 months of use AI parted with it. Too much recoil for me to handle, especially when dealing with multiple targets- such as not infrequently occurs on a walk and stalk lion when the bitches decide to get involved, or tuskless cows in the jesse.

More recently aquired a Krieghoff 500/416 - and love it. Still there are some situations where the 9,3 will be better, so that now rides in the truck and I carry the Krieghoff

quote:

Originally posted by oldun:
I asked the question after reading some of the silly comments on the big bore page where a comparison twixed the x62 and the 375 H&H are being made.
The x62 is not, never has been, never will be up to the 375 H&H. It can not safely push the 286 grain bullet fast enough to be as good and reliable a round as the Holland.

This statement displays your complete ignorance of the history of the two cartridges. From 1905 to about the second world war, the 9.3X62 served the same role that .375 serves now. It was used by by all manner of African and European people to take everything from dik dik to elephant. After the war, rifles and ammo became really hard to get and American sportsman bought Winchester .375's and the rest is history.

I would not hesitate to hunt cape buffalo or lion with a 9.3X62 and I just talked to a PH who had no qualms about doing so. His comment was, "it's just like a .375." I admit that for heavier game, I would prefer a heavier rifle than EITHER the 9.3 or .375. However, the added velocity of the .375 only becomes important beyond the ranges at which game is normally shot. Pay attention to Ganyana. I'd bet he has more experience than you.

/

Mr Bush
I am far from ignorant of the history of the 9.3 and 375. Tell me what has an understanding of history got to do with balistic facts?
I suggest you revisit my comments above I did not say that the the 9.3 could not kill big stuff, what's pointed to is that the 9.3x62 does not have the velocity of, or carry as much energy as the 375. QED
I may not be an historian but I do have some scientific training. Ballistics is a scientific discipline and as Old Henry Ford said something to the effect of, "History is rubbish"
Further I can't see that I said a man should not carry a 9.3, I wanted to know if any PH did.
For myself I would feel a little more secure in the company of a PH who carried something in the 400 class of cartridge. Thats my choice. As we say the man who pays calls the tune.

ALF, a good note of historical use-thanks. I enjoy the AR with its diverse wealth of knowledge.

now onto reloading for my 9,3x62

quote:

What is interesting is that the 9mm died when DWM died and the 318 basically died when Kynoch died. What is puzzeling is that if these calibers were so popular numerous, and they oul surely remain numerous as second hand rifles and surely one would see many specimans around today? Sadly one does not! The 318 especially once numerous, now reside on used gunshop shelves as shot out clunkers. As for the 9mm, it simply vanished from the scene, now mainly in collectors hands.

I bought a 9x57 at auction in the UK probablt fifteen years ago. It seemed ideal in that it was very light weight, five shot capacity, sensible short (100 yards) range pig and woodland cartridge. I paid £60.00 for it.

When I tried to get cartridges I found out why I had only paid £60.00. So I never shot it. Ever. And sold it. For about the same £60.00 paid for it.

Which was a pity as many totally useless and pointless "35" cartridges had usurped it.

No doubt it may one day become fashionable and then everybody will rediscover it usefulness...although it now may struggle against the fact that the useful 35 Whelen and 358 Winchester now exist as factory loadings.

Ok, it looks like a good practical velocity out of a 9.3x62 285 gr with a 22 inch tube is 2400 FPS and a 375 does about 2600FPS out of a 26 inch tube with a 300 is that enough of a difference at say 100yds or under that the game are able to tell much difference?

quote:

Originally posted by ron williams:
Ok, it looks like a good practical velocity out of a 9.3x62 285 gr with a 22 inch tube is 2400 FPS and a 375 does about 2600FPS out of a 26 inch tube with a 300 is that enough of a difference at say 100yds or under that the game are able to tell much difference?

I can't recall ever asking game any questions at all,or indeed them volunteeribg such information. It's the 2nd of April, enough of the jokes now.

Sounds like you have made up your mind on what you feel the right answer should be.

If you do not feel the 9.3x62 is enough do not use one and always insist that your PH carry something bigger.

quote:

Originally posted by oldun:
Mr Bush
I am far from ignorant of the history of the 9.3 and 375. Tell me what has an understanding of history got to do with balistic facts?
I suggest you revisit my comments above I did not say that the the 9.3 could not kill big stuff, what's pointed to is that the 9.3x62 does not have the velocity of, or carry as much energy as the 375. QED
I may not be an historian but I do have some scientific training. Ballistics is a scientific discipline and as Old Henry Ford said something to the effect of, "History is rubbish"
Further I can't see that I said a man should not carry a 9.3, I wanted to know if any PH did.
For myself I would feel a little more secure in the company of a PH who carried something in the 400 class of cartridge. Thats my choice. As we say the man who pays calls the tune.

No, what you said was that the 9.3 "can not safely push a 286 grain bullet fast enough to be as good and as reliable a round as the Holland' and that it was "silly" to suggest otherwise. I think it is pure nonsense to argue that 14 gains more bullet and 100 feet per second more velocity makes the .375 somehow an infinitely more "reliable" dangerous game cartridge then the 9.3 at least at the ranges at which dangerous game is usually taken.

/

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:

quote:

Originally posted by oldun:
I asked the question after reading some of the silly comments on the big bore page where a comparison twixed the x62 and the 375 H&H are being made.
The x62 is not, never has been, never will be up to the 375 H&H. It can not safely push the 286 grain bullet fast enough to be as good and reliable a round as the Holland.

This statement displays your complete ignorance of the history of the two cartridges. From 1905 to about the second world war, the 9.3X62 served the same role that .375 serves now. It was used by by all manner of African and European people to take everything from dik dik to elephant. After the war, rifles and ammo became really hard to get and American sportsman bought Winchester .375's and the rest is history.

I would not hesitate to hunt cape buffalo or lion with a 9.3X62 and I just talked to a PH who had no qualms about doing so. His comment was, "it's just like a .375." I admit that for heavier game, I would prefer a heavier rifle than EITHER the 9.3 or .375. However, the added velocity of the .375 only becomes important beyond the ranges at which game is normally shot. Pay attention to Ganyana. I'd bet he has more experience than you.

Hey, be nice.

What PH's or Ganyana say are biased by their own experiences, just like everyone else. And also are limted by those same experiences.

I've hunted with a bunch of PH's and not a one used anything as small as a 9.3 or 375. Until a few years ago, I never knew the 9.3 existed. Though I have two now for plinking I do not pretend that they are something they are not.

They are relatively mild shooting, indeed. But that is because they are relatively mild in the horsepower department, not because of some magical powers.

quote:

fact is the 9,3 is nothing more than a heavy shooting 30-06 and there lies the genius of this caliber.

Alf,

That about says it all.

Alf, Will, Thank you for your comments.
This'll put the cat amongst the pidgeons.
I'd rather have a Rooger in the new 375 Rooger than a 9.3x62 in a factory rifle of simular quality.

/

Here is a picture of a Zebra thken with a 338 Federal (less powerful than either the 9.3 or 375) shooting 210 grain TSX bullets
the rif;e and scope wieghed 6 pounds





The next picture shows the damage to the Zebras heart.




A hole large enough to stick your fist into.

The 338 Federal is not as large in diameter and doesn't have the energy figures to match the larger rounds, but apperantly it was enough and the bullet exited the Zebra.. Enough is exactly that enough...

JPW475,
Is that a Kimber rifle?
The damage to the animals' innerds is indeed impressive.

Yes it is a Kimber... It is not my rifle and I did not take that Zebra the gentle man that did is 80 years old. i thought that the 338 Federal was on the sluggish side until I saw him take that Zebra and I was and am impressed with the performance of this rather sedate cartridge..

Kevin Robertson loads the 375 H&H 300 grainers down to 2400 fps for buffalo hunting. Splitting ballistic hairs between .366 and .375 and 14 grains of bullet weight at ~2400 fps requires a hunting knife sharper than a scalpel!

quote:

Originally posted by ACRecurve:
Kevin Robertson loads the 375 H&H 300 grainers down to 2400 fps for buffalo hunting. Splitting ballistic hairs between .366 and .375 and 14 grains of bullet weight at ~2400 fps requires a hunting knife sharper than a scalpel!

In addition, in his new book, Kevin Robertson endorses the 9.3 for buffalo and has a rifle so chambered that he says has taken over 600 buffalo.

I have shot enough buffalo with the 9.3x62 and the .375 H&H to satisfy myself, that they are both "good enough" with proper bullets and proper bullet placement, but I suspect about anything from the 06 on up qualifies under those guidelines...

I rate the .375 H&H a little better than the 9.3x62 or the 9.3x64, the .416 better than the .375 and the 458 Lott is probably better than the .416, and the 505 Gibbs better than the 458 Lott, In my opinnion thats the way it works but thats just my opine.

I like the .416s as a happy medium for self....but I will hunt with any of them and be satisfied..

There are no fleas on the 9.3s

And neither are there ticks

The 375 H&H has a reputation very well earned

The 9.3s are overlooked and sometimes evan spurned

Some new fangled rounds have come along

Hopeing for some marketshare to steal

All they are trying to do is reinvent the wheel

We as sportsmen should not have any fears

The 9.3 and 375 willbe around another hundred years

It seems popular belief that bigger is better for large game, but doesn't recoil , weight and muzzle blast come into play?
I for one feel happier with my light but fast 9.3mm over a heavy hard recoiling 416.

quote:

Originally posted by ozhunter:
It seems popular belief that bigger is better for large game, but doesn't recoil , weight and muzzle blast come into play?
I for one feel happier with my light but fast 9.3mm over a heavy hard recoiling 416.

Totally biased comment, if I ever heard one.

Yea,what makes ozhunter think pure logic has anything to do with this debate!!

til later

Actually the only time bigger is better is when a big buff is about to stick his horn up into your crotch..Makes all the since in the world to me to have a 40 caliber or larger...but I have no qualms about using the 9.3x62 on anything, I do know however that there are better rounds for dangerous game..

Starting a thread is a bit like becoming a parent in that no matter what ones intentions and hopes are, they have lives of their own and go off on their own merry way. Sometimes surprising and at other times making one smile.
Thank you all for your contributions.

While the 9.3x62 can never quite match the ballistics of the .375 H&H (more powder capacity and a slightly heavier bullet will win out every time when it comes to generating "horsepower"), I find it amazing how close the 9.3x62 can come to the .375 H&H.

I thought some might find this of interest:


From the article "Medium Mediums" by John Barsness.

What I like about the 9.3x62 is that it generates plenty of power for general plains game hunting while doing it from a rifle with a standard length action. My CZ 550 American with scope weighs 8.75 lb. That's a lot of power in a handy package.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
The 9.3 Mauser falls in that rare category of what I see as "sweet shooting" calibers, there are not many of them. But once you shoot one you know why.

Yep, I agree! I also have a .338 Win Mag and a .375 H&H but I enjoy shooting my 9.3x62 more. It is a "sweet shooter". The 9.3x62 has become one of my favorite cartridges.


Rifle: CZ 550 American in 9.3x62
Handload: 286 gr Woodleigh round nose at 2390 fps (chrono'd average)


Cheers!
-Bob F.

While I did not hunt with him personally, Coenraad Vermaak, owner of CVS in South Africa, told me he used a 9.3x62 for backup and felt it was plenty of gun for buffalo. He liked its light weight and said he used it for back up for quite some time.

I haven't used a 9.3x62 on cape buffalo, but a 286 at 2450-2500 and a 300 at 2450-2500 isn't much different and I have not chrono'd a factory .375 load that went over 2500 fps with a 300-grain. Maybe Hornady loads will, but not Winchester and they will certainly kill game.