I've noticed the weight of the CZ550 in .375H&H is 9.36 pounds -- which, without a scope would give a fair amount of recoil, I would imagine.

Someone who wanted a similar cartridge but with less recoil would logically look at the 9.3x62, but, darn it, the CZ550 in that caliber weighs only 8.0 pounds. That's annoying!

A 9.36 pound 9.3x62 would be nice! Who makes the heaviest bolt rifle in 9.3x62?

At over 9 lbs, a .375 should be very comfortable to shoot. I've shot the CZ in .375 and found nothing objectionable. It's a comfortable weight for an H&H IMHO.

Was it scoped, though?

My only big bore experience is with a .45/70 Siamese Mauser and full loads. This rifle weighed 8.33 pounds.

From the bench, this rifle was unpleasant to shoot with 500 gr. bullets at 1800 fps. I think the powder load was about 50 grains. The recoil calculator I use shows recoil energy/recoil velocity numbers of 42/18 for that combo.

The .375H&H with 300 grainers shows recoil numbers of 39/16, so it would be less, but not a whole lot!

A 9.36 pound 9.3x62 would have numbers of 28/14! *That* I would like.

As it is, an 8 lb. 9.3x62 has numbers of 33/16. Even at that weight, it should be considerably more pleasant.

quote:

Whitworth: At over 9 lbs, a .375 should be very comfortable to shoot.

Ditto. 9.36lbs is plenty of weight for a 375.

Niether will kick you very hard at those weights. I have a 6lb 375 H&H and while stimulating it is nothing you can't handle. I also have a 8.5lb 9.3x62 and I would call its recoil mild. With 286gr partitions at just over 2400fps it is comfortable to shoot of a bench and very comfortable to shoot offhand or from field positions. Either one of those rifles will be very controlable. The 9.3 will kick less than the 375. Stock shape and construction make more of a difference than weight unless your talking about light wieghts and neither of those could be consider light.

...at 6 lbs 9,3 is alive - add 1 lb and you have tamed her...

You guys are made of sterner stuff than I. Of course, I have age and arthritis to use as an excuse. I can't see any reason not to have a 9.5 pound 9.3x62 -- if there were one.

I have a 375H&H that's 8lbs 6ozs, including scope, and it's pleasant to shoot. It's no worse than a shotgun with duck loads. You never notice the recoil when hunting anyway.

If the recoil bothers you have a Pachmayr Decelerator pad installed. That helps quite a bit. When you're shooting from the bench put a thin sandbag between your shoulder and the butt of the gun and you can shoot it all day.

postoak -- no, the CZ did not have a scope. I had an 8 lb .375 that used to beat me up on the bench, but at over 9 lbs it shouldn't be a problem if it has a good pad. You don't need to spend too much time on the bench anyway. Sight it in and that should take care of your bench activities.

I guess I just don't see any reason to get the .375 H&H instead of the 9.3x62.

I could live w/ an 8# 9.3 scoped & ready to shoot. Maybe the same for a .375 but 9#+/- seems about right for a .375. My .404 weighs just over 10.3# & I wouldn't want it lighter for any work off the bench.

At 8.5 pounds, the CZ 550 American in 9,3x62 fitted with a 2.5-8x Leupold is very pleasant to shoot.

The load I use is 58 gr of RL-15 on Norma or Graf cases, WSF primers, and Nosler 286 gr Partitions makes 2425 fps.

The only reason to go to a .375 H&H is because the DGR caliber floor is .375 in the country in which you will hunt. Although I have a pair of .375s, I'd rather take a .416 on a dangerous game hunt.

Usually people complain about the CZ’s being too heavy. Not me, though, as I like some heft to my rifles.

Having said that, the 9.3x62 is the lightest of the 550 series, as the barrel has (presumably) the same outside diameter but a much larger inside diameter, hence less metal. I know that of my five identical-other-than-caliber CZ 500’s the 9.3 is noticeably the lightest. Since, like I wrote, I like some heft to my rifle, that one is the only one on which I use the CZ-supplied rings, as they are quite heavy.

I have a Leupold 1-4 mounted on it, but with a sunshade that makes the forward part of it look belled like my other scopes, which also causes the (too tall for my taste) CZ ring height not to be noticeable. If I really wanted to stouten it up I could install my 3.5-10 AO scope on the rifle as the AO part of the scope makes it heavier. However, for the time being I’m content the way it is. I consider it a terrific rifle.

If they still make it with the flip up express-style sights then I wouldn't put a scope on mine.

What happened to the 550 LUX model?

I thought about a Nightforce scope until I read the specs. Those things are almost twice as heavy as a Leupold. If you need some weight buy a nightforce scope.

8lbs without a scope is toooo heavy for a 9.3x62.
According to Olson; original Mausers weighed in at 7.3 lbs. That, in my view, is about right, but I think 7lbs then more weight for a scope and rings would be acceptable.
My 9.3x64 is 7.75 lbs, no scope; it's fitted with a peep sight and shoots 250 grain Woodleighs like a dream, not much recoil and no lost fillings. It knocks Red deer flat.

I don't see the "too heavy" part. If people lug 10 1/2 - 11 pound .375 H&Hs around then why not be able to lug a 9.3x62 of the same weight around -- and enjoy a lot less recoil?

I have an Interarms Mark X that was customised in 375, and have shot everything from whitetails to musk-ox with it and enjoy it. It is pleasurable to shoot off the bench. I checked the weight during a discussion the other night, and rifle, scope, and 4 rounds of 250 grain Barnes "X" loaded shells comes in at 10 pounds 4 ounces.

I have a CZ 550 in 458, that weighs in at 8 and a half pounds, no scope yet, and shooting 350 grain Hornady round nose bullets out of it is fun. The first 458 I had was a Ruger Model 77, that was a pound or more heavier, and was not fun to shoot with that same round.

quote:

Originally posted by postoak:
I don't see the "too heavy" part. If people lug 10 1/2 - 11 pound .375 H&Hs around then why not be able to lug a 9.3x62 of the same weight around -- and enjoy a lot less recoil?

I'd rather carry and shoot a lighter rifle so long as recoil is manageable. You can also carry it farther without fatigue. Just my two cents.

Buy a CZ action in 9.3 and have it mounted in a laminate, thumbhole stock. You'll love it. Kudude

My CZ550 Safari Magnum comes in at 10 lb. without rings and scope; almost 11.5 with rings and scope. Given the size of the stock on these rifles, I would guess that the individual piece of wood can contribute to a lot of weight variation from rifle to rifle.

This rifle is easy to shoot. That weight with the decelerator pad makes it just a big push. It's also far less muzzle blast and terror than an overbore 300 magnum.

So my points are that either one of these rifles isn't going to be bad to shoot (though I have no personal experience with the 9.3x62) and my 375 could be a good bit lighter and still be pleasant to shoot and much easier to lug around. (There's a shortage of gunbearers at our deer lease.)

If you haven't tried either of these, try one. You might be pleasantly surprised. When I first shot my .375 I had my eyes closed and jaw set in anticipation of a serious beating. Well, it was in actuality must more pleasant to shoot than a buddy's 300 Weatherby. These older cartridges don't use half a keg of powder to charge a catridge to get every last bit of velocity possible so that no holdover is necessary to 300 yards. This results in (a) usually good bullet performance since your initial MV is in the 2400-2700 fps range and (b) much less recoil compared to more modern cartridges since the amount of powder burned is in proportion to recoil. (The more powder burned, the more gaz comes out the front end to drive the gun back.)

If you are ever in the Fort Worth area, let me know, you can try my 375.

Regards,

LWD

I suppose if a fellow doesn't mind lugging the weight.........go for it. But having "age and arthritis to use as an excuse", I'd think you'd rather have a lighter gun. Carry a lot.......shoot a little.

What level of recoil are you used to and comfortable with?

The Limbsaver pad can make a world of difference, too. I shoot an 8 3/4 lb. .375 Wby. Right now it's a 250 gr. load at 3060 fps which figures (I think) to about 57 lbs of recoil at about 21 fps. It's a healthy snap. But the Sims pad takes all the pain out. I'll shoot 15 or 20 rounds at a sitting in a T-shirt without a thought. I'm not overly masochistic when it comes to recoil, either. I have no love of taking a beating.

quote:

Originally posted by postoak:
You guys are made of sterner stuff than I. Of course, I have age and arthritis to use as an excuse. I can't see any reason not to have a 9.5 pound 9.3x62 -- if there were one.

My Husqvarna 9.3x62 weighs just short of 9 lbs. with new stock, rings, and 4x scope.

It kicks about the same as my .270

I would not complain if it was 9.5 lbs. but just under 9 lbs. sure tames the recoil for me.

A lot of interesting comments.

LWD, thanks for the offer. Not likely to be able to take you up on it -- although I have an ex-daughter-in-law and grandchildren in Flower Mound, but I'll try to bum a shoot from someone at the range the next time I encounter a .375 H&H or 9.3x62.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris01:
I have a 375H&H that's 8lbs 6ozs, including scope, and it's pleasant to shoot. It's no worse than a shotgun with duck loads. You never notice the recoil when hunting anyway.

If the recoil bothers you have a Pachmayr Decelerator pad installed. That helps quite a bit. When you're shooting from the bench put a thin sandbag between your shoulder and the butt of the gun and you can shoot it all day.

Try a thin bag filled with lead shot.............................works much better.

quote:

Originally posted by postoak:
I don't see the "too heavy" part. If people lug 10 1/2 - 11 pound .375 H&Hs around then why not be able to lug a 9.3x62 of the same weight around -- and enjoy a lot less recoil?

!0.5 -11lbs for a 375 is, in my view, toooo heavy, my scoped 375 weighs 8.75lbs and shoots fine.
I can only immagine that my tollerance to recoil is higher than others but my tollerance to carrying, what I find heavy for calibre rifles, is lower. There you go.
The BRNO in 375 feels like a club in my hands, it lacks that lively feeling which aids throwing it up to the shoulder with ease.
Have your rifles how you like them in barrel length, balance and weight, I know what I like, find tollerable and that's what I use.
11lbs is a good weight for a 505 Gibbs.

Postoak...I have a CZ in 9.3x62 and load it with 286 gr Partitions at about 2425 fps. This gun has a Burris Safari scope and the factory recoil pad. It doesn't kick bad at all....and I mean that. I'd shoot this thing all day vs a 7mm mag....and I have...and regularly shoot..a 470 NE.

Go for it.

Gary

Garby -- do you have the CZ550 "American"? Do me a favor and give me the total weight of your rig.

quote:

Originally posted by postoak:
I've noticed the weight of the CZ550 in .375H&H is 9.36 pounds -- which, without a scope would give a fair amount of recoil, I would imagine.

Someone who wanted a similar cartridge but with less recoil would logically look at the 9.3x62, but, darn it, the CZ550 in that caliber weighs only 8.0 pounds. That's annoying!

A 9.36 pound 9.3x62 would be nice! Who makes the heaviest bolt rifle in 9.3x62?

A CZ 550 in 375 I had weighed 9.69 lbs. and a 550 in 9.3x62 weighed 7.82 lbs.

I would have prefered an 8# 375 and a 7# 9.3.

.375H&H Magazine rifle should weigh about 8&1/4lb ("lock, stock, and barrel") and 9,3x62 20% less.
Postoak, it sounds like you're a candidate for buying a .375H&H "Gargantuan Ruger" Magnum Rifle.

I assume you mean the Model 77 at 10 pounds. The #1 is only 8 1/4 pounds. Actually, I was looking for a slightly heavier 9.3x62 than 8 pounds.

Postoak,

Just under 9# with scope. I'm sorry I can't give exact, since I don't have an "exact" scale. According to the little dial, about 8.6# seems about it.
And, yes, it is the American and wears a 1.75x5 Burris Safari scope. I took all 6 head on my plains game with the rifle...it's awesome.
I personally think my son's 30/06 (weighs about 7#) kicks as much as this gun. I really like it.

Gary

Another way is to "split" recoil force curve by using Sirkis designed Voere 2185. I believe it was chambered for 9,3x62,....or "soldering on" steel-tubed "Gypsy scope" (made by company called IER, IOR?, or something) on a bolt gun for added weight.

The 550 American stock is very well designed, and on the 9.3x62 models a 1" Decelerator is stock. Recoil is about like a 12-gauge duck gun. The recoil of my 6.5# 30-06 with 180-gr. loads is far worse than that of my CZ 550 American firing 286-gr. Partitions at 2,350 fps. The 550 American could actually be a little bit lighter and still not be too bad.


Okie John

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
A CZ 550 in 375 I had weighed 9.69 lbs. and a 550 in 9.3x62 weighed 7.82 lbs.
I would have prefered an 8# 375 and a 7# 9.3.

Way to go Will.
I just can't understand this liking for heavier 9.3 & 375 rifles.


But what do I know and I have been wrong before. Why my wife told me so just two days ago.
I increasingly find myself uttering those two words essential for a happy Marriage,
"Yes Dear,"

My Husqvarna M98 in 9,3x62 weighs just over 3 kgs exactly 3,2 kgs or rather~6.5 LBS, that is a rifle that has broken many a good mans spirits when the thought they where destined for magnums.

However it´s not really a problem with som gettings used to to go a full 20 rounds of the bench.

Rifles intended for hunting should be light.

Best regards Chris

quote:

Originally posted by postoak:
I've noticed the weight of the CZ550 in .375H&H is 9.36 pounds -- which, without a scope would give a fair amount of recoil, I would imagine.

Someone who wanted a similar cartridge but with less recoil would logically look at the 9.3x62, but, darn it, the CZ550 in that caliber weighs only 8.0 pounds. That's annoying!

A 9.36 pound 9.3x62 would be nice! Who makes the heaviest bolt rifle in 9.3x62?

An 8 lbs rifle in a 9,3 is heavy enough. With a straight stock the felt recoil is less than with a dropped comb, as the push is backwards and the upwards whip is minimized that is right under the shooters cheek-bone.

Then the scope weight must still be added - another 11 to 16 ounces depending on your choice of scope - that makes for about a 9 pound system.

Recoil seems worse on the bench when one leans into the rifle in an attempt to get closer to the scope. So stock fit is also important - position the scope in such a way that it provides a comfortable position without stretching one's neck. That assumes that the scope has enough tube length so as to aid adequate movement.

The combination of the above parameters should make for comfortable shooting. Shooting off-hand, as it would be in the bush, the recoil seems even less.

Chris

quote:

My Husqvarna M98 in 9,3x62 weighs just over 3 kgs exactly 3,2 kgs or rather~6.5 LBS, that is a rifle that has broken many a good mans spirits when the thought they where destined for magnums.

The truth hurts, sometimes literally


Terry

I am 65 years old, and just came back from a Namibian elephant hunt where we walked between 5 and 15 miles per day. I carried my 416 Howell which weighs roughly 10 pounds, no scope. You don't want to be shooting a 375 or 9.3 that weighs six pounds.

Weight in a rifle is relative. It should be heavy enough to be comfortable to shoot in the context of its intended use. If you are elephant hunting with a large bore, it should be light enough to carry all day and heavy enough you don't flinch all over the place when the time comes to kill/stop an elephant.

If I were hunting sheep, my rifle would be lighter, but it would not be shooting a 400gr bullet at 2400fps. It would be a 6.5 something in a 6 or 7 pound rifle sans scope, but would generate significantly less recoil.

Why do you think people designed all these different cartridges? Kudude