9.3x66 Sako vs 9.3x64 Brenneke

15 February 2006, 17:35

i was unaware of the former round till i got a new copy of cartridges of the world. for whatever reason, it fails to give ctg dimensions of the sako round but looking at the case length and ballistics i can't help but wonder why they'd introduce a round like that when the brenneke is already around? marketing to induce sales of new guns? what justification is there for this round over the brenneke?

15 February 2006, 17:45

jens poulsen

quote:
Originally posted by willmckee:
i was unaware of the former round till i got a new copy of cartridges of the world. for whatever reason, it fails to give ctg dimensions of the sako round but looking at the case length and ballistics i can't help but wonder why they'd introduce a round like that when the brenneke is already around? marketing to induce sales of new guns? what justification is there for this round over the brenneke?

From me from another thread:

...haven`t seen much point in the 9.3x66 sako

Our old 9.3x64 Brenneke has a bigger casevolume(powdercapacity) !

Just think of it....if someone were to make
a .308 caliber cartridge that were 2mm longer than our 30-06 but with less casevolume, who would buy it?
Posts: 161 | Location: Denmark | Registered: 09 June 2005

djpaintles
one of us
Posted 22 January 2006 18:01
Jens, while I agree that the 9,3x64 is a great round I'll still find room for the 9,3x66 when it becomes available. I think that the logic behind it is to acheive 9,3x64 performance on existing 9,3x62 platforms and hold 5 down as a 9,3x62 would. The Brenneke case is a good deal fatter and requires a non-standard bolt-face..................DJ

Remember that this is all for fun.........
Posts: 2056 | Location: Oklahoma,USA | Registered: 27 February 2004

jens poulsen
one of us
Posted 22 January 2006 18:20
quote:
Originally posted by djpaintles:
Jens, while I agree that the 9,3x64 is a great round I'll still find room for the 9,3x66 when it becomes available. I think that the logic behind it is to acheive 9,3x64 performance on existing 9,3x62 platforms and hold 5 down as a 9,3x62 would. The Brenneke case is a good deal fatter and requires a non-standard bolt-face..................DJ

I know, you are right,: I was just wondering, looking for a just course , and you found it for me...Thanks
Posts: 161 | Location: Denmark | Registered: 09 June 2005

ramrod340
one of us
Posted 22 January 2006 19:25
Anyone know if it will ever make it to the states? Anyone have or know where I can find case dimensions?
Posts: 1477 | Location: Houston, tx | Registered: 02 April 2001

lawndart
one of us

Posted 23 January 2006 03:48
I've got brass, reamers and gauges. Just waiting on a barrel to come in. It is basically a 9,3x62 stretched in the middle section. if you build a rifle on an older Sako action, or a Remington, etc., you can load out to 87mm in over all length. At that point you are getting pretty good performance. In the newer Sako rifles with the detachable magazines there is only enough room for an 85mm OAL. Then you have to use double based powders and a heavy hand on the seating and crimping stations.

When I get my little blunderbuss put together this spring I'll publish pictures and measurements.

lawndart

Oh nothing mom. Just pounding primers with a hammer.

Posts: 3013 | Location: Owyhee County, Idaho | Registered: 02 February 2004

lawndart
one of us

Posted 23 January 2006 03:55
Hi Jens,

The only reason for the 9,3x66 Sako is that we can build another rifle in the 9,3 calibre.

I hope to have a set of:

9,3x62 Mauser
9,3x66 Sako
9,3x64 Brenneke
9,3x70 Expert Magnum

done one of these days. Any special reason? They all start with 9,3 .

In the early 1990's I flew out of Karup, between Viborg and Herning up on the Jutland penninsula. I miss the ice cream and the buses and trains that always ran on time.

lawndart

Oh nothing mom. Just pounding primers with a hammer.

Posts: 3013 | Location: Owyhee County, Idaho | Registered: 02 February 2004

ramrod340
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 05:41
quote:
I've got brass, reamers and gauges

Where did you get your brass?
Posts: 1477 | Location: Houston, tx | Registered: 02 April 2001

9.3x62
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 07:09
Yes, where did you get your brass? Also, is your reamer to CIP specs or does it have a "Americanized" target throat/leave? Thanks...

------------------------------------
Cogito, ergo spud

Posts: 2104 | Registered: 30 June 2003

9.3x62
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 07:12
quote:
Originally posted by ramrod340:
Anyone know if it will ever make it to the states? Anyone have or know where I can find case dimensions?

Dave Kiff at Pacific Tool and Die has reamers (one to CIP spec and one with a target throat). he can fax you a copy of the reamer dimensions...

------------------------------------
Cogito, ergo spud

Posts: 2104 | Registered: 30 June 2003

ramrod340
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 08:04
quote:
one to CIP spec and one with a target throat

The difference being?

Thanks for the heads up on Dave. I'll give him a call this week.
Posts: 1477 | Location: Houston, tx | Registered: 02 April 2001

9.3x62
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 18:41
quote:
Originally posted by ramrod340:

quote:
one to CIP spec and one with a target throat

The difference being?

Thanks for the heads up on Dave. I'll give him a call this week.

CIP throat is long with a really long and gradual leade. The target throat is shorter with a much more abrupt leade.

I think I would go with the CIP just because I have had very good luck with CIP spec throats/leade in 9.3x62...

------------------------------------
Cogito, ergo spud

Posts: 2104 | Registered: 30 June 2003

Pete Lincoln
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 18:55
add a 9.3 RSM to the list.

i'm currently playing with a 300wsm case necked up to 9.3.
Pete

http://www.roedaleprecision.com
Posts: 62 | Location: Germany | Registered: 23 September 2005

ramrod340
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 19:31
As to the brass. Couldn't you simply run some 30-06 cylinder brass into a sizing die and trim to length? Yep I know the headspace wouldn't match but you would have a start.
Posts: 1477 | Location: Houston, tx | Registered: 02 April 2001

Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by groupee community

15 February 2006, 19:59

wsj

My guess is that whey wanted to duplicate the potential ballistics of the 9x64 but needed a modern standarized cartridge that can't fit in old rifles. Think 450 Marlin.
-WSJ

15 February 2006, 21:45

<9.3x62>

I thought long and hard about choosing between the two, and finally settled on the 9.3x64. What tipped the decision was better availability of cases and dies. Mark Penrod has agreed to do the work on 1951 model 70, so I have no worries about the feeding being anything less than perfect...

Also, I've got plenty of 9.3x62s which I can seat to mag length, which brings it mighty close to 9.3x66 ballistics, where the 9.3x64 is a potentially meaningful increase in power.

Finally, I would like to hear reports from folks who have chronographed the 9.3x66 factory ammo. The velocity claims seem a bit optimistic to me...

16 February 2006, 00:01

willmckee

just guessing at the case head diameter at the time, that was my conjecture on the x66. is intended to satisfy a pretty narrow set of circumstances. i ran off 5 loading dummies. work great in an unmodified 98 action (excepting the bolt face of course) and a 98 i did to 300winmag (but am tired of) i've got the mag box lengthened by .1" and they worked great thru it as well besides allowing longer bullets or less seating depth or both.

i guess if someone has an action that cannot easily be modified to accomodate a larger case head the sako round is the way to go. otherwise, i just don't see it. and there seems to be no economic reason to chose the x66.

9.3x62, where do you get your x64 brass? i got some from buffalo arms who sells them by the each but they're made from 458winmag brass. seem perfectly fine but i'd rather have at least some brass that was strictly speaking appropriate.

roger

16 February 2006, 01:00

<9.3x62>

quote:

9.3x62, where do you get your x64 brass? i got some from buffalo arms who sells them by the each but they're made from 458winmag brass. seem perfectly fine but i'd rather have at least some brass that was strictly speaking appropriate.

Huntingtons. RWS brass for about $25 per 20. Pricey, but I'm willing to pay it as RWS brass is second to none in quality...

16 February 2006, 01:01

willmckee

that ain't too bad. not like i need 500 pcs or will have to replace it every 3 months. thanks.

16 February 2006, 01:21

<9.3x62>

I just called them, they are out of RWS x64 brass until March, but they have a bunch of Horneber x64 brass in stock, which is also good brass I am told, though I have not used it myself...

Here's a link:

http://www.huntingtons.com/

16 February 2006, 02:18

lawndart

The 9,3 x62 is roughly equivalent to the 35 Whelen, the 9,3 x 64 is equivalent to the 375 H&H. The 9,3 x 66 splits the difference.

Different horses for different courses.

I will do some work later in the spring or early summer to see about making 9,3 x 66 brass out of 30-06 basic brass (with the correct headstamp).

Basically you have your choice of 3-4 down with greater power, or 4-5 down with good power.

LD

16 February 2006, 02:24

<9.3x62>

Lawndart:

Does the new 9.3x66 have exactly the same case head diameter as the 9.3x62, which is ever so slightly larger than the 30-06 case head? If so, there may be issues making brass from 30-06 (or better yet 280) cases. I should look back at the reamer specs...

16 February 2006, 02:28

ramrod340

quote:
30-06 (or better yet 280)

I'd look towards 06 cylinder brass.

16 February 2006, 02:30

<9.3x62>

quote:
Originally posted by ramrod340:
quote:
30-06 (or better yet 280)

I'd look towards 06 cylinder brass.

Maybe I don't know what cylinder brass is, but a 280 will get a lot closer to 66mm than a -06 case will...

16 February 2006, 03:02

ramrod340

It is nothing more than 06 brass before the final forming. 2.65" long. Z-Hat and others sell it.

http://www.z-hat.com/catalog/search.php?submit=submit&c...ba3b0a887d33234dd3b3

16 February 2006, 04:36

<9.3x62>

quote:
Originally posted by ramrod340:
It is nothing more than 06 brass before the final forming. 2.65" long. Z-Hat and others sell it.

Cool.

16 February 2006, 05:28

lawndart

The factory 9,3 x 62 and 9,3 x 66 brass does have a tiny bit larger head diameter.

In practice it will be like firing American made 6,5 x 55 SM brass out of a European chamber for that cartridge. The case won't look as pretty as the correct factory one does, but it will function 100%.

LD

16 February 2006, 15:06

Bent Fossdal

Where the '66 really shines, is in a long action like the Rem700. With a loaded length of 3,5", bullets could be seated out far enough to give you the same capasity as the '64, but with 5 down instead of 3.

16 February 2006, 15:28

lawndart

Amen!

16 February 2006, 17:08

willmckee

5 versus 3 isn't true. i can get 4 easily in an unmodified mauser box. and they feed fine. considering most 375's only hold 3 down the 9.3x64 is one up on common 375's and lacking a long action the choice is pretty clear. what was basically said is given a long action the x66 can equal the x64. not beat it, just equal it. 4 down is the equivalent of a double rifle and one reload and since i'm not likely to be doing control work 4 is plenty.

16 February 2006, 18:51

<9.3x62>

quote:
Originally posted by willmckee:
5 versus 3 isn't true. i can get 4 easily in an unmodified mauser box. and they feed fine.

Well said. My unmodified 9.3x64 model 70 (pre-64) takes 4 down easily - not even a tight fit.

Next, put a x64 on a 3.5" action, and you can seat its bullets farther out too, and thus the ballisitc advantage of the x64 will remain.

Moreover, who would want a 9.3x66 on a 700 action anyway? More still, most 700 actions in '06 sized rounds only hold 4 down, not 5.

18 April 2006, 01:44

tera

quote:
Originally posted by jens poulsen:
quote:
Originally posted by willmckee:
i was unaware of the former round till i got a new copy of cartridges of the world. for whatever reason, it fails to give ctg dimensions of the sako round but looking at the case length and ballistics i can't help but wonder why they'd introduce a round like that when the brenneke is already around? marketing to induce sales of new guns? what justification is there for this round over the brenneke?

From me from another thread:

...haven`t seen much point in the 9.3x66 sako

Our old 9.3x64 Brenneke has a bigger casevolume(powdercapacity) !

Just think of it....if someone were to make
a .308 caliber cartridge that were 2mm longer than our 30-06 but with less casevolume, who would buy it?
Posts: 161 | Location: Denmark | Registered: 09 June 2005

djpaintles
one of us
Posted 22 January 2006 18:01
Jens, while I agree that the 9,3x64 is a great round I'll still find room for the 9,3x66 when it becomes available. I think that the logic behind it is to acheive 9,3x64 performance on existing 9,3x62 platforms and hold 5 down as a 9,3x62 would. The Brenneke case is a good deal fatter and requires a non-standard bolt-face..................DJ

Remember that this is all for fun.........
Posts: 2056 | Location: Oklahoma,USA | Registered: 27 February 2004

jens poulsen
one of us
Posted 22 January 2006 18:20
quote:
Originally posted by djpaintles:
Jens, while I agree that the 9,3x64 is a great round I'll still find room for the 9,3x66 when it becomes available. I think that the logic behind it is to acheive 9,3x64 performance on existing 9,3x62 platforms and hold 5 down as a 9,3x62 would. The Brenneke case is a good deal fatter and requires a non-standard bolt-face..................DJ

I know, you are right,: I was just wondering, looking for a just course , and you found it for me...Thanks
Posts: 161 | Location: Denmark | Registered: 09 June 2005

ramrod340
one of us
Posted 22 January 2006 19:25
Anyone know if it will ever make it to the states? Anyone have or know where I can find case dimensions?
Posts: 1477 | Location: Houston, tx | Registered: 02 April 2001

lawndart
one of us

Posted 23 January 2006 03:48
I've got brass, reamers and gauges. Just waiting on a barrel to come in. It is basically a 9,3x62 stretched in the middle section. if you build a rifle on an older Sako action, or a Remington, etc., you can load out to 87mm in over all length. At that point you are getting pretty good performance. In the newer Sako rifles with the detachable magazines there is only enough room for an 85mm OAL. Then you have to use double based powders and a heavy hand on the seating and crimping stations.

When I get my little blunderbuss put together this spring I'll publish pictures and measurements.

lawndart

Oh nothing mom. Just pounding primers with a hammer.

Posts: 3013 | Location: Owyhee County, Idaho | Registered: 02 February 2004

lawndart
one of us

Posted 23 January 2006 03:55
Hi Jens,

The only reason for the 9,3x66 Sako is that we can build another rifle in the 9,3 calibre.

I hope to have a set of:

9,3x62 Mauser
9,3x66 Sako
9,3x64 Brenneke
9,3x70 Expert Magnum

done one of these days. Any special reason? They all start with 9,3 .

In the early 1990's I flew out of Karup, between Viborg and Herning up on the Jutland penninsula. I miss the ice cream and the buses and trains that always ran on time.

lawndart

Oh nothing mom. Just pounding primers with a hammer.

Posts: 3013 | Location: Owyhee County, Idaho | Registered: 02 February 2004

ramrod340
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 05:41
quote:
I've got brass, reamers and gauges

Where did you get your brass?
Posts: 1477 | Location: Houston, tx | Registered: 02 April 2001

9.3x62
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 07:09
Yes, where did you get your brass? Also, is your reamer to CIP specs or does it have a "Americanized" target throat/leave? Thanks...

------------------------------------
Cogito, ergo spud

Posts: 2104 | Registered: 30 June 2003

9.3x62
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 07:12
quote:
Originally posted by ramrod340:
Anyone know if it will ever make it to the states? Anyone have or know where I can find case dimensions?

Dave Kiff at Pacific Tool and Die has reamers (one to CIP spec and one with a target throat). he can fax you a copy of the reamer dimensions...

------------------------------------
Cogito, ergo spud

Posts: 2104 | Registered: 30 June 2003

ramrod340
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 08:04
quote:
one to CIP spec and one with a target throat

The difference being?

Thanks for the heads up on Dave. I'll give him a call this week.
Posts: 1477 | Location: Houston, tx | Registered: 02 April 2001

9.3x62
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 18:41
quote:
Originally posted by ramrod340:

quote:
one to CIP spec and one with a target throat

The difference being?

Thanks for the heads up on Dave. I'll give him a call this week.

CIP throat is long with a really long and gradual leade. The target throat is shorter with a much more abrupt leade.

I think I would go with the CIP just because I have had very good luck with CIP spec throats/leade in 9.3x62...

------------------------------------
Cogito, ergo spud

Posts: 2104 | Registered: 30 June 2003

Pete Lincoln
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 18:55
add a 9.3 RSM to the list.

i'm currently playing with a 300wsm case necked up to 9.3.
Pete

http://www.roedaleprecision.com
Posts: 62 | Location: Germany | Registered: 23 September 2005

ramrod340
one of us
Posted 23 January 2006 19:31
As to the brass. Couldn't you simply run some 30-06 cylinder brass into a sizing die and trim to length? Yep I know the headspace wouldn't match but you would have a start.
Posts: 1477 | Location: Houston, tx | Registered: 02 April 2001

Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by groupee community

tera
Can you me given more information on 9.3 x 70 Expert mm Magnum?
Is can tone to take 9.3 x 74 mm R to form it?
Mercie

19 April 2006, 00:42

.366torque

quote:
Originally posted by willmckee:
i was unaware of the former round till i got a new copy of cartridges of the world. for whatever reason, it fails to give ctg dimensions of the sako round but looking at the case length and ballistics i can't help but wonder why they'd introduce a round like that when the brenneke is already around? marketing to induce sales of new guns? what justification is there for this round over the brenneke?

Brass availibilty, drawings, etc.
www.z-hat.com

20 April 2006, 05:27

lawndart

The 9,3 x 70 Expert Magnum is basically a 404 Jeffrey necked down to .366" (9.3mm).

I have brass enroute from Germany (Reimar Johannsen).

PTG can do the reamer.

LD

20 April 2006, 20:42

tera

quote:
Originally posted by lawndart:
The 9,3 x 70 Expert Magnum is basically a 404 Jeffrey necked down to .366" (9.3mm).

I have brass enroute from Germany (Reimar Johannsen).

PTG can do the reamer.

LD

Me, thank you for information which has provided you me

21 April 2006, 00:43

TrapperP

Last time I posted I got my tables crossed, then almost got my head bitten off - so excuse me in advance if I screw this one up again. My question is this, re the 9.3 X 70mm whis is "basically a 404 Jeff. necked down to 9.3" or so we are told. What would be the difference here - I don't have any info at hand or I might not have to ask - if the 338 Lapua was Necked UP to 9.3mm as the .338 Lapua is 8.60x70mm???? What is the basic difference between the Lapua case and the Jefferies as far as case capacity? Anyone have water tables that list the Lapua? As I said I'm on the road and don't have access to my 'library.'
Thanks in advance.

21 April 2006, 00:59

ALF

21 April 2006, 06:24

ALF

21 April 2006, 06:48

Tex21

Trapper,

Get in touch with RIP over on the Big Bore forum. He'll tell you volumes about what you're asking.

Will,

Go with the 9.3x64. Because: it has been around long enough to ensure some kind of brass supply. The 9.3x66 is not available enmass to us over here yet and finding proper brass may become a serious problem. I mean no disrepect when I say this, but I think its a little silly build a rifle around a cartridge you might be able find brass for or at least *might* be able to make work with basic brass; just seems a little risky. It is different for someone who's looking to build a wildcat or a one-off special rifle and if that's what you're interested, disregard the previous comments. If not, at least consider them.

Lastly, hey man, the 9.3x64's got class!

21 April 2006, 07:07

lawndart

The 9.3 x 64 brass is a phone call away from Huntington's.

I have a 9.3 x 64 getting finished up by Mark Stratton as I type this.

Converting an -06 based action to 9.3 x 64 is pretty straight forward. converting it to 9.3 x 66 is even more forward straight.

Making 9.3 x 66 brass is quite easy. You just run -06 basic through the resizing die, pretty much what Sako does. I believe, but do not know for a fact, that Z-Hat uses the same -06 basic brass that Huntington's sells.

My reamer and gauges:

were made by measuring Proper Sako factory brass:

The brass does hold more powder than 30-06 brass:

You can see where how the various cartridges compare thanks to Boha's immortal photograph:

So, what to make? 9.3 x 57, 9.3 x 62, 9.3 x 64, 9.3 x 66, 9.3 x 70, 9.3/338 Lapua
Magnum ??????

One of each, of course.

If you wait until next year you can come over to my place and shoot one of each. If you live in Canada you can go over to ALF's place and shoot one of each also.

We will both have proper brass, I assure you

.

lawndart

24 April 2006, 05:52

lawndart

With a primer inserted (I guess that is how you have to do it, huh?), My Sako factory 9.3 x 66 brass holds 81 grains of water filled to the top.

My 9.3 x 64 brass (from Huntingtons, made by Horneber, I believe) holds 87.6 grains of water filled to the top.

I don't have a piece of RWS 9.3 x 64 brass to check. It is often thicker than Horneber brass, so it might hold a few less grains of water. I don't know that to be true.

I will check a piece of Lapua 9.3 x 62 brass later tonight, and report my results tomorrow.

Just for fun I will also report on some W-W 375 H&H brass, and some Federal Gold Medal 30-06 brass.

Ain't science fun??

24 April 2006, 08:34

ALF

24 April 2006, 09:14

lawndart

Life is grand ALF,

All three of these cartridges fit in a 30-06 length action (the 9.3 x 62 & 9.3 x 64 will fit in a standard large ring mauser more easily).

The 9.3 x 66 is a natural for one of the more modern actions (so long as it doesn't have a detachable magazine).

A hunter can pick what level of power and recoil they desire for their application.

The 9.3 x 62 is a natural for a shorter barreled battue or full stock rifle for use in the woods on feral pigs, elge, elk and other ruminants.

The 9.3 x 64 provides 375 H&H performance in a standard mauser length action.

The 9.3 x 66 Sako splits the difference rather nicely.

I believe that the Sako factory figures are attainable in a 24" length barrel. When mine gets back from Jim Kobe (we are waiting on a Krieger barrel), I will be able to test that supposition.

I also believe, but do not know, that the 9.3 x 70 will safely send a 286 grain bullet downrange at 2,850 - 2,900 fps.

Now, I just need to teach myself to read German so I can use my CIP references. Do you know of a good CIP reference manual in English?

LD

24 April 2006, 09:26

ALF

24 April 2006, 09:50

<9.3x62>

Cool project, but I am still suspicious of the x66 factory claims and safe pressures. There is no free lunch in physics...

Moreover, if we stick to 30-06 length actions (like a model 70 say), the mag appears have to about 3.375" or so (rough measure). Now if I seat my 286 Partition out to this mag length in a 9.3x62 case, I've still got more than full neck contact with the bullet shank. All the x66 will do is move me closer to the cann, as OAL is fixed. Thus, the functional increase in powder capacity seems like it is, in fact, less meaningful than the water measurements would indicate.

This, of course, does nothing to stop the x66 from being a cool project...

25 April 2006, 00:08

7mm Exp

The Website at Z-Hat.com offers brass and specs on the cartridge. I don't think that they will sell the reamers but will do barelling using whatever type desired in the 9.3x66.

25 April 2006, 05:48

lawndart

My reamer is at Jim Kobe's shop.

Anyone can use it if they send their rifle to Jim for the work.

ALF,

I have that CD. It is called PA.U.LA. (Patronen- und Lagermabe fur Kurz- und langwaffen Version 1/2003)

You can order it from Antonio Triebel for 98.00 Euros at www.triebel-guntool.de

He speaks English. I ordered it with my Visa card. It came in less than a week. Nice to deal with.

LD

26 April 2006, 08:35

ALF