Or anyone else who might be in the know...

Was just wondering how the 9.3x66 project is coming. Have you been able to wring that one out fully? Does this cartridge live up to Sako's claims? Does it give you a definite performance boost over the 9.3x62?

I ask because I have a rifle in mind. I'm looking for the most punch I can put into a standard M98 without any magazine or bolt face mods, and do not want to look at any wildcats. I believe the 9.3x66 fits that bill. The 9.3x64 is another contender, but will require a small amount of bolt face work, and could require magazine changes - I'm sure it will reduce capacity by one in any case. The 9.3x66 should still allow 5 in the original mag, right?

quote:

Originally posted by the_captain:
Or anyone else who might be in the know...

Was just wondering how the 9.3x66 project is coming. Have you been able to wring that one out fully? Does this cartridge live up to Sako's claims? Does it give you a definite performance boost over the 9.3x62?

I ask because I have a rifle in mind. I'm looking for the most punch I can put into a standard M98 without any magazine or bolt face mods, and do not want to look at any wildcats. I believe the 9.3x66 fits that bill. The 9.3x64 is another contender, but will require a small amount of bolt face work, and could require magazine changes - I'm sure it will reduce capacity by one in any case. The 9.3x66 should still allow 5 in the original mag, right?

I think your right.................but the 9.3x64 will 99.99% feed with our mods and the bolt face opening is very minimal, I think people have converted 9.3x62 cz guns to the 64 with just a rechambering and tiny amounts of bolt opening.

Because you are using a M98 the 9.3x64 just seems a nice way to go IMHO.

My 64 is built on a Brno ZKK 600 (old CZ550) originally a 7x57. Not much magazine work was needed to get it to feed. Of course it was a new barrel.

I side with PC here, a friend lent me some 9,3x64 Brennecke loads and they fit in the magazine and would feed to a certain point. Like where they were too fat to go in the chamber. The boltface just needs to be opened up .020" to work.

After chronographing today I don't think I will need any more case. I wanted to do some tinkering with AA2015BR and the Nosler 286gr PT so I loaded up five rounds with 48gr and seated the PT to the back end of the cannelure.
First two shots were about like I expected 2143 and 2147fps...but the next three were 3546, 3348 and 3300fps!!
Either I have one monster 9,3, or the 31-degree temperature got to the chrono batteries pretty fast. Fifteen minutes out in the wind (wind chill was 16-degrees) and I gave it up. Maybe next month.

Rich
NRA Life Member
DRSS
Got a serious kick-ass 9,3x62.

so here is a nice wildcat...

use 8x68 brass...



rebate it to .470 and trim at 62mm!

call it the 9,3x62 magnum!

although i would recommend the trim and no rebate...

torque...thats yer new wildcat the 366 torque magnum

benefits...

no feeding issues, minimal smithing, maximum 62 performance and ideal for the m98's and give 9,3x64 or better performance with either the 62,64or 68 boltface and 9,3x62 length

The 9.3 x 66 does actually live up to Sako's claims. The trick is using the N-550 or N-540 powder. The cartridge does benefit from having a full 24" of barrel.

This case will accomodate the North Fork 286 grain bullet.

It will get the job done.

You can get the brass directly from Reimer Johannsen in Germany, or form it with a Reding full length sizer and 30-06 basic brass from Huntington's.

I have a drop box mag from Blackburn's that I am considering using with the 9.3 x 66 Sako. It would make a pretty nice "feed on Sunday, shoot all week" type of rifle.

One nice thing about the 9.3mm bullets. They have better sectional density than .375" bullets. Good penetration coupled with the North Fork front end.

I will publish pessure data after I get the universal receiver up and running.

LD

quote:

Originally posted by lawndart:
.. One nice thing about the 9.3mm bullets. They have better sectional density than .375" bullets. ...

Diameter = .366"
Wt gr   Sec Den
232	.247
250	.267
270     .288
286	.305 *  <------  (Classic weight for the 9.2x62)
320	.341

* 18.5 grams = 285.498845 grains so call it 285 or 286 grains as you like.

	
Diameter = .375"
Wt gr   Sec Den
235	.239
250	.254
260	.264
270	.274    <------  (Classic weight for the .375 H&H)
300	.305    <------  (Classic weight for the .375 H&H)
350	.356

I really like my 9.3x62 and my .375 H&H but I think the sectional densities of the .366 and .375 bullets are very similar.

Cheers!!
-Bob F.

yeright bob...375x66! better yet the 411x66!

Yeah, the 9.3x64 does have that historical appeal and the performance...but the x66 seems to fit things without any effort at all.

This rifle will likely wear a rear bridge mounted peep (no scope in any case), so I could even get away with using original 8x57 stripper clips to load it if I stuck with either the x62 or x66 case! I really like the idea of no bolt/magazine/feed rail work.

What's the OAL standard for the 9.3x66? I've been all over the web today, and managed to find just one incomplete drawing with some case dims on it, but nothing that gives the COAL of a loaded round.

I couldn't resist so I went to the shop & necked up a 8x68 to a 9.3x68 & seated a speer 270 grain SP in the case. The little ring at the base of the neck is because I didn't have the correct dies & had to make do with what I had. you get the idea though.

quote:

Originally posted by D Humbarger:
I couldn't resist so I went to the shop & necked up a 8x68 to a 9.3x68 & seated a speer 270 grain SP in the case. The little ring at the base of the neck is because I didn't have the correct dies & had to make do with what I had. you get the idea though.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
so here is a nice wildcat...

use 8x68 brass...

OK guys, is this the same thing? Is the base diameter of the unaltered 8x68 factory brass .511? So, is the 8x68 factory brass rebated, as it appears in the drawing?

Please remind me - or better yet - post a picture of the dimensions of the 9.3x64 Breneeke.

I am wondering just how a fellow could get a chamber cut, and dies for the 9.3x68 wildcat as shown.

I'm generall always interested in learning something new about anything to do with 9.3mm.

.411 bullets/cartridges are interesting too.

Thanks,
KB

Here ya go Kabluewy!

& here you go again Kablueway. Left to right: 9.3x64, 9.3x68, 8x68.

quote:

What's the OAL standard for the 9.3x66? I've been all over the web today, and managed to find just one incomplete drawing with some case dims on it, but nothing that gives the COAL of a loaded round.

3.400"

That is the length of the dummy rounds that the head of ammunition for Sako, Erkki Kauppi, sent me two months ago.

He designed it originally to be 89mm long. That works with most modern actions. The factory later shortened it to 85mm to fit in the detachable magazines that the model 75 uses. For your own use I would recommend the 89mm length. That is what I am using on my Sako A-III. It started out as a 30-06 and is now a switch barrel 9.3x66/30-06. No feeding problems whatsoever.

I believe it would be perfect at an iron sighted rifle fed by stripper clips. You could shove in a full clip of five at a time. I have been planning to do the same thing in a 9.3 x 62.

LD

quote:

Originally posted by D Humbarger:
& here you go again Kablueway. Left to right: 9.3x64, 9.3x68, 8x68.

thanks for posting that

if you can get it to feed 64mm...there you go...the 366 torque standard magnum! 9,3 tsm but a 411

So this is why KB was playing with my CZ 550 Medium today .......I couldn,t figure out what he was doing............He is being unfaithful to his 366/338 win mag.wildcat ............I might send it out and have the chamber reamed to 64 Bren... .. It was pretty much a knee jerk reaction on my part to begin investigations and get a box of brass last winter ............Make up a bunch of dummies and learn it fed real well........My rifle takes 4 in the mag, same as the 62....But here,s my problem ,,,,,,,,unless I lay in 2000 rounds of brass , what is to say 9.3x64 Bren. will be available in 5 years........10 yrs ago I thot the 375 H&H would go bye bye in the wake of the 416 Rem mag ......That didn,t happen.......I can make 9.3x62 M from 270 win brass if need be,, and I get 2600 fps w/250gr X bullets moly coated.............From its 20" barrel . It seems I could gain 150 fps by going to the 64 B.......definatly worthwhile but I would rather do it up on a stainless Ruger with a 22" barrel.........But I want a 358 Norma more......And my 416 is kind of my end all cure all hunting rifle... ......The 9.3 Brenneke brass necks up to 416 in one easy pass thru my LEE dies. The 300 gr X bullet seats to the base of the shoulder and crimps well with the factory crimp die . if your careful.......There isn,t much of a shoulder and I think the 416 WSM or Short Rum is superior.....But then so is the 416 Taylor Have a good day gumboot out....

quote:

Originally posted by gumboot458:
Make up a bunch of dummies and learn it fed real well........My rifle takes 4 in the mag, same as the 62....But here,s my problem ,,,,,,,,unless I lay in 2000 rounds of brass , what is to say 9.3x64 Bren. will be available in 5 years....

snowman has made 64 brass from458 Win brass. Aparently it takes some work but the end result has the exact same case capacity.

According to my calculations:
89mm = 3.504"
85mm = 3.346"

This is going into a 98/22 receiver, and the magazine length is ~3.31" so there will have to be some kind of small lengthening done. I'd like to use the 85mm length, so I'll only need about .050" more mag length. I should be able to get that much just by thinning each end wall a bit, so no big problem there.

I've been doing some other measuring, as well, and I think there might be a problem with getting 5 down after all. I tried 5 of my 338-06AI rounds, and 5 of them will go in, just barely. The last one has no spring left under it, and will dent the shoulder in slightly to make room. With the same size shoulder on the 9.3x66 even farther forward, I'm wondering if this might be even more of a problem. The reason for staying with this case size is to keep 5 down. If I have to reduce capacity by 1, I will just go ahead and chamber for the 9.3x64 to make it worthwhile. Is there a simple way to get a bit more mag depth? Can I just take a little off the bottom of the follower, reshape it somehow, etc? I think even an add'l .050" here would do it.

9.3x66 case drawing courtesy of Z-Hat

BTW, that 9.3x68 sure looks like a hotrod, but is more work than I want to do now. I got my sample piece of 9.3x64 brass from Buffalo Arms, and it is remanuf from 458 WinMag. It looks hell for stout, and I'd use it with no issues.

quote:

Originally posted by gumboot458:
So this is why KB was playing with my CZ 550 Medium 9.3x62 today ..I might send it out and have the chamber reamed to 64 Bren... My rifle takes 4 in the mag, same as the 62...I couldn,t figure out what he was doing.....He is being unfaithful to his 366/338 Win Mag wildcat ........ bewildered: Have a good day gumboot out....

Yes, I was being unfaithful to my wildcat 9.3x338 Win Mag, but she doesn't know about it, because I don't yet have her back from the gunsmith. We can keep a secret among us gun nuts? Jealousy is a big problem with wildcats, especially when being compared to standard SAAMI of CIP chamberings, such as the 9.3x64. Wildcats are high maintenance.

I heard gumboot talking about rechambering his 9.3x62 to x64, and talked him out of it because I didn't realise the receiver of the CZ 550 is different compared to a standard Mauser. It's a little longer, and the slightly bigger cartridges seem to feed well, so the only modification would be the bolt face and re-chambering. The 9.3x66 would probably be an easier conversion, requiring only a reamer, but I'm pretty sure few will opt to convert their great 9.3x62 CZs to 9.3x66.

I think the 9.3x64 or x66 could use a little more barrel length than 20" and the 9.3x62 is more suited to the shorter barrel.

I basically re-visited my thought process when I decided to go with the 9.3x338, and I still reach the same conclusion. Besides, I now own the reamer, and dies - too late to turn back now.

If I made the decision today, I think I would wait for the 375 Ruger brass, and of course then the 9.3mm decision would be strongly swayed by the question: Why wildcat the 375 Ruger brass, rather than keeping it simple and buying something chambered in 375 Ruger?

As I said, wildcats are fun to think about, and play with, but high maintenance bitches.

KB

KB,

you points RE Wildcats are valid, but once you get the brass fireformed it is all same-same. I end up shooting a wildcat more, as I FL size the parent case and load up 50 rounds...then it's off to the range or hauling the 4-wheeler up to the mountains for a multi-rifle rockchuck shoot and some trout fishing. Any excuse to run some high country is a great one!

Rich
NRA Life Member
DRSS
Wildcatter

quote:

unless I lay in 2000 rounds of brass , what is to say 9.3x64 Bren. will be available in 5 years.......

that is almost a lifetime of brass but if for some reason there is literally zilch for brass(highly unlikely in my humble opinion) then rechamber for the .366/375Ruger.....always a cure.

in 6 mo there will be almost any ???-375 ruger wildcat stuff out there...

thinking about that too boom, a .366/375Rgr. but going to stick with my in the works x64 1909 and if brass runs out(not) then will just rechamber to you know what. Man it is going to be wild when this Ruger hits the dirt and all the variables!!

Ya 2000 rounds may be a lifetime supply , but I shoot quite a bit.........Mayby I,m just going thru a phase but , all these medium bores work so simularly and well that other than flatter trajectory or ease of feeding and use the less expensive ones get my vote........With the possible execption of the 35 /300 short RUM 358 Norma , 358 STA and 375 Ruger ,,,... None of which I have , I could probably trade what few Mediums I have left ,,away and not miss them....But I do want to build up a 17 enfield in to a 9.3 x 62 and keep the ears ON.....

quote:

But I do want to build up a 17 enfield in to a 9.3 x 62 and keep the ears ON.....

5 down and you can still use stripper clips
Not much you can't do up here with 286gr Partition @ 2400fps.

quote:

Originally posted by Thebear_78:

quote:

But I do want to build up a 17 enfield in to a 9.3 x 62 and keep the ears ON.....

5 down and you can still use stripper clips
Not much you can't do up here with 286gr Partition @ 2400fps.

just beautiful!

is that a leupold 1.5x scout scope? (drool drool)

2.5x leupold scout scope with duplex reticle. It is fine enough for shots out to 300 yards but still easy enough to find in the heavy brush. Its probably the most practicle combination I have. Not to heavy, exceptionally quick, accurate at all normal hunting ranges, and lots of firepower.

Now that, is ONE serious looking rifle!

Rich

PS: if you get the hots bad enough, I know where a very clean Remington M1934 in 7mm Mauser could be bought...but the guy thinks it's worth about $350.

Oh, yeah Grizz...they been making the x64 Brennecke brass for nearly 100 years. It'll be around awhile.

Rich

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
Oh, yeah Grizz...they been making the x64 Brennecke brass for nearly 100 years. It'll be around awhile.

Rich

Thanks to the Russky revival, it'll be around for a while!

quote:

Thanks to the Russky revival,

that IZHMASH SVDK sniper 9-mm snayperskiy seems quite intimidating for sure and appears that brass should be in relatively good supply for yrs. --thanks to the Barnaul manufacturing plant.