Dear Sirs:

I have some experience for big game (buffaloes, eland, hippo ...) with the 375, and I think it's capable to take them, altougth I recognize the 40's are more capable.
A friend of mine, says that with good bullets and +P reloadings 9,3x62 and 375 H&H are almost the same, for this type of game. What experiences can you supply to this disscussion?

if game can tell the difference in a 308 or a 30-06 they might notice the difference between a 366 and a 375

The biggest difference is in the rifles, not the cartidges. 9.3 can be lighter and hold more rounds. Otherwise not much to choose from between them other than rifle preferences or ammo availibilty.

The biggest difference between the two rounds is that the .375 H&H is accepted as dangerous game medicine in all countries. If it is to be your only or one of a very few rifles going to Africa and you'll be looking for the Big Five ... the .375 H&H has that advantage. For plains game the 9,3x62 works wonderfully well!

In terms of power the .375 has a small but real advantage. The quantum leap in effectiveness from the 9,3x62 really is to one of the .416 chamberings.

They have about said it all. I have both 9.3x62 and .375, and the 9.3 has become my "go to" rifle. It is slightly lighter; a little handier; and with 250gr bullets it is able to reach out (275-300yds, if you know where to point it.) I have used it on eland, leopard, lion, roan, sable, and a slew of other antelope. It kills incredibly well and way beyond what one would expect from a 30-06 size cased cartridge. I think this is because it is about the ideal case capacity for bore diameter, and the new powders just make it sing in a modern action (M98, M70, etc).

You feel a little ridiculous setting in a deer stand here with a 375HH, but with a 9.3, it isn't as "over the top." It is, in my opinion, the African equivalent of the 30-06. A round designed for standard length Mauser actions; able to take anything that might decide to eat you and able to take anything you might want to eat; and affordable to the average German colonist, Herman. It is a 30-06 on steroids. Kudude

the 375 minimum specifically exempts the various 9,3's from that floor. If I had a dollar for every Cape Buffalo, Elephant, Rhino and Hippo shot by the german settlers in Africa I could buy Zimbabwe.

It kills all out of proportion to its size. 286gr 9,3 VS 270gr 375 is pretty much a toss up. My FS CZ in X62 holds 5 rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber...firepower and then some.

Rich
DRSS
Knowledge not shared is knowledge lost...

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
the 375 minimum specifically exempts the various 9,3's from that floor. If I had a dollar for every Cape Buffalo, Elephant, Rhino and Hippo shot by the german settlers in Africa I could buy Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe is on sale right now,a bid by one Robert Mugged-Byme, a bloke with political aspirations has been put in, the price One billion, trillion, zillion $Zim. Or free to any corrupt regime.

/

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Let there be no doubt about the reality, the 9.3x62 is no 375 H&H, has never been, will never be, no matter what anyone says or however you wish to cut it.

As fond as I am of the 9.3 it is a case of: "can be loaded to" 375 specs or the infamous claim: " in my 26 inch tight barreled whatever, using this and that powder I can get it to shoot like a 375.

Me too.

YEA,kinda like the small blocks tryin to run with the big blocks!!

til later

The 286 gr 9.3 bullet has the exact same SD as a 300 gr .375 bullet and the real world velocities are not much different
Everyone "knows" that a 300 gr .375 dia fired from an overly long,impressive looking case HAS to be better than a 286 gr .366 bullet fired from a smaller case.
But I have never heard from anyone who had extensive experience with both calibers who actully claimed that fifteen grains more bullet weight and .009" diameter made any difference or killed any better.

This is the same old argument that a 416 is no different than a 375, which is no different than a 9.3, which is no different than a 338, which is no different ...... than a 22 LR.

At nominal velocities, a 375 H&H spits out about 4300 ft-lb of muzzle energy while a 9.3x62 runs at 3700 ft-lb.

If a 20% increase in muzzle energy of the 375 over that of the 9.3 doesn't matter, than bring on the 22 LR.

A .30-06 is not a .300 magnum. A .280 is not a 7mm magnum. A 9.3x62mm is not a .375 H+H. I take them for what they are. I race cars not cartridges.
til later

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Let there be no doubt about the reality, the 9.3x62 is no 375 H&H, has never been, will never be, no matter what anyone says or however you wish to cut it. As fond as I am of the 9.3 it is a case of: "can be loaded to" 375 specs or the infamous claim: " in my 26 inch tight barreled whatever, using this and that powder I can get it to shoot like a 375.

Amen, your preaching to the choir here.

Dirk

quote:

Reply

Don`t compare the 9,3x62 with the .375! Take the 9,3x64 Brenneke - than you have a real beltless magnum - and you have the same or little more speed than with the Holland & Holland at the same bullet-weights!

If 9,3 than take the 9,3x70, and bye, bye 375 H&H

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
This is the same old argument that a 416 is no different than a 375, which is no different than a 9.3, which is no different than a 338, which is no different ...... than a 22 LR.

At nominal velocities, a 375 H&H spits out about 4300 ft-lb of muzzle energy while a 9.3x62 runs at 3700 ft-lb.

If a 20% increase in muzzle energy of the 375 over that of the 9.3 doesn't matter, than bring on the 22 LR.

Will, I agree that the 2 cartridges are so close in performance that to delect a difference is virtually not possiable. The difference is that energy is not a factor in the wounding process, rather it is force and the greater amount of force applied is always greater with the larger caliber and heavier projectile..

A great book on the subject is this one by Duncan MacPherson

I am sorry, but they are not virtually the same. Penetration is one thing, and indeed they should be very close together on paper calculations, but the knockdown effect goes to the 375 H&H. Much of the knockdown effect is apparently due to bullet momentum and the 375 wins.

All you have to do to prove it to yourself is miss the brain by a bit with a 9.3 and the elephant shakes it head a bit, if that, and miss the brain with a 416 or 458 and it will typically knock them down, if only temporarily.

It is the same thing that John Taylor wrote about 60 years ago, and nothing has convinced me otherwise.

quote:

This is the same old argument that a 416 is no different than a 375, which is no different than a 9.3, which is no different than a 338, which is no different ...... than a 22 LR.

At nominal velocities, a 375 H&H spits out about 4300 ft-lb of muzzle energy while a 9.3x62 runs at 3700 ft-lb.

If a 20% increase in muzzle energy of the 375 over that of the 9.3 doesn't matter, than bring on the 22 LR.

How is a 20% difference equal to a 99% difference? If you want to accept that reductio ad absurdum argument as legitimate then it should go both ways; no one should hunt with less than a .505 Gibbs, or, more properly, a nuclear bomb.

Besides, I don’t see a 20% difference. To keep it “apples-to-apples†I grabbed the Hodgdon 2008 reloading manual and compared the two rounds using the fastest velocity listed for each round with the following bullet weights common to both. Accordingly they show the .375 H&H as having the following advantage over the 9.3x62:

250 gr.: 2835/2453 = 15.6% advantage

270 gr.: 2710/2548 = 6.4% advantage

300 gr. 2620/2288 = 14.5% advantage

So if it’s so silly to ask about the comparability of rounds with a maximum listed difference of 16% then what’s the point of these discussion boards? Even the energy numbers listed in the argument don’t produce a 20% difference. To wit:

4300/3700 = 16.2% advantage

And remember, these numbers show the .375 H&H’s percentage advantage over the 9.3x62, meaning that the smaller of the two numbers is in the denominator. If we list the 9.3x62’s disadvantage to the .375 H&H then the larger number is in the denominator and the percentage difference reduces.

So, may we have a discussion about the applicability of rounds with a 16% difference and their appropriateness in the hunting fields without one of them becoming a .22 rimfire and the other a howitzer?

The nominal velocity of a 300 gr. bullet in the 375 H&H is 2550 fps. The nominal velocity of a 286 gr. bullet in the 9.3x62 is 2360 fps.

The resultant muzzle energy of the 375 is 4300 ft-lb and that of the 9.3 is 3700 ft-lb. Without get out my calculator, that is about 16%. So I exaggerated a bit with 20%.

Because you can find some super velocity for one round or the other avoids the fact that the the 375 can out perform the 9.3 just because I can get more powder in the case. And that cannot be overcomed in the 9.3.

But hell, I just throwing out info. Use and believe what you want.

{Edit} I guess you're right, if energy is to be the figure compared then the v^2 component
must be taken into account. Simply comparing velocities of like bullet weights doesn't accomplish that. My bad.

No one's arguing that a 375 H&H doesn't outperform a 9.3x62; indeed, that was conceeded as given, up front. As was, for that matter, that the 40 cals are better still.

6_5x57 asked about the 9.3x62's applicablity to the big game fields. One can always find a bigger and smaller weapon. But that was not the question.

But what if you +P the 375H&H?

Oh wait Hornady already did this with their heavy mag loading.

I supposed we could all dump our long action 375H&H for the super powered 375 Ruger. Not!

A big bore plus long cartridge case powder capacity equals dangerous game performance.

Will it is not energy, rather it is force and I agree that the most force applied is always on the side of the large caliber heavier projectile....

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
Will it is not energy, rather it is force and I agree that the most force applied is always on the side of the large caliber heavier projectile....

You can call it mojo if you want but force comes from mass and accleration, and momentum comes from mass and velocity and you still can't make a 9.3 a 375! Give it up!!

Nor can you make a 9.3 a .22 rimfire or a .375 a .505 Gibbs.

Do you know how many legs a dog has if you count his tail as a leg? Four; counting his tail as a leg doesn't make it one.

A 9.3x62 is a 9.3x62 and a .375 H&H is a .375 H&H. Who's claiming otherwise?

6.5_57's point was, if may be so presuptious as to put words in his mouth, a hopped-up 9.3x62 can achieve what a standard .375 H&H loading achieves. If a standard .375 H&H loading is deemed acceptable for animal X, it stands to reason that a +P loading of a 9.3x62 would be as well. He did not claim that a +P loading of a 9.3x62 is the same as a +P loading of a .375 H&H. To keep addressing that issue is to derail the discussion.

If someone wants to claim that to even broach the topic is tantamount to sliding down a slippery slope to the .22 rimfire then likewise it should be legitimate to point out that a .375 is not a .505 Gibbs and beyond. If delivering more energy to the target is the only goal here and an end unto itself then a nuclear weapon should be the order of the day.

If, on the other hand, we're discussing hunting cartridges and of what they're capable and their appropriate uses, then I don't think the topic is unreasonable or that the participants in the discussion should be ridiculed.

My understanding is that back when Kenya allowed hunting thier minimum caliber requirement was 40. Does that somehow make all the people who've hunted with a .375 H&H fools? Of course not. Does that make a .375 a .416? Of course not.

quote:

Originally posted by 6_5X57:
Dear Sirs:

I have some experience for big game (buffaloes, eland, hippo ...) with the 375, and I think it's capable to take them, altougth I recognize the 40's are more capable.
A friend of mine, says that with good bullets and +P reloadings 9,3x62 and 375 H&H are almost the same, for this type of game. What experiences can you supply to this disscussion?

There is not much difference between 9,3 and 9,5, but just look at difference in size of the two cartridge cases.

There is a lot of ballistic masturbation here but I still contend that i have never met a hunter with considerable experience with BOTH cartridges who claimed they was enough difference to matter.

Of course the larger 375 is better. It has to be.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
There is a lot of ballistic masturbation here but I still contend that i have never met a hunter with considerable experience with BOTH cartridges who claimed they was enough difference to matter.

Of course the larger 375 is better. It has to be.

one would have to be able to pick fly shit out of pepper to distingish the difference between the two on game....IMHO

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
There is a lot of ballistic masturbation here but I still contend that i have never met a hunter with considerable experience with BOTH cartridges who claimed they was enough difference to matter.

Of course the larger 375 is better. It has to be.

one would have to be able to pick fly shit out of pepper to distingish the difference between the two on game....IMHO

It is amazing the effect that blind faith has on some folks.

quote:

that is about 16%. So I exaggerated a bit with 20%.

actually.....that's an exaggeration of 25%....and it doesn't help the case.

I've not killed dangerous game with either so this is just fun reading. I like them both for North American hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

that is about 16%. So I exaggerated a bit with 20%.

actually.....that's an exaggeration of 25%....and it doesn't help the case.

I've not killed dangerous game with either so this is just fun reading. I like them both for North American hunting.

I exaggerated a bit of the nominal muzzle energy difference as 20% off the top of my head instead of 16%, so indeed it was an exaggeration percent of 25.

I have been found out. Mercy, please. The 9.3x62 is more gun than a 375. Okay?

Isn´t this a bit silly already? The law says min 9.5mm for DG then so be it.

BUT that doesn´t change the fact that a lot of DG has been shot with the 9.3.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Let there be no doubt about the reality, the 9.3x62 is no 375 H&H, has never been, will never be, no matter what anyone says or however you wish to cut it.

As fond as I am of the 9.3 it is a case of: "can be loaded to" 375 specs or the infamous claim: " in my 26 inch tight barreled whatever, using this and that powder I can get it to shoot like a 375.

And the .308 is no 30-06 either but the game doesn't know the difference Before WWII the 9.3 WAS the .375 and I would bet it has killed as much if not more dangerous game than the .375.

I have both and I just don't think there is any real world difference between the two except that the 9.3 makes up into such a nice, light portable rifle.

If I were hunting elephant, would I pick the 9.3? No, but then again, I wouldn't pick the .375 either.

/

I don't think it means much to say that there is no difference between the 9.3x62mm and the .375 H&H Mag. on "game." The original question on this thread, for example, lumps buffalo, hippo and eland together.

There are obviously big differences in the size, dangerousness, toughness and tenacity of these and other African game animals.

That is true even if we are speaking only of dangerous game. Perhaps the 9.3 and the .375 are equal with lighter bullets when used on leopard or lion. But elephant? Buffalo?

Even the more powerful of the two, the .375, is the legal minimum in most places, and is generally conceded to be marginal for use against these animals.

So, how can it be a matter of indifference whether one chooses an even less powerful cartridge for such purposes?

I think the margins can be very important where sufficient, versus insufficient, power and penetration on dangerous game are concerned.

For that reason, neither the 9.3 nor the .375 would be my first choice for elephant or buffalo.

But if I were forced to choose between these two marginal cartridges for use against such game, I would most assuredly choose the one that is marginally more powerful - the .375.

quote:

Originally posted by Will:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
There is a lot of ballistic masturbation here but I still contend that i have never met a hunter with considerable experience with BOTH cartridges who claimed they was enough difference to matter.

Of course the larger 375 is better. It has to be.

one would have to be able to pick fly shit out of pepper to distingish the difference between the two on game....IMHO

It is amazing the effect that blind faith has on some folks.

Ain't that the truth...

I’ll tell you what’s the truth. If you bring numbers into the discussion you are accused of masturbating; if you argue without numbers you are accused of blind faith.

Ask about the effectiveness of a medium bore round and it gets transformed into a .22 rimfire for the sake of denigrating it. Don’t you denigrators know that if you extrapolate too much you’ll go blind?

Or, in this case there’s the additional element of claiming that the original poster proffered that one round was the equivalent of another, which he did not. That’s called a straw man argument, whereby you create a false “straw man†of an argument to knock down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

The first time I heard of a 9.3x62 was when Ray Atkinson put a 9.3x64 up for sale. Someone asked what it would take to transform his 9.3x62 to a 9.3x64. Mr. Atkinson advised him against going to the effort to do so as “…a 9.3x62 is an awesome killer of anything.†That’s authoritative enough for me, for my needs. That, plus all the piles of dead animals over the past 104 years.

Perhaps you big-bore-small-demeanor, detached-retina boys shouldn't fire off all your rounds equilibrating.

The first time I heard of the 9.3x62 was in a 1999 article in Handloader mag by Finn Aagaard. By then the Mauser actioned rifle I wanted to convert to something had sat in the safe 10+ yrs. After reading the article I knew I wanted one.
Here's what he says about it in his summary. He suggests that it is the best of the non-magnum,medium-bore cartridges. But there is little to choose between it,the .338-06,the .35 Whelen,and most of the time the .338 Winchester magnum. He sticks by his suggestion as the 9.3x62mm appears to make a slightly bigger hole than the first two.
He says that if he had to limit his big game battery to two rifles(which he says is the case in some countries)and he needed something with more"smash" than the .30-06 he would not choose the 9.3x62 but would go UP to atleast the .375 H+H or maybe a .416 Remington and get some really noticeable increase in power. His last sentence says he still likes the 9.3x62mm Mauser. He kept the rifle he had put together for the test. Cut the bbl down to 20" from 23.6" and said he'd use it for rough work in thick cover,for elk and hogs,for moose,and for protection against bears while fishing or otherwise wandering about the next time he got to ALASKA. He appreciated the cartridge for what it is.

til later

X 1000

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
X 1000