Splitting off from another thread.

These are two theoretical cartridges based on the 9.3x64 case.

The .375 / 9.5mm version was a bit of a cul-de-sac that led nowhere (IMHO), but going a bit larger and smaller captured my imagination.

So, a .338 / 8.6mm and .400 / 10.3 version. Both are trimmed a bit to 2.500 case length. Both have the usual Ackley features of minimal body taper (I used .25 degrees) and sharper necks (I used 35 degrees).

I used Load from a Disk for modeling. Unfortunately it uses CUP for pressure, which adds another layer of inference. For any modern action that is also available in magnum chamberings, I assume a safe pressure max of ~54000CUP. In practical application, this just eliminates break open single shots.

The 400 Version:

10.3x64

Excuse my typo, this uses the 9.3x64 as the donor.

Load Modelling

I used the Barnes 350gr. The North Fork 360 would probably work very similarly.

With a starting COAL of 3.340 -
Benchmark @54000CUP yields ~2300fps, a nice start.

The 338 Version:

8.6x64

Load Modelling

I used the Nosler 210gr loaded to 3.340.

H414 @54000CUP yields ~2850fps, a nice start.

The 6.5 X 64 is also very close to a 6.5-06 Ackley Improved

Barstooler

6,5*64 is more like .264wm. 6,5*65 (9,3*62 case)is similar to 6,5-06.

8*68s is similar to your .338*64 and a factory cartridge.

quote:

Originally posted by wookie76:
The .375 / 9.5mm version was a bit of a cul-de-sac that led nowhere (IMHO), .

I think Greater selection of bullets in this caliber than in 9.3 helps this choice by those who reloads.

quote:

Originally posted by vashper:

quote:

Originally posted by wookie76:
The .375 / 9.5mm version was a bit of a cul-de-sac that led nowhere (IMHO), .

I think Greater selection of bullets in this caliber than in 9.3 helps this choice by those who reloads.

This already exists.
Steyr
It's sort of faded away into a zombie cartridge, since the introduction of the 375 Ruger, which was also developed with Hornady.

quote:

Originally posted by Nordic2:
6,5*64 is more like .264wm. 6,5*65 (9,3*62 case)is similar to 6,5-06.

8*68s is similar to your .338*64 and a factory cartridge.

That's true, I apologize for the geographical myopia. It's also practically unknown in America, and would be almost like building a wildcat for those of us here.

It's a large cartridge, does it function well in a standard length (30-06) action or does it require a full length magnum action to reach it's potential?

quote:

Originally posted by wookie76:
This already exists.
Steyr
.

Well, here brass is shortened.
But, of course, simple rebarreling of usual rifle for 9.5x64 may be impossible because bolt is too short for long 375 bullet

8*68s was made for orginal m98.

I have been shooting and testing the 9.5x62 (375x62) for about two years now..and I can duplicate some of the .375 H&H factory rounds.

My chosen loads are the 350 gr. Woodleigh at 2350 FPS. The 300 gr. Swift at 2400 FPS, but got 2500 plus a little and case showed to be good, no sticky bolt lift, no indentions of the primer, but it had to be hot?? at any rate I backed off for now to 2400 FPS and have reloaded that case many times..

Advantages I like is it holds one more round than a .375 in any magazine, barrel is 22" and its a beautiful old nostalgic Mauser 98, with full rib, integral sights, claw mounts,large trigger extending to the grip cap, and light engraving..It was a shot out 9mm and wouldn't cut to a 9.3 so I made a 9.5x62 out of it..Its my go to elk rifle and Its a decent Cape Buffalo rifle.

Love the old claw mounts, and they return to exact zero and very quickly off and on. Where I hunt is nasty swampy thick black timber and shots are close and going south, so I am have a QD peep made for the rear claw, and I have a belt scabbard for the 3X Leupold for shots across the canyon on rare ocassions or if I watch a meadow in the morning or evening.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
I have been shooting and testing the 9.5x62 (375x62) for about two years now..

Very cool. I read somewhere that the original intent of Whelen and G&H was for the 380Whelen. But, they had to stop development after Winchester dropped production of 38-72 ammo and they lost their supply of bullets. Who knows what might have been?