I am posting this information for those interested. This is a result of some extensive test done by others & I got this from another forum as well as PMS. PM me if you want the document with photos. I also have a 320 gr test report. Hope this helps.....
--------------------------

"IN 99 OUT OF 100 CASES, YOU WILL KILL A MOOSE WITH ALL THE BULLETS AVAILABLE ON THE

MARKET. BUT I DON'T WANT TO WAIT FOR THAT 1 EXCEPTION, SO I CHOOSE MY BULLETS CAREFULLY.

Although an old timer, the 9,3mm has not expired from age yet. We have even recently witnessed new creations in this caliber, such as the 9,3x66, which for all practical purposes can be compared to the older 9,3x64. Still, the most popular variant of this caliber is the 9,3x62, and also yet another older variant that won't give up; the 9,3x57. With the variations in velocities attained with these different rounds, it is obviously difficult to make bullets that work optimally in all 3. We are after all talking about a span in velocity difference of roughly 150m/s.

The test. I gathered together 25 different types 9,3 bullets. The test dealt with checking the expantion and depth of penetration at 15 meters with the 9,3x66 (which was also used to represent the 9,3x64). This was to to stress the bullets to their maximum capabilities. I borrowed a new Sako 75 from Ing. Rolf Aaberg for this. The test medium was a stack of wet telephone catalogues with a dry catalogue put in as #2. This is a tough challenge, as a some lead is often lost in the dry catalogue.

Next, the bullets were tested in 9,3x62 (which also was used to represent the 9,3x74R). The test was exactly as described above, but with about 50m/s lower velocity. Finally, all bullets were tested to find their lowest expansion distance/velocity. Study the results. Choosing a bullet that is known to be the toughest isn't necessarily always the best choice. Especially if using a caliber with moderate velocity.

Do not read the expansion data as absolute, but more as a guideline. If you find a bullet that you think would be potentially interesting for your use, then try it out yourself. Most likely you will obtain a different velocity than I did, and thus the data will not be identical.

My choice. And I mean MY choice. I can't pick the ideal bullet for you, as you have to do this yourself depending on which 9,3 cartridge you use, your personal wishes, and particular needs. It's more than enough to pick my own favorites amongst the ones I tested. My own criteria is that it will be use for general hunting, and I demand that the bullet doesn't fragment/seperate. I prefer more penetration over expansion diameter (the 9,3 has a relatively large diameter to begin with), and I sometimes experience occasional long shots, so trajectory is also a factor for me. Since my barrel is 18.5 inches, the chances of finding something suitable narrowed itself down? We'll see.To begin with I mentioned that all of these bullets will kill a moose. At least 99 times out of 100. So when I put aside many of these bullets, it is not because they are bad.

However, since the options are so many, and I only really need one bullet, I have sorted them quite harshly. The first thing I did was cut out all bullets that easily loose their core. Basically, this is all of those that aren't reinforced in some way that makes them hold together. This leaves quite a few still, so I continue to look. To achieve a good combination of penetration and large expanded diameter requires a high retained wight. A glance at the tables for retained weight (and thus penetration and diameter) in 9,3x62 shows that the number of suitable light bullets of modern construction are quite large. I find variants here that have just as much penetration when expanded as the traditionally heavy bullets. And since I also appreciate a decent bullet trajectory for all around use, my choices naturally fall on the lighter bullets.

I can for example say that my trajectory criteria is that when shooting 5 cm high at 100 meters, I don't want the bullet to shoot lower than 5 cm below my point of aim at 200 meters. That leaves me with the PBP 220 grain, Rhino Solid Shank 235 grain, Brenneke TOG 247 grain and Barnes X 250 grains (Nosler BT is already weeded out since it is prone to seperation). If I accept a few more cm of drop at 200 meters, I can also use the Swift A-Frame and Woodleigh Weldcore RN SN in 250 grain. All of these are superb bullets, and are generally suitable for my demands. But from past experience, I know that the Barnes X leaves an unwanted amount of copper fouling in my barrel. The Brenneke TOG looses 20% of it's lead, and is also hard to get a hold of. The Rhino has doesn't expand at lower velocities, although the importer claims that a new slightly softer type will soon be available. And the Woodleigh could penetrate better in My opinion.

So I am left with the PBP and the Swift. One is as good as the other. The PBP could ideally expand at lower velocities than it does in my barrel, but it has a better trajectory than the Swift. So that makes it a tie. I don't care much about price, but if you are than my tip would be the Lapua Mega, which is the tests best resulting conventional bullet. The Nosler Partion, Normas Oryx, and the Sako Hammerhead are the tests least expensive "Super bullets".
-----------------------------------
Some additional information about the picture texts:

Trajectory: The figures are for a range of 200 and 250 meters for each of the 3 tested cartridge, with a standard muzzle velocity and sighted in to impact 5 cm high at 100 meters.
----------------------------------
The comment text in each bullet evaluation:

"Inntr." = Penetration
"Diam." = Expanded diameter
"Restvekt" = Remaining bullet weight
"Eksp.Grense" = Distance when velocity becomes so slow that it will not expand reliably.
------------------------------------
PBP 220grain: The tests only Norwegian produced bullet. Simply a top notch hunting bullet for the 9,3x64/66 and 9,3x62. Monometal copper.
+Strength
+Penetration
+Diameter
-Reluctant to expand when the velocity is very low.
-------
Norma Vulcan 232 grain: Conventional lead filled bullet. Holds together surprisingly well, but can't take too much before coming apart.
+Price
-Seperation risk
-Little penetration
--------


Rhino Solid Shank 235 grain: "Semihomogeneous(semi-monometal)" South African produced bullet with a small portion of bonded lead in the front. High remaining bullet weight and large diameter. A little stiff at low speeds, but the producer promises a "extra soft" variant soon.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Reluctant to expand when the velocity is very low.
-----------
Brenneke TOG: Brenneke's new generation of bonded bullets. Expands willingly in all 9,3mm cartridges, but looses a bit of weight.
+Balanced penetration and diameter.
-Looses some weight/some shrapnel.
-----------
Barnes X 250 grain: Homogeneous/monometal bullet that gives maximum penetration combined with a large expanded diameter. Willingly expands at the velocities of all 3 tested calibers.
+Strength
+Penetration
+Diameter
-Often leaves a lot of fouling in the barrel.
------
Nosler Ballistic Tip 250 grains: A conventional bullet with a solid rear part of the jacket. It has good flight characteristics, but is a little reluctant to expand at 9,3x57 velocities.
+Ballistics
+Price
-Very varying results regarding loosing lead/shrapnel.
--------
Swift A-Frame 285 grain: The bullet has a solid partion between the top and bottom in addition to being bonded. Looses very little lead and willingly expands. A bullet that never fails.
+Strength
+Penetration
-None that are obvious.
---------
Woodleigh Weldcore RN SN 250 grain: This Australian is bonded and is a good choice for those who prefer expanded diameter rather then maximum penetration.
+Strength
+Diameter
-None that are obvious.
--------
Rhino Solid Shank 250 grain: The 250 grain bullet from Rhino is simply too solid and does not give acceptable expansion. The producer promises a "extra soft" variant will be available soon.
+Strength
-Very unwilling to expand.
(Note from ErikD: I read a similar test in a Swedish magazine published this months, and the Rhino 250 grain got the same results as before. Which leads me to believe that they have not released a "softer" version yet.)
--------
Speer 270 grain: A traditional lead filled bullet that is cheap and generally usable at lower velocities. However, it is not a safe bet when bone is hit.
+Price
+Penetration
-Seperation risk
-------


Lapua Naturalis 270 grain: Earlier reluctency to expend appears to have been dealt with, because now this bullet is impressive. It gives moderate penetration, but delivers an unusually large expanded diameter, and 100% retained weight. The length of the bullet does steal a little case capacity though.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Long length of bullet.
-------
Swiss Jagt CDP 286 grain: Has a constuction very similar to the Nosler Partion, but is undoubtedly more solid. This bullet has also been made to expand more easily as the years have passed, and does well both when it comes to penetration and diameter.
+Penetration
+Diameter
-None that are obvious.
--------
Woodleigh Weldcore PP 286 grain: Bonded bullet with "Protected Point". Gives a lot of penetration due to not so much expansion at high velocity, but gets opposite results at lower speeds (?!?!?). Is not very willing to expand, and is thus not very suitable for the 9,3x57 and is even a bit too stiff for the 9,3x62 also.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Reluctant to expand
-Looses a little weight/shrapnel
--------
Nosler Partion 286 grain: An old classic that has gotten a lot of competition. The partion between the front and rear guarantees weight retention, but generally the front part looses all it's lead. The published retained weights include lead that is often found together with the rest of the bullet.
+Penetration
+Price
-Shrapnel
----------
Rhino Solid Shank 286 grain: This Rhino is also way too stiff, which results in no expansion in 9,3x62. But be patient, as a "Extra soft" variant is also promised.
+None
-No expansion
-----------
Norma Alaska 286 grain: A conventional bullet with a good reputation, but can't stand up to the more modern bullet constructions. Does not hold together well at higher speeds or under stress.
+Price
-Risk of seperation.
--------
Norma Oryx 286 grain: A bonded bullet that stays together very well. It is soft, which results in a large diameter at higher speeds. Works well in 9,3x57 too.
+Diameter
+Penetration
-Some shrapnel.
--------
Lapua Mega 286 grain: Conventional lead/copper bullet with a good reputation. The jacket has a thicker portion in the middle, which locks the core to the jacket. The test showed good results. A lot of bullet for the money.
+Price
+Well balanced diameter/penetration
-Seperation potential
----------


Sako Hammerhead 286 grain: A bonded bullet that can handle most situations. Shows impressive penetration and diameter. It also expands willingly at all relevant velocities.
+Price
+Penetration
-Some shrapnel.
--------
Barnes X 286 grain: Barnes X shows once again a high level of technical qualities. The diameter and penetration is second to none. But I have too much varied experience when it comes to copper fouling to make it my first choice.
+Penetration
+Diameter
-Copper fouling.
--------
Sellier & Bellot 286 grain: A cheap bullet of conventional construction. Can probably kill both moose and red deer, but the core seperates from the jacket too easily. This is probably a great bullet to use for practice. The importer can not promise any more this year.
+Price
-Seperation risk
---------
Partizan 286 grain: It can probably kill most things, but with a very great risk of the core seperating from the jacket. No matter what, it's the tests cheapest bullet. You can buy 15 of these for the price of 1 of the more expensive bullets.
+Price
-Rik of seperation
---------
Swift A-Frame 300 grain: This bullet weight is best suited for the 9,3x64/66, but I have added the data from the 9,3x62 also. It is a bullet that works under all conditions, but low speed and moderate BC doesn't exactly help the trajectory.
+Strength
+Penetration
-Short range bullet.
--------
Rhino Solid Shank 300 grain: This bullet is in the same catagory as the previous (Swift A-Frame 300 grain), but this one delievers a large diameter at the cost of lower penetration. It's need for velocity to expand reliably, and to get decent trajectory, diqualifies it from being useful in the 9,3x62.
+Strength
+Diameter
-Penetration
Short range bullet.
---------
Woodleigh Weldcore RN SN 320 grain: Actually a bullet for the old .360NE Nr2, but works in 9,3x64/66 as an alternative in dence bush.
+Strength
+Penetration
Diameter
-Short range bullet.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Bråten Exclusive"

As you can see, one of the tests bullets is designed and produced in Norway. This peaked my curiousity and interest, and resulted in me using these PBP (Performance Bullet Production) bullets quite a lot these last few years. Both for hunting and for testing. Thus it is my pleasure to tell you that although I quite easily picked out a couple of favorites amongst the tested bullets, my real favorite is a slightly different variant.

Since my 9,3x62 has a 18.5 inch barrel (I sacrificed length when I put on a moderator to keep the overall length down), I have to accept a slightly reduced muzzle velocity compared to a more conventional barrel length. Therefore the PBP 220 grain is a little reluctant to expand at my preferred distances. In my opinion. This resulted in me wanting to modify these bullets so they would expand reliably at a lower velocity. I discussed this with Kjell Tonheim at the company Arms & Ammo (who produce the PBP), and he shortly made up a handful of bullets designed to my wishes and specifications. The modification was to expand the existing hollowpoint to a slightly larger diameter in addition to making it slightly deeper.

The result was a bullet that was more willing to expand at lower velocities (longer distance), while at the same time more material at the end of each expanded petal lessened the likelyhood that they would break off at shorter ranges. This variation was naturally named "Bråten Exclusive" and functions perfectly in my rifle.

So it is fully possible to have your bullets custom made if you wish. The price however is something you'll have to discuss with Tonheim.
----------------------------------------------------------

Test Method:

I am sometimes asked if I get the correct bullet expansion by shooting at short range with a reduced load. This in comparison to shooting at genuine distances. With reduced velocity, there will always be a reduction in the rate of the bullet rotation, taking into consideration that the barrel twist is the same. I am aware of, and find this topic worth discussing, and thus I have tried out both

methods. Up till now, I have found only negligible differences. This time I brought the Rhino 250 grain bullet with me out in the field, after having tested it's expansion with reduced loads at short range. The short range test showed me that expansion stopped at around 650 m/s. The BC of this bullet is .307, and if we put this info into the computer, with a muzzle velocity of 760 m/s we will find that the velocity will be reduced to 650 m/s at a distance of about 150 meters.

After checking that muzzle velocity was 760 m/s, I shot at a stack of telephone catalogues at a laser measured 150 meters. The result was 2 bullets that looked exactly the same. There are however some variables that can create difficulties and varied results. First of all, you must be in full control of the velocity. A variation here will give a large difference in the end result. Secondly, the result is dependent on an accurate BC. Then there is the fact that different test media will show varied results to one degree or another. The hard part though is that some bullets can produce a reasonable amount of expansion within a rather large specter of velocities. Thus, you end up having to use common sense when deciding if the expansion has reached an acceptable level, and this can make the science less exact.

Finally, in regards to expansion tests with hunting bullets, I do not claim that wet paper is the same as live flesh and blood. But it is the most easily used and practical that that I have available. This goes for both test methods.

So with that in mind, I would say that this test method gives a good idea of what is happening. And knowing what is happening is good to know. Remember that Norwegian law demands that expanding bullets be used for hunting."

(note that the last picture with two Rhino Solid Shank show that these 2 bullets acted exactly the same using both test methods: fast/long distance + slow/short distance)

Here is another one on the 320 gr bullet. This is a Norway test. PM me with email ID if you want the document with photos & tables.

Hope this helps.....

------------------------------

9,3 mm, Woodleigh # 49A 320 gr, Protected Point - some experiences .

The story about the #49A started after a mail to Woodleigh bullets, Australia the early autumn 2002. A “little late”, but here is some test results. I had tried the Woodleigh 360 No. 2, and found it to be a little to soft for the 9,3x64, as the cartridge are capable of giving the 320 gr. Wodleigh bullet a velocity of 730 – 760 m/s (2400 – 2500 m/s). I shot the 360 No. 2 in a velocity of 730 m/s, and it seemed to mushroom perfect at a distance of 200 metres, but too much at shorter distances. I set up some rough specifications (wishes) for a new bullet based on the well known weld core process used by Woodleigh bullets. I wanted the ultimate bullet for moose. With that I mean a bullet that starts expanding early, mushrooms well, still retaining most or all of its original weight providing maximum penetration. I want the bullet to exit the animal leaving a big hole in the skin. Meat damage must be kept to a minimum.
The rough specifications I set up for the bullet were as follows:
• Weight: 320 gr.
• I would like it to be a protected point, but not nesecarely.
• Early initial expansion.
• Large diameter after expansion.
• Expansion has to stop earlier than the 360 No. 2, which might be obtained by using a jacket that was more heavy in the rear of the bullet, but tapered to the front.
• Crimping-cannelure that give a COL of 85 mm.
About one month later I got 100 bullets for testing. An amazing response to the market!!!


Unsectioned/Sectioned bullet, 49A and 360 No. 2.
Unfortunately the hunting season for moose had been going on for 2 weeks, and I could only use the bullet in the end of the season. The number of animals killed with the bullet was limited, but I bagged one calf and one small bull-moose with it.

Reloading
The bullet has showed to be very easy to load. By some sort of reason it tolerates a lot of powder, raising pressure very slowly and controlled. I have never experienced such smoothness with any other bullet. The diameter was measured to 9,3 mm. Due to my experiences, this is the opposite of the SWIFT A-Frame. (This lot of SWIFT was measured to have a slightly larger diameter than 9,3/.366).
The VVN-550 is the powder giving best velocity in this calibre, in my gun. The Norma 204 is a suitable powder in the 9,3x64, but gives compressed loads before maximum pressure is obtained. Norma 203-B gives max pressure before loads gets compressed, but give acceptable velocities.


I have not really been testing the bullet for precision. I have only tried it in one gun (M 98 reciver), with two powders. The precision seems to be sufficient for any purpose with these combinations.
Powder Weight,
gr. Velocity, m/s – f/s Precision, 5-shot groups,mm - inch Marks
VVN-550 72 775 - 2540 45 – 1,8 Max load-hot!
Norma 204 70 718 - 2355 22 – 0,8 May be increased
Norma 203-B 65 Not tested Max load
Reloading data
Barrel length: 61 cm/24 inches. CCI 200 primers are used for all loads. RWS brass.
Start 10% under given loads. I take no responsibility regarding use of these loads in other guns.
Selection of expanded bullets, 49 A (2-6) and 360 No. 2 (8).
Distance 35 meters. Bullet nr. 6 at 60 meters. Velocity V0: Woodleigh No. 49A: 770 m/s-2520 f/s Woodleigh 360 No. 2: 730 m/s-2360 f/s




Bullet Nr./Type Retained weight (gr) Length (mm) Diameter (mm) Depth Media
1.Woodleigh No. 49A Unfired 37 - - -
2.Woodleigh No. 49A 295 13 19x22,5 5,5 Telep. catal.
3.Woodleigh No. 49A 280 14 19x21 6+ Water cans, 5 inch thick
4.Woodleigh No. 49A 195 12 15x22 - Wood across fibre
5.Woodleigh No. 49A 285 15,5 15x16,5 - Wood + frozen earth
6.Woodleigh No. 49A 255 19 13x19 - Small bullmoose+snow
7.Woodleigh 360 No. 2 Unfired 34 - - -
8.Woodleigh 360 No. 2 305 15,5 21x23 5 Telep. catal.

Test results in wet paper, compared to other bullets
I tried the 49A and the Swift A-frame of 300 gr in wet telephone-catalogs, together with the 360 No. 2 Sn of 320 gr. and Lapua Mega of 286 gr. The Swift bullet is known to give very deep penetration even if the penetration is not equal to the expanding bullets made of solid copper as Barnes X. The A-frame is used as a reference. Distance: 35 meters.
Bullet SD BC V0 (m/s-f/s) Penetration in catalogs (No.) Retained weight (gr) Retained diameter (mm)
Woodleigh No. 49A, 320 gr ,341 ,428 775 - 2540 5,5 295 19x22
Woodleigh 360 No. 2, 320 gr ,341 ,378 730 – 2395 5,0 305 21x23
Swift A-frame, 300 gr. **?
,342 775 - 2540 6+ 290 17x18
Lapua Mega, 286 gr. ? Apr.
,330 810 - 2655 4,5 195 16x18
Woodleigh No. 49A ,341 ,428 775 - 2540 Small Bull-moose, exited* 255 13x19
Lapua Mega, 286 gr. ? Apr.
,330 810 - 2655 Moose calf, exited* 215 16x19
* Bullet was found in the snow behind the animal.? Simple, but I really don’t know the formula! (Metric/none metric)
On game - 2002 The first moose that had the mixed pleasure to meet the Australian was a calf. It had a wound in the rear front-leg, and was lying when it got the bullet from about 60 metres. The bullet went into the ribs behind the front leg. It penetrated both lungs from an angle about 90 degrees, and left the moose. Unfortunately I could not find any signs of the bullet in the snow behind. The animal died surprisingly fast.
Exit, calf. Compared to a 9,3x64 and a 12 gauge slug cartridge.
After this my hunting team did not have any more licenses for moose. By luck I got the possibility to join the landowner and outfitter, Anders Kiær in the very end of the hunting season. Anders Kiær is living in Stor-Elvdalen (“Big-Riverwalley”). I got the chance on a small bull-moose with a weight of approximately 175 kg/385 pounds without skin, head and “leg-bones”. He came running from right at a distance of 60 metres, and got the bullet a little high in the middle of the left lung. The bullet touched a rib-bone on the entrance, went trough both lungs in an angle of about 65 degrees, and exited trough the right side after cutting one rib-bone, and chrusing the right shoulder-blade. After being hit, the bull run into cover in heavy forest and got out of sight, totally about 100 metres after being hit. It was 60 cm of snow, which made it easy to read the reaction of the animal. First: There was a lot of hair on the place where it was hit. In fact I could see the hair from the place where I fired the shot. The animal had lost control very fast. It had been running straight on small trees after only 30-40 metres. There was not very much blood in the track, but some few, small drops after about 30 metres. I was very surprised by this after looking at the exit hole, which was really big. When we turned the bull on its back to fieldstrip it, the blood was flowing out of both entrance and exit wound. (I can not remember to have seen that earlier). The only explanation I can find about the limited blood ”trail” is that the shot was a little high in the lungs, and the blood had to “fill up the chest” before there was anything to leave. I was shooting a little bit downrange, and was lucky to find the bullet after some digging in the snow. It had penetrated about 70 cm of snow after leaving the moose. Most of the snow was a kind of frozen layer (“Skare” in Norwegian).
The entrance-hole in the skin was limited on both animals - as normal with pointed bullets. The exit-hole was very big at both. The bullet found after the bull had left most of it’s “wings”. I don’t really know, but due to the big exit-hole I suspect the bullet to have been quite intact, tough well expanded, after leaving the moose. The frozen snow my have broken the wings of. I have never seen such an exit hole on an adult moose after any other bullets.

Entrance, small bull. Compared to a 9,3x64 Exit, small bull. Compared to a 9,3x64 and a 12 gauge slug cartridge.
Before I went to Anders Kiær I made sure that the camera was with me. “Nice conditions for a picture I thought” after the moose was bagged. But of course, when trying to put the camera in “On-position”, I found that the 16 degrees minus had killed the batteries for a while.
On game - 2003
One calf and one 1 ½ year bull was bagged with the bullet. The calf came running at about 50 meters distance. Shot at an angle of 90 degrees through both lungs right behind the heavier bones, only ribbons was hit. The animal run 5-6 meters after the shot. Bullet exited. The small bullmoose was standing as it got the shot in the front a bit at the left side. The shot went trough both lungs in the middle of the chest, and had almost left the skin at the exit side, right in front of the stomach. The bullet could be picked out of the skin with the fingers without the help of knife. Retained weight 280 gr. Diameter (smallest x largest) 15x21 mm. Retained length: 18 mm. The moose fell in its track, although no heavier bone, or bone in central nerve-system was hit. Entrance and exit-holes in skin very similar to the pictures above.
Bullet recovered from Seen from the top the 11/2 year old bull 2003.
Compared to other bullets
The Woodleigh # 49A is heavy for the calibre giving a high SD. It also is well shaped, resulting in a high BC. It mushrooms easy, and even if the jacket is thicker and more solid in the rear half of the bullet it is the length of the bullet more than the slightly heavier jacket that stops the expansion. This might be a result of the use of pure lead which is quite soft. A harder lead-alloy would control the expansion better. It will without any doubt also give a harder bullet that rise pressure faster than the # 49A, as it is today. For the 9,3 x 64 Brenneke this bullet is one of the best expanding hunting bullets you can get. It starts to mushroom early and expands to a large diameter, giving a large wound-cavity in the game. Due to the weld core bounding between lead and jacket, and its high SD, it retains a large amount of weight resulting in very good penetration. The pointed bullet makes a small hole in the entrance side of the animal, but give a very big hole in the skin on the exit-side-when it exit. It might not give as much penetration as the Swift A-frame in the 300 gr version, but it is not far away from it. The 49A will give equal or better shock to the animal. The meat damage will probably be worse than from the Swift. The bullets performance in the animal is tough not very different from the Woodleigh 360 No. 2 (Rn-version). In my opinion it should still be a little bit harder to mushroom (“about 25%”, to give a value). It might be obtained with a jacket that tapers less to the front/point of the bullet and/or a harder lead alloy. The excellent engineers at Woodleigh knows better what to do than I. The 49A is close to perfect for relatively thin skinned game like moose, in my opinion.

I'm definately interested - I've got a 9,3x62 with a 24" barrel. Soooo....Where are the pics? I miss something?