THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM GUNSMITHING FORUM


Moderators: jeffeosso
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Question re headsizes and boltfaces
 Login/Join
 
One of Us
Picture of Bren7X64
posted
Hi all,

I bought a ZKK 600 the other day in 270 Win. I'm not a great fan of the calibre (I am the anti-Jack O'Connor), and the barrel is a bit crap.

I want to have it rebarreled to the latest flavour of the month 9.3 x 62. Now the Hornady and Nosler manuals show that the headsize for 9.3 is slightly smaller than the headsize for 270 / 30-06 / 308 ... etc, but it's not much - one manual says 5 thou the other says 3 thou - is this something to even worry myself about or is it the sort of variation I'd find between consecutive rifles off the same production line?

Thanks in advance - I'm sure I'll get a wealth of good info.


--
Promise me, when I die, don't let my wife sell my guns for what I told I her I paid for them.
 
Posts: 1048 | Location: Canberra, Australia | Registered: 03 August 2012Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Go ahead and re-barrel.

Your Gunsmith will probably not have to do anything else to the rifle other than headspace the new tube, there's usually no feeding issues, no bolt head size issues - Nada.

If there are any issues a Gunsmith worth his Salt ought to be able to tweak easily.

Have fun with your 9.3x62, good cartridge but then again I appreciate a good 270 Winchester, too.

tu2


Cheers,

Number 10
 
Posts: 3433 | Location: Frankfurt, Germany | Registered: 23 December 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of z1r
posted Hide Post
9.3x62 rim diameter is .470".

Hornady's book is wrong. Although, perhaps not for the brass they make which according to their book seems to be based off the .30-06 case.




Aut vincere aut mori
 
Posts: 4865 | Location: Lakewood, CO | Registered: 07 February 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Rim diameters are so close, that should not be an issue. However the head IS slightly wider on the 9.3 and, probably more important the shoulder is wider and further forward. That may or may not give feeding problems. You may get lucky or the feed rails and ramp may need tweaking.
 
Posts: 189 | Registered: 17 February 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
If a .277 can't kill it there is a good chance that a .366 will bounce off too.
But I don't know what to recommend. O'Connor didn't use a a 9.3 he jumped to a .416 Rigby.
 
Posts: 13978 | Location: http://www.tarawaontheweb.org/tarawa2.jpg | Registered: 03 December 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
If it is a ZKK 600 and not a CZ 550 I'd at least shoot it at a target BEFORE I'd pulled the barrel.

I've had a couple of these ZKK 600 rifles...in 270 WCF...and they were BOTH extremely accurate! You may just be quite surprised!

FWIW I don't like the 270 WCF in it's O'Connor "loading" either! I use a 150 grain Speer or Hornandy bullet out of mine at about 2,700fps.

A sort of 280 Remington "lite" if you will.
 
Posts: 6823 | Location: United Kingdom | Registered: 18 November 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of eagle27
posted Hide Post
We used to resize 30.06 cases into 9.3x62 for a couple of my German friends Mannlicher rifles (one old and one new model) and didn't have any problems at all, just sized in the 9.3 FL die loaded and shot. What minor differences there may be don't seem to matter.
 
Posts: 3924 | Location: Rolleston, Christchurch, New Zealand | Registered: 03 August 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Bren7X64
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by enfieldspares:
If it is a ZKK 600 and not a CZ 550 I'd at least shoot it at a target BEFORE I'd pulled the barrel.

I've had a couple of these ZKK 600 rifles...in 270 WCF...and they were BOTH extremely accurate! You may just be quite surprised!

FWIW I don't like the 270 WCF in it's O'Connor "loading" either! I use a 150 grain Speer or Hornandy bullet out of mine at about 2,700fps.

A sort of 280 Remington "lite" if you will.


Got nothing really against the 270 - just am not excited by it.

The action is from the 70's and has the integral peep sight on the rear bridge, which would be quite spiffy as an open sight on a 9.3 - not so useful on a 270.

I also thought of a 280 (actually I thought of a 7x64), but I already have a 7x57, so decided 9.3 it would be depending on availability - maybe a Whelen or 338-06, but 9.3 if I had my druthers.


--
Promise me, when I die, don't let my wife sell my guns for what I told I her I paid for them.
 
Posts: 1048 | Location: Canberra, Australia | Registered: 03 August 2012Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Bren7X64
posted Hide Post
Thank you all for the advice, I'm not going to worry about it any more ...


--
Promise me, when I die, don't let my wife sell my guns for what I told I her I paid for them.
 
Posts: 1048 | Location: Canberra, Australia | Registered: 03 August 2012Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of z1r
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bren7X64:
so decided 9.3 it would be depending on availability - maybe a Whelen or 338-06, but 9.3 if I had my druthers.



It would make a superb 9,3x62. That would be my choice.




Aut vincere aut mori
 
Posts: 4865 | Location: Lakewood, CO | Registered: 07 February 2002Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia