All the way from New Zealand, via Africa to the USA and Eastern Europe - welcome as a member of the community, and especially focused on one of the classic Africa calibres.
A great piece of writing with passion. It is without a doubt a great cartridge that will not lie down. I got mine to help Sambar here in Australia, stay down without an argument. My mistake being to get it in a Tikka by Sako (not a real Tikka), making my fifth in the brand. With a Burris Veracity 2-10x is weighs in at 7lb 12oz. I know I can carry it all day, but, mid range powder load & Interlock 286gn, load development at the bench is not nice at all. I could swop one of the hunter/walnut stocks for the plastic, and epoxy in shot. But, I think I should add a cross bolt, and where would it end.
Good description. Here is a teaser: The kinetic energy correlation is a valid sub-issue and I shall soon respond with that as my departure point. The only effect that the release of kinetic energy into heat has when the bullet loses its kineses is on the carrier of the kinetic energy itself - namely the bullet itself. The heat carried as KE by a 180 gr from a .300 RUM is the same as the heat carried as KE by a 500 gr from a .458 Lott. The only change that will occur when the KE cum heat in that 180 gr from the RUM is applied to a Cape buffalo's shoulder will be the expression on the shooter's face. Same applies to the 9,3x62 and any .300 calibre.
Thank you for this platform to share information on such a great caliber. Here is the first contribution from the 9.3x62 Mauser Journal. This article is an extract from the Journal that is available here https://93x62journal.co.za/.
Revelation Time - Taylor’s “Old Farm Horse” Under The Magnifying Glass
Let us investigate this supposedly dead or dying “old farm horse” to see if we are indeed, maybe, “flogging a dead horse” after all and that it would be best to dismount. I am not sure if John Taylor was sarcastic in a polite kind of way when he referred to the 9.3X62 as an “old farm horse”, he actually meant it’s an óld horse per se, and instead, he may have actually meant that the newer and ballistically improved 375 H&H is the “new horse” to replace the 9.3X62. It seems as if some folks believe exactly that. And that is exactly what happened, … almost!
Should you compare the “nine-three’s” meagre MV of 2360ft/sec and humble energy calculation of 3544ft/lbs with 286gr bullet, with the 270 Win Short Mag’s 3275ft/sec and 3096ft/lbs with its puny little 130gr bullet – the 9.3X62 indeed would have failed to impress.Should we draw the 300 Win Mag’s 3605ft/lbs with 150gr bullet or the 300 Weath Mag’s 4195ft/lbs with 180gr bullet into the comparison, we can easily arrive at the wrong conclusion that the latter three American sporting cartridges are by far the best cartridges for hunting buffalo, or any other game animal for that matter.
Consequently, and very wrongly so, a hunter indoctrinated with such knowledge, and equipped with a rifle in any of the latter three cartridges, might believe himself fully informed, thus correctly equipped and invulnerable to any shortcomings just because the figures on paper said so. Or he might be so convinced because it is a cartridge that would gladden the resting soul of a great shooting celebrity of the past. After all, it is no secret that the late great Elgin T Gates used the 300 Weatherby Magnum to sign his name in Rowland Ward’s Records of Big Game alongside that of 232 trophies taken worldwide, of which 152 accounted for African game, including the big ones. I just know that for some, the argument ends right here, and the case is closed.
Why then is the lethal old farm horse still on its feet? Reasonable doubt! The investigation is NOT closed!
If measured on muzzle velocity and calculations on paper alone, the 9.3X62 remains even more mysteriously unimpressive compared with other useful medium calibers, like the 338 Win Mag (3929ft/lbs, 250gr), the esteemed 375 H&H (4299ft/lbs, 300gr) and the new .375 Ruger (4715ft/lbs, 300gr). But I still do not have a conclusive answer about why the 9.3X62 is not yet being put out to pasture .......
Perhaps…any verdict made from such data quoted from ballistic tables about its efficacy in the laboratory of the hunting field remains but inconclusive speculations and mathematical conjecture, because the 9.3mm’s efficiency in the hunting laboratory has proven otherwise. More than a century of history emphasizes that the real virtues of the 9.3X62, are not in ballistic tables, but must lie deeper than its performance over the chronograph and the subsequent mathematical calculations.
“If your primary rifle is a 9.3X62mm, you are indeed well armed for your hunt. I am a great fan of this mild- mannered cartridge; it is one of the few that work a lot better than the math says it should. So good is the nine-three that you can safely use 250-grainers for all the [non-dangerous plains] species you intend to hunt.” – Doctari (Ask Doctari, Sportsafield.com, 2016).
I’m looking for a pulse on a supposedly dead horse here and it seems that I have found it!
In an attempt to corral the 9.3X62 among younger “rational cartridges”, it has been compared by many confused reporters over the recent years, with many other cartridges while using ballistic figures. It was measured against cartridges from the 30-06 Springfield to the 405 Winchester, and believe it or not, even to the 500 Jeffrey! You don’t have to believe me; you can go out and study the reports yourself.
Says a popular rifle renaissance man: “For large game the 9.3X62 is clearly superior to the 6.5s, 7mms and .303s that some early hunters favoured, but it’s not a powerhouse. In British terms, the 9.3X62 is similar to the once-popular .350 Rigby Rimless Magnum, with the strong advantage of heavier bullets. In American terms, it’s similar to the .35 Whelen – with the same advantage of heavier bullets.” – Craig Boddington, “A Most Marvelous Metric” (2002).For those who are not familiar with the classic 350 Rigby, it is the exact equivalent of the 358 Norma Magnum and 338 Win Mag.
The notion, among some reporters, that the 9.3X62 is nothing more than a necked-up 30-06 or, like a metric 35 Whelen (250gr at 2400ft/sec and 3197ft/lbs) or that the 9.3X62 is a German 338, however, is more frequent, but this reporting does nothing to establish any credibility for the 9.3X62’s amazing track record at all. In my eyes, many reporters, that are mystified by the “magical” re-appearance of the 9.3X62 on the scene, just want to conveniently “latch” cartridges onto the great 9.3X62 without in-depth investigation. Which, of course, leaves the inexperienced layman even more uninformed.
The fact is, the 9.3X62 is a different cartridge altogether. Even superficial scrutiny will reveal that the 9.3X62 generates as much energy as the 300 Win Mag in all loads! Yes, I know, that explain nothing, yet everything…! Let’s see just how similar, but totally different the “old farm horse” really is. A few reporters complicate the matter when reasoning that the 35 Whelen is more flexible than the 9.3 because it has a wider choice of lighter bullet weights available.“The 9.3X62 Mauser is not as versatile as the .33’s or .35’s, since the lightest commonly available bullet weighs 232 grains…” John Barsness – Handloader 250-Medium Mediums (Dec/Jan 2008).
Enter another American 338 wildcat, known by its full name of 338-06 A-Square (250gr at 2370ft/sec and 3130ft/lbs), which is frequently associated with the 35 Whelen, with both being on the exact same cartridge case. It consequently results in the 9.3X62 rather rounded up, by big names in the business, with these two moderate American cartridges.
Let’s get the next out of the way. While the unfamiliar 9.3x63 Peterlongo and both the 9mm Whelen and 8.5mm/338-06 is devised on the smaller 30-06 Springfield case, the 9.3X62 was NOT developed on a 30-06 case. Not that the 9mm (35) Whelen and 8.5mm (338)-06 cartridges are, in any way, not justifiable cartridges in their own right and on its own American soil. Having said that, does not mean they are equal to the 9.3X62! [9mm and 8.5mm being the metric designation for .35” and .338”]. The 35 Whelen with a metric designation of 9mm is in fact a recall of the early German cartridges, 9x57 Mauser and, more exact, 9x63 Hessmer Berlin from the early 1900s. The 338-06, is actually equal to the famed 318 Wesley Richards though [with an actual calibre of .333”].
Whatever was done with the 7.62x63mm (30-03/6) parent case in recent decades, the Germans and Austrians did on the x57mm and x56mm as parent cases already a century ago. That includes the .35/9mmx56 MS (aka, 9x56MS) and .35/9mmx57 (aka, 9x57 Mauser). Rigby had the fine 9mm/350 Rigby Magnum, a cartridge that Norma duplicated on a rimmed case and named it, 358 Norma Magnum or in metric terms, the 9mm Norma Magnum. The two, x56 and x57 cartridges, chambered in both Mannlicher and Mauser rifles, performed very well on all heavy African as well as Asian and European antelope and boar in typical bush and forest ranges. It is in this, 9x57, 9x63 Hessmer Berlin, 9.3x63 Peterlongo and 318 WR-corral that the 35 Whelen and 338-06 A-Square should be rounded up in. The heavy and big, dangerous animals proved a bit too heavy to handle for abovementioned mediums that is wrongly “equalled” to the 9.3X62.
Image 1 - From Left: 300 Weatherby Mag, 300 Win Mag, 338 Win Mag, 358 Norma Mag, 9.3x64 Brenneke, 9.3X62. Amongst these magnum cartridges that saw use in Africa, it is the 9.3X62 (far right) that became the legend of Africa, regardless of its moderate velocity
Image 2 -300 Weatherby mag, 300 Win Mag, 338 Win Mag. By figures on paper alone, any of these, might be perceived as the ideal buffalo cartridge. Decades of use proofed otherwise.
Image 3 - 9.3X62 left, 30-06 Springfield right. The difference is obvious
Image 4 -9.3X62 Mauser left, 35 Whelen right. The differences are obvious
.png)
A great piece of writing with passion. It is without a doubt a great cartridge that will not lie down. I got mine to help Sambar here in Australia, stay down without an argument. My mistake being to get it in a Tikka by Sako (not a real Tikka), making my fifth in the brand. With a Burris Veracity 2-10x is weighs in at 7lb 12oz. I know I can carry it all day, but, mid range powder load & Interlock 286gn, load development at the bench is not nice at all. I could swop one of the hunter/walnut stocks for the plastic, and epoxy in shot. But, I think I should add a cross bolt, and where would it end.
Good description. Here is a teaser: The kinetic energy correlation is a valid sub-issue and I shall soon respond with that as my departure point. The only effect that the release of kinetic energy into heat has when the bullet loses its kineses is on the carrier of the kinetic energy itself - namely the bullet itself. The heat carried as KE by a 180 gr from a .300 RUM is the same as the heat carried as KE by a 500 gr from a .458 Lott. The only change that will occur when the KE cum heat in that 180 gr from the RUM is applied to a Cape buffalo's shoulder will be the expression on the shooter's face. Same applies to the 9,3x62 and any .300 calibre.
Thank you for this platform to share information on such a great caliber. Here is the first contribution from the 9.3x62 Mauser Journal. This article is an extract from the Journal that is available here https://93x62journal.co.za/.
Revelation Time - Taylor’s “Old Farm Horse” Under The Magnifying Glass
Let us investigate this supposedly dead or dying “old farm horse” to see if we are indeed, maybe, “flogging a dead horse” after all and that it would be best to dismount. I am not sure if John Taylor was sarcastic in a polite kind of way when he referred to the 9.3X62 as an “old farm horse”, he actually meant it’s an óld horse per se, and instead, he may have actually meant that the newer and ballistically improved 375 H&H is the “new horse” to replace the 9.3X62. It seems as if some folks believe exactly that. And that is exactly what happened, … almost!
Should you compare the “nine-three’s” meagre MV of 2360ft/sec and humble energy calculation of 3544ft/lbs with 286gr bullet, with the 270 Win Short Mag’s 3275ft/sec and 3096ft/lbs with its puny little 130gr bullet – the 9.3X62 indeed would have failed to impress. Should we draw the 300 Win Mag’s 3605ft/lbs with 150gr bullet or the 300 Weath Mag’s 4195ft/lbs with 180gr bullet into the comparison, we can easily arrive at the wrong conclusion that the latter three American sporting cartridges are by far the best cartridges for hunting buffalo, or any other game animal for that matter.
Consequently, and very wrongly so, a hunter indoctrinated with such knowledge, and equipped with a rifle in any of the latter three cartridges, might believe himself fully informed, thus correctly equipped and invulnerable to any shortcomings just because the figures on paper said so. Or he might be so convinced because it is a cartridge that would gladden the resting soul of a great shooting celebrity of the past. After all, it is no secret that the late great Elgin T Gates used the 300 Weatherby Magnum to sign his name in Rowland Ward’s Records of Big Game alongside that of 232 trophies taken worldwide, of which 152 accounted for African game, including the big ones. I just know that for some, the argument ends right here, and the case is closed.
Why then is the lethal old farm horse still on its feet? Reasonable doubt! The investigation is NOT closed!
If measured on muzzle velocity and calculations on paper alone, the 9.3X62 remains even more mysteriously unimpressive compared with other useful medium calibers, like the 338 Win Mag (3929ft/lbs, 250gr), the esteemed 375 H&H (4299ft/lbs, 300gr) and the new .375 Ruger (4715ft/lbs, 300gr). But I still do not have a conclusive answer about why the 9.3X62 is not yet being put out to pasture .......
Perhaps…any verdict made from such data quoted from ballistic tables about its efficacy in the laboratory of the hunting field remains but inconclusive speculations and mathematical conjecture, because the 9.3mm’s efficiency in the hunting laboratory has proven otherwise. More than a century of history emphasizes that the real virtues of the 9.3X62, are not in ballistic tables, but must lie deeper than its performance over the chronograph and the subsequent mathematical calculations.
“If your primary rifle is a 9.3X62mm, you are indeed well armed for your hunt. I am a great fan of this mild- mannered cartridge; it is one of the few that work a lot better than the math says it should. So good is the nine-three that you can safely use 250-grainers for all the [non-dangerous plains] species you intend to hunt.” – Doctari (Ask Doctari, Sportsafield.com, 2016).
I’m looking for a pulse on a supposedly dead horse here and it seems that I have found it!
In an attempt to corral the 9.3X62 among younger “rational cartridges”, it has been compared by many confused reporters over the recent years, with many other cartridges while using ballistic figures. It was measured against cartridges from the 30-06 Springfield to the 405 Winchester, and believe it or not, even to the 500 Jeffrey! You don’t have to believe me; you can go out and study the reports yourself.
Says a popular rifle renaissance man: “For large game the 9.3X62 is clearly superior to the 6.5s, 7mms and .303s that some early hunters favoured, but it’s not a powerhouse. In British terms, the 9.3X62 is similar to the once-popular .350 Rigby Rimless Magnum, with the strong advantage of heavier bullets. In American terms, it’s similar to the .35 Whelen – with the same advantage of heavier bullets.” – Craig Boddington, “A Most Marvelous Metric” (2002). For those who are not familiar with the classic 350 Rigby, it is the exact equivalent of the 358 Norma Magnum and 338 Win Mag.
The notion, among some reporters, that the 9.3X62 is nothing more than a necked-up 30-06 or, like a metric 35 Whelen (250gr at 2400ft/sec and 3197ft/lbs) or that the 9.3X62 is a German 338, however, is more frequent, but this reporting does nothing to establish any credibility for the 9.3X62’s amazing track record at all. In my eyes, many reporters, that are mystified by the “magical” re-appearance of the 9.3X62 on the scene, just want to conveniently “latch” cartridges onto the great 9.3X62 without in-depth investigation. Which, of course, leaves the inexperienced layman even more uninformed.
The fact is, the 9.3X62 is a different cartridge altogether. Even superficial scrutiny will reveal that the 9.3X62 generates as much energy as the 300 Win Mag in all loads! Yes, I know, that explain nothing, yet everything…! Let’s see just how similar, but totally different the “old farm horse” really is. A few reporters complicate the matter when reasoning that the 35 Whelen is more flexible than the 9.3 because it has a wider choice of lighter bullet weights available. “The 9.3X62 Mauser is not as versatile as the .33’s or .35’s, since the lightest commonly available bullet weighs 232 grains…” John Barsness – Handloader 250-Medium Mediums (Dec/Jan 2008).
Enter another American 338 wildcat, known by its full name of 338-06 A-Square (250gr at 2370ft/sec and 3130ft/lbs), which is frequently associated with the 35 Whelen, with both being on the exact same cartridge case. It consequently results in the 9.3X62 rather rounded up, by big names in the business, with these two moderate American cartridges.
Let’s get the next out of the way. While the unfamiliar 9.3x63 Peterlongo and both the 9mm Whelen and 8.5mm/338-06 is devised on the smaller 30-06 Springfield case, the 9.3X62 was NOT developed on a 30-06 case. Not that the 9mm (35) Whelen and 8.5mm (338)-06 cartridges are, in any way, not justifiable cartridges in their own right and on its own American soil. Having said that, does not mean they are equal to the 9.3X62! [9mm and 8.5mm being the metric designation for .35” and .338”]. The 35 Whelen with a metric designation of 9mm is in fact a recall of the early German cartridges, 9x57 Mauser and, more exact, 9x63 Hessmer Berlin from the early 1900s. The 338-06, is actually equal to the famed 318 Wesley Richards though [with an actual calibre of .333”].
Whatever was done with the 7.62x63mm (30-03/6) parent case in recent decades, the Germans and Austrians did on the x57mm and x56mm as parent cases already a century ago. That includes the .35/9mmx56 MS (aka, 9x56MS) and .35/9mmx57 (aka, 9x57 Mauser). Rigby had the fine 9mm/350 Rigby Magnum, a cartridge that Norma duplicated on a rimmed case and named it, 358 Norma Magnum or in metric terms, the 9mm Norma Magnum. The two, x56 and x57 cartridges, chambered in both Mannlicher and Mauser rifles, performed very well on all heavy African as well as Asian and European antelope and boar in typical bush and forest ranges. It is in this, 9x57, 9x63 Hessmer Berlin, 9.3x63 Peterlongo and 318 WR-corral that the 35 Whelen and 338-06 A-Square should be rounded up in. The heavy and big, dangerous animals proved a bit too heavy to handle for abovementioned mediums that is wrongly “equalled” to the 9.3X62.
Image 1 - From Left: 300 Weatherby Mag, 300 Win Mag, 338 Win Mag, 358 Norma Mag, 9.3x64 Brenneke, 9.3X62. Amongst these magnum cartridges that saw use in Africa, it is the 9.3X62 (far right) that became the legend of Africa, regardless of its moderate velocity
Image 2 - 300 Weatherby mag, 300 Win Mag, 338 Win Mag. By figures on paper alone, any of these, might be perceived as the ideal buffalo cartridge. Decades of use proofed otherwise.
Image 3 - 9.3X62 left, 30-06 Springfield right. The difference is obvious
Image 4 - 9.3X62 Mauser left, 35 Whelen right. The differences are obvious
To be continued.................