7x57 vs 9.3x62 (it's probably not what you think)

[Alexandro Faria]

I'm hoping someone here can help me out: if both of the mentioned calibers above are in a ruger #1 platform, would it be more likely to get the 7x57 to launch a 190gr bullet at 2350ft/s or the 9.3x62 to throw a 320gr at 2350ft/s? I know it's not as simple as that,but I'm hoping someone can give me "In most cases,this would be the answer...".

 

[ActionBob]

I really think your going to just need one of each

 

[fsrmg1]

I agree, one of each to fill different niches. The 7mm with a faster bullet for added reach and the 9.3mm for the bigger stuff at moderate range.

 

[Red Leg]

Or find one of the wonderful .300 H&H's in the No. 1 and split the difference. It is a fine madness!

 

[JimP]

From what I have seen is that you may have a problem finding bullets in those calibers in those weights.

Other than that you might want to check out the rate of twist of each rifle if you do find that heavy of a bullet in those calibers. They will be longer than any other bullet and may not stabilize when shot depending on the rate of twist of the barrel.

But then I would buy any and all #1's that I could afford.

 

[Code4]

No.1's have long barrels and strong actions and in my experience can accurately use handloads a bit 'stiffer' than bolt guns.

With the 7x57 possibly.
In my Custom mauser '98 7x57 with 25" barrel I can get 175's to 2,371fps (chronographed). If I wanted to go heavier (If I could find the projectiles) I'd go to a 7 mag. with a fast twist barrel. You would have to get the length of those 190's and calculate the twist required.
http://www.bergerbullets.com/twist-rate-calculator/
I've seen a lot of internet claims about the 7x57 achieving high velocities, particularly with 140 projectiles, however I am sceptical of anything not chronographed.

With the 9.3x62 doubtful.
My custom mauser '98 9.3x62 had a 26" barrel and I got 320's t0 2,190fps. Stability post impact at 100+ paces was non existent with all woodleighs tumbling (effectively killing the game).
If you want 320's to go faster get a No.1 in 9.2x74R and see how you go.
Norma in their reloading data can get a 325 grain proj to 2,100 fps in the 9.3x74R.

 

[Alexandro Faria]

Hey guys, thanks for the replies! Okay, I forgot to say that all of this is theoretical... Curious as to everyone's experiences Thanks for the replies!

 

[Alexandro Faria]

No.1's have long barrels and strong actions and in my experience can accurately use handloads a bit 'stiffer' than bolt guns.

With the 7x57 possibly.
In my Custom mauser '98 7x57 with 25" barrel I can get 175's to 2,371fps (chronographed). If I wanted to go heavier (If I could find the projectiles) I'd go to a 7 mag. with a fast twist barrel. You would have to get the length of those 190's and calculate the twist required.
http://www.bergerbullets.com/twist-rate-calculator/
I've seen a lot of internet claims about the 7x57 achieving high velocities, particularly with 140 projectiles, however I am sceptical of anything not chronographed.

With the 9.3x62 doubtful.
My custom mauser '98 9.3x62 had a 26" barrel and I got 320's t0 2,190fps. Stability post impact at 100+ paces was non existent with all woodleighs tumbling (effectively killing the game).
If you want 320's to go faster get a No.1 in 9.2x74R and see how you go.
Norma in their reloading data can get a 325 grain proj to 2,100 fps in the 9.3x74R.

Thanks for the info! I thought rimmed cartridges were meant to be kept at lower pressures? Or is that only because they are usually shot in doubles?

 

[Witold Krzyżanowski]

No.1's have long barrels and strong actions and in my experience can accurately use handloads a bit 'stiffer' than bolt guns.

With the 7x57 possibly.
In my Custom mauser '98 7x57 with 25" barrel I can get 175's to 2,371fps (chronographed). If I wanted to go heavier (If I could find the projectiles) I'd go to a 7 mag. with a fast twist barrel. You would have to get the length of those 190's and calculate the twist required.
http://www.bergerbullets.com/twist-rate-calculator/
I've seen a lot of internet claims about the 7x57 achieving high velocities, particularly with 140 projectiles, however I am sceptical of anything not chronographed.

With the 9.3x62 doubtful.
My custom mauser '98 9.3x62 had a 26" barrel and I got 320's t0 2,190fps. Stability post impact at 100+ paces was non existent with all woodleighs tumbling (effectively killing the game).
If you want 320's to go faster get a No.1 in 9.2x74R and see how you go.
Norma in their reloading data can get a 325 grain proj to 2,100 fps in the 9.3x74R.

I think the same as Code4.
Witold

 

[Mannlicher]

I thought rimmed cartridges were meant to be kept at lower pressures?

You ate right. 7x57 -3900 bar, 7x57R - 3400 bar.

Mannlicher

 

[rookhawk]

I have a 7x57 and shoot exclusively Sellier & Bellott ammo through it. (a dakota single shot that is similar to a Ruger #1) The S&B factory load from a 23" barrel is an astounding 2430 at the muzzle according to my chronograph. Since its a Euro loaded round it is much hotter than anything factory made for primarily US consumption. This is pushing a 175grain Nosler Partition. I found that it works like a bolt of lightning for killing all plains game of which I shot a great many different species up to Bull Kudu and Burchell's Zebra. I also hunted black bear and killed a bear center of chest instantly. The upper organs were turned literally to coagulated jelly so the energy transfer was astounding.

The bullets for 7x57 that are >175 grain have pretty terrible ballistics and certainly are not as well regarded for expansion performance as the go-to 175gr partition.

Beyond violating CIP / SAAMI pressure rules for the 7x57 by hotrod hand loading it, I think you are running afoul of another critical point in this experiment of yours and that is the entire purpose of the 7x57: "how does the 7x57 kill?". The theory goes that the 7x57 (and 6.5x55) are so lethal because they provide a heavy for caliber bullet a long hang time inside the animal by impacting at 1900-2300fps. The entire "religion" of these two guns rely upon the notion that "hang time" kills animals, "good BCs kill animals", "Heavy for caliber bullets kill animals", "1900-2300fps impact velocity kills animals".

If you believe in the "religion" above then I think you should find a weapon that achieves the power/performance goals you have with the heavier bullet. .318 Westley Richards and .35 Whelen seem like really good options to get you where you want to go with the 190grain to 225 grain bullets in my opinion.

Save yourself a lot of hassle and just buy the factory loaded 175gr S&B ammo for the 7x57 and be happy with its awesome abilities. Get something bigger for the 190GR bullets at 2350fps.

 

[rookhawk]

Or find one of the wonderful .300 H&H's in the No. 1 and split the difference. It is a fine madness!

I had a single shot Dakota in 300 H&H for my last trip to Africa. I'm a very big man. Gigantic in height and weight by most people's standards. I used it ONE TIME to harvest a bull giraffe and that was enough. Sold it immediately upon returning to the USA. While the caliber is delightful in its performance on game, it is absolutely miserable to shoot from a single shot rifle (Dakota or Ruger) with a lightweight stalking scope or iron sights. 7-8 pound guns do not play well with .300H&H as the recoil was absolutely horrible.

If you want a .300H&H I recommend picking up a sweetheart pre-64 winchester model 70 as that caliber is not very expensive/collectible, the guns for which it was made are exquisite and with a decent 2-10x scope installed would be an 11 pound gun that would be pleasant to shoot. I've seen many excellent condition guns like the aforementioned for around $1400-$1600 with optic.

Just my opinion.

 

[Red Leg]

I had a single shot Dakota in 300 H&H for my last trip to Africa. I'm a very big man. Gigantic in height and weight by most people's standards. I used it ONE TIME to harvest a bull giraffe and that was enough. Sold it immediately upon returning to the USA. While the caliber is delightful in its performance on game, it is absolutely miserable to shoot from a single shot rifle (Dakota or Ruger) with a lightweight stalking scope or iron sights. 7-8 pound guns do not play well with .300H&H as the recoil was absolutely horrible.

If you want a .300H&H I recommend picking up a sweetheart pre-64 winchester model 70 as that caliber is not very expensive/collectible, the guns for which it was made are exquisite and with a decent 2-10x scope installed would be an 11 pound gun that would be pleasant to shoot. I've seen many excellent condition guns like the aforementioned for around $1400-$1600 with optic.

Just my opinion.

Seriously? Wow, mine is a pussy cat. The perceived recoil is no worse than a light '06 that I have, and nothing remotely like my .338 or .375's.

 

[rookhawk]

Seriously? Wow, mine is a pussy cat. The perceived recoil is no worse than a light '06 that I have, and nothing remotely like my .338 or .375's.

I'm 6'9", 300+ lbs. and I'm evidently a recoil sissy. No offense taken by you pointing that fact out.

 

[Red Leg]

I'm 6'9", 300+ lbs. and I'm evidently a recoil sissy. No offense taken by you pointing that fact out.

Lol. You are a big fellow - let's make sure we aren't seat mates to J'burg!. Seriously though, I find the very straight stock on the No. 1's really mitigate recoil. I have never fired one of the lovely Dakota's, but they seem to be built a bit slimmer and lighter. Your comment only surprised me because I had never considered mine a hard kicker. But different guns affect people differently. I once owned (for a short time) a Ruger mannlicher in the .308 (the RSI?). It was a perfect little bitch. Recoil was sharp, but I could have sold tickets to watch the muzzle blast. Looked and sounded like a howitzer going off - and that was a .308.

 

[Royal27]

Or find one of the wonderful .300 H&H's in the No. 1 and split the difference. It is a fine madness!

@Red Leg is right. Get the .300 H&H.

Then do like @ActionBob said, and get one of each.

I really think your going to just need one of each

 

[35bore]

Go for the 7, the 9.3 is just a sad representation of the 35Whelen. ...

That's for the Norwegian.

Honestly though, I like the idea of carrying something big enough to cover all you bases. You know, the unexpected coming around the corner with an attitude. Expecially if it weighs a ton or so. Go for the 9.3

 

[rookhawk]

If think a 9.3x74 or better yet, a 9.3x64 brenneke would be preferred to the 9.3x62 for purposes of being able to take dangerous game in a pinch?

 

[8x68]

I think we may be having the "apples and oranges comparison" argument. My thinking is that both calibres are in different weight classes (unless I'm missing the point of the thread which is highly probable). 7x57 good for open country and medium class "meanies" with heavier bullets and the 9.3 a close in "heavy" for severely pissed off "meanies". The 9.3 has the option of open country too depending on bullet choice. Do I get a "second" or shall I sit in the corner......again?
As ActionBob pointed out "When in doubt get both!"
I would like to be "overgunned" than "undergunned" myself. Go 9.3

 

[rookhawk]

8x68,

My thinking was 7x57 good for many things. Not sure what 9.3x62 is good for? Too small to legally hunt "meanies".

In fact, in Zimbabwe the only things 9.3x62 can do that 7x57 cannot do legally would be Eland and giraffe.

So the 9.3 is less viable than a 375 for big meanies and is not measurably superior to the 7x57 for the medium stuff in my opinion.

That's just my take and I'm sure others are inferring other things in their comments than am I.