9.3x62 vs .375 h&h

I would seriously consider the 300 PRC.

It's up to you we could talk what would be better till where blue in the face, both have pluses and minuses. 375 is more available but there aren't many rifles chambered in it anymore that are affordable, the 9.3 you can get in a few reasonably priced rifles but brass is like unicorn horns right now and ammo is as much or more then 375 if in stock. The Hornady 9.3 is pretty much useless since they use 3006 brass size to make it.

Not “legendary” (yet), but I went with a .375 Ruger. Got a good deal on a second hand Ruger 77 Hawkeye African.

Ammoseek.com shows:

9.3x62 with 75 options
375 Ruger with 160 options
375 H&H with 395 options

All are roughly the same price with hunting ammo loads. Though the H&H can be bought with FMJ from PPU which is a little cheaper.

I have both. The 9.3mm Mauser and the 375 H&H are remarkably similar when it comes to felt recoil. I think the thumb hole stock on the Mauser is a big reason why recoil is moderate. The pre-64 Model 70 375 fits very well and feels better than a nearly identical 338 Win Mag. To complicate it a great friend took a huge Cape Buffalo with one shot from his 375 Ruger. A second shot was for insurance, of course. You can’t go wrong with any of the three.

JeeperCreeper said:

I'm considering a big boy rifle for brown bear and maybe moose. I currently hunt with a 338 RCM and want a legendary cartridge that won't get dropped (I'm grumpy with Hornady).

I know the 9.3 vs 375 has been beat to death. Both are great, but I like the idea of the 9.3 more. But will still consider an H&H.

But, anyone know of any good pseudo-dangerous-game rifles in these currently on the market??

Considering a European bolt gun, but it's so hard to find anything in stock
What would you all pick if you wanted a new current market biggish bore??

Click to expand...

To me moose is super special and big bear is exciting. New rifles are boring. Classic American made African style in H&H. Pseudo is lame. I mean you have the funds to hunt big bear so.... well you asked strangers so.....

I've had 338-06 and 35 Whelen in the past. Realistically they don't do anything I can't do as well with my 30-06 and I sold them. Most people never shoot anything heavier than 200-225 gr bullets in either of those. I can load 200 or 220 gr bullets in my 30-06. The 33 and 35 caliber rifle will shoot them a little faster at the muzzle, but the 30-06 will catch up down range and penetrate deeper at any range. If the 35 Whelen is loaded with 250-270 gr bullets it does start to edge out 30-06, but almost nobody does that.

If I were interested in something similar, I believe the 9.3X62 is where I'd go. The traditional bullet weight is 286 gr and is a definite step up over 338-06, 35 Whelen or 30-06. Either of the 375's are more potent and versatile. While more gun than most of us will ever need with the lighter bullets they shoot flat enough to be used for much smaller game at extended ranges. Trajectory comes close to matching 30-06/180 gr loads.

But the 9.3X62 is technically legal for game as large as elephant, at least in a few places. It is certainly potent enough for larger North American game. It's not going to be a good long-range round, but at close to moderate ranges should do what needs to be done. Ammo isn't that hard to find and if you handload I'd think brass could be made from 35 Whelen or even 30-06 brass.

It's biggest advantages over the 375's are that it comes in a lighter, more compact rifle and the mag can be loaded 4+1 or 5+1 depending on the rifle vs 3+1 with the 375's. If I were in need of large bear protection, I'd rather have 1-2 more rounds in a more compact rifle than the additional 375's power.

It shouldn't be too hard to re-barrel, or rebore any 30-06 rifle to 9.3X62 so I'd not worry about rifle availability.

If you're asking for personal preference 9.3 is the way I'd go. But either 375 is certainly an option, and a more versatile option.

It would really depend on the rifle.....either will work fine.

I went .375 Ruger, because it fit and worked easiest on my A-bolt. Either thr H&H or the 9.3x62 would have been fine choices

They were discontinued a while back, but CZ 550’s in .375H&H and 9.3x62 should still be available on GB and other sites. Those were excellent rifles made in several of the African calibers like .458 Lott, .404 Jeffery, .416 Rigby, etc.

Good luck finding your new rifle.

Stay safe.

JeeperCreeper said:

OP here,

I should rephrase, my title is misleading.

I'm looking for a rifle first, then the cartridge.

I can't find many current rifles in either.

Click to expand...

Might be time for a semi custom? Pick a complete action, stock, and add a prefit barrel

I know Sako currently chambers both the 375 H&H and the 9.3x62. Sauer also chambers new rifles (or did recently anyways) in 9.3x62. I think you'll find more new offerings from the more common manufacturers in 375 H&H. Winchester and Weatherby both chamber 375 H&H in one or more configurations.

I built my 9.3x62 on 1903 Springfield that had already been sporterized before I purchased it. I had JES up in Oregon rebore it to 9.3.

9.3x64 Brenneke. Ugh, ugh, More Power. First one on your block.

If you can find one , a Zastava model 70 ( not to be confused with their model 70 AK47 ) is a model 98 Mauser rifle from Serbia . They have been imported as Parker Hale , and Remington model 798 and maybe others .

C-grunt said:

Ammoseek.com shows:

9.3x62 with 75 options
375 Ruger with 160 options
375 H&H with 395 options

All are roughly the same price with hunting ammo loads. Though the H&H can be bought with FMJ from PPU which is a little cheaper.

Click to expand...

I have some of the PPU 375 FMJ. My impression is that it is just that, FMJ, AKA hard ball, not a true solid. As such it's a practice round. Any definitive answer to this?

375 bullets and loaded 375hh ammo seem to be easier to get at least in the US.

unspellable said:

My impression is that it is just that, FMJ, AKA hard ball, not a true solid. As such it's a practice round. Any definitive answer to this?

Click to expand...

FMJ bullets were "solids" in safari rifle speak for a long long time before bronze bullets came out.
The better ones like Rigby and Hornady are true steel jacketed. Not "practice rounds."

"The business end of the DGS® bullet features a wide, flat nose that delivers maximum energy upon impact, while resisting bullet deformation and deflection. Incorporating a very hard high antimony lead core with a copper-clad steel jacket, this bullet maintains integrity and overall weight retention"

Too bad they only make it in .458" at 480 gr for .450 Nitro and 500 gr for .458 Win.

I was horrified to see that Winchester brand ammunition does not even offer .458 any more.

Jim Watson said:

9.3x64 Brenneke. Ugh, ugh, More Power. First one on your block.

Click to expand...

Fantastic round, better luck meeting a mermaid on your next fishing trip then finding brass and ammo in the usa.

The classic "solid" had a full metal jacket but differed from the military style FMJ or hardball. The literally solid bullet is a modern innovation. A hardball will deform if it hits bone. This would be a grievous fault in a "solid". The flat meplate on a solid is also a relatively modern innovation. I suspect the PPU load to be a hardball and thus suitable only for the target range.

unspellable said:

The classic "solid" had a full metal jacket but differed from the military style FMJ or hardball.

Click to expand...

Howzat? A lot of early military ball was steel jacketed, plated with copper or cupronickel for corrosion protection and "lubrication." A straight cupronickel jacket is stronger than gilding metal, we did not go to gilding metal jackets until we started using antimonial lead cores.
I have read of gilding metal and even "nickel" jacketed bullets "riveting" on bone.

Listing for PPU 9.3x62 says SP = Soft Point, no doubt. The only solid I see at Graf's is the Swift Breakaway with a plastic nose for feeding that breaks away leaving a flat or even cup pointed FMJ to penetrate.

A classic solid has a much thicker jacket than a hardball. There was an old saying that you should be able to put it back in the rifle and fire it again. Any deformation whatsoever in a "solid" is considered a serious defect. Where as a hard ball will often deform if it hits bone. Also the solid never has a spitzer shape as the spitzer will "steer"and often deviate from a straight line in the target. The classic solid was always round nosed, in recent times a flat meplate has come into use.

Mr Bell got famous for braining elephants with ball ammo, 173 gr roundnose FMJ. Probably because nobody made specialist safari bullets for such small bores. I saw one of his rifles at a gun show, accompanied by a concerned letter from him to Rigby wanting to know if they had reduced the rifling twist when they introduced the 140 gr bullet. I read that Mr Rigby would not sell spitzer bullets, that he had been wounded by an 8mm spitzer that deflected off his hard head. Even the 140 gr high velocity was only a semispitzer.

John Taylor had a lot to say about proper bullets for elephants etc. He was critical of the .470 because the bullet has a bit of taper; he wanted a parallel body and a hemispherical nose. And he said German bullets were not tough enough.

I have seen warnings against shooting "monolithic" bronze bullets in period double rifles, the strain deformation of the barrels might pop your ribs loose.

Speer made a bullet that was essentially monolithic except it had a narrow tungsten core to keep the length down to the same as a conventional lead core jacketed bullet.