(Accuracy @ 100 yards/meters) .363" at 100 yards average of three, three shot groups.
(Notes) This is a promising long rage load for the 9.3X62 as it delivers the required minimum 1,800 FPS to insure expansion all the way out to 400 yards. It appears that the Zeiss ASV+ #6 ring will match the trajectory but I have not yet proven that out in the field as this bullet has been hard to obtain and I used my available stock for load development. Thankfully I've located and obtained four boxes now.
Last edited by stokesrj on Tue Sep 09, 2014 9:49 am, edited 2 times in total.
I secured my stores of the 250 grain Accubond and spent the entire day at the range today ringing out this load firing over 100 rounds. At first I was not getting the same accuracy I was before but vertical stinging, less than 1/4 MOA wide but more than 1 MOA tall. Finally I figured out that my rail mount was slipping on my Zeiss Victory HT 3-12. I was a bit surprised because I had used lock-tight to secure everything but I verified it was the culprit and retightened every thing down tight.
Then I was rewarded with the same kind of accuracy I had experienced before, sub 1/2 MOA at 100 yards so I moved out to 200, 300 and 400 yards using the settings of the #6 ASV+ ring. which is +6 clicks for 200 yards, + 16 clicks for 300 yards, and +27 clicks for 400 yards. These worked out perfectly for each distance but the real reward was the size of the 400 yard group, I was really shocked, it was only 1 1/32" center to center and perfectly aligned with the waterline of the aim point about 5" left, which is exactly where it should be for a 8-10 mile an hour 1/3 value cross wind. I was thrilled. My 9.3X62 is now a bonafied short to medium range thumper, fully capable of a 400 yard shot if the need arises.
As a very pleasant bonus, the 286 grain Nosler Partition load with 56 grains of IMR8208XBR shoots to the same point of aim at 100 yards, it just doesn't get much better than that. I'm a happy camper.
After tightening down the rail mount, here is the first and second three shot group. The first was a little high so I lowered the scope setting two clicks before moving out to 200, 300 and 400 yards.
Here is the 400 yard group that put a smile on my face.
Last edited by stokesrj on Sun Sep 28, 2014 7:35 am, edited 3 times in total.
Yea, I know. Some of the very best loads are compressed and exceed what Quick Load says is safe. I'm very comfortable using these loads but that doesn't mean everyone should be. Hand loading responsibility lies squarely with the individual, that means the individual should look at all the data and make their own decisions. I have many decades of experience in this area, but I still work up loads carefully. I have the tools to measure case head expansion to the .0001" level and use them.
I've mentioned this before but the load, the majority of high power rifle competitors use in the national matches is also indicated as sky high and unsafe pressures by QuickLoad. This is the 77 grain Sierra Match King over 24.5 grains of Varget in Lake City .223 cases seated to 2.250". This is also the load issued to our squad designated marksmen. You can hear the Varget crunch when the bullet is seated.
I have two service rifles I use in the national matches. One is on it's third barrel and the other it's fifth. I shoot between 12,000 and 15,000 rounds of this load each year and have never popped a case, broken a bolt lug or seen any other bad effects. I get between 8 and 12 loading per case before the primer pockets loosen up. I do see problems occasionally, usually traced to the build up of a carbon ring in the throat, once this is removed with careful use of JB, every thing starts running smooth again.
However, back to the 9.3X62, Hodgdon publishes pressure tested load data with the 250 grain Barnes TSX, a bullet that is much harder to engrave and much more susceptible to pressure spikes than the 250 Accubond.
BULLET WEIGHT
250 GR. BAR TSX
Starting Loads Maximum Loads
Manufacturer Powder Bullet Diam.
C.O.L.
Grs.
Vel. (ft/s)
Pressure
Grs.
Vel. (ft/s)
Pressure
IMR IMR 4895 .366" 3.200" 52.0 2,185 39,200 CUP 58.0C 2,438 48,700 CUP
Hodgdon H4895 .366" 3.200" 51.0 2,221 37,000 CUP 57.0C 2,484 48,700 CUP
I believe pressure tested data trumps QuickLoad theoretical data, but just for curiosity, substitute the Barnes TSX in your above graph and see what it says, I bet it is significantly higher than 48,700 CUP or 55,927 PSI.
Also, QuickLoad is wrong on the amount of compression, it is no more than 1%. The bullet touches the powder but when the bullet is pulled, the powder can be easily poured from the case. I routinely use loads that are heavily compressed to the point that the powder is locked into a mass and will not pour. Some of the most accurate match loads are 5-10% compressed. It really only becomes a problem if the compression expands the case walls to the point it interferes with chambering.
I didn't notice that but it does make sense. For some reason QuickLoad thinks pressure and velocity are higher than they are.
What I do know for sure is that this load shoots really well from my rifle and I'm going to kill stuff with it
Bob
I played around with 3031 but abandoned it before finding any satisfactory loads, it is to bulky for the 9.3X62, even 51 grains is compressed if seating bullets to the designed depth. So, I simply moved on to other powders.
Bob
FOR THOSES WHO ARE INTERESTED
A couple of comments on compression & pressure using QuickLoad.
1. Measure your bullets OAL
2. Measure your fired cases, first empty and then full with water. The difference is your Maximim Case Capacity overflow. Example my QL defaults to 78.0 grains of H2O but measuring two different brans of cases give different results.
Default 78.0gr H2O 98.2% full
a. Barnes- MT=188.2gr, Full=264.3gr, capacity 76.1gr 101.2% full
b. Lapua- MT=195.0gr, Full=270, capacity 75.0gr 103% full
3. Now for pressure and using QL. Some people adjust the Weighting Facture on the on the cartridge dim. window and others adjust the Burning Rate Factor Ba on the Selected Propellant window to match the velocity they're registering from their chronograph. So by adjusting the above load to 101% full and adjusting the Ba to the velocity recorded of 2468fps gives a pressure of 51727psi. Whether this is true or not I can't say with certainty.
MY DISCLAIMER: I AM ONLY A LAYMAN AND HOBBYIST NOT A PHYSICIST. I DO NOT HAVE A FULL UNDERSTANDING OF THE BURN RATE FACTOR Ba. Anyone who has a good understanding of the burn rate factor please PM me.
QL IS ONLY AS GOOD AS THE INFORMATION GIVEN IT (GARBAGE IN GARBAGE OUT) AND THE DATA GIVEN BY MANUFACTURERS CAN CHANGE WITH LOTS
QUICKLOAD IS A MODELING SOFTWARE NOT AN EXACT REPRESENTATION
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo
The fact that Jellyfish have survived 650 million years, despite not having brains, gives hope to many people. sun-gazing.com
I forgot to ask earlier, While looking over your load I noticed that you use a magnum primer. I have seen others including some manuals use them also for this cartridge. Please explain to me the reasoning for using them. Does it have to do with bore diameter/case capacity ratio or……. is there some other reason.
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo
The fact that Jellyfish have survived 650 million years, despite not having brains, gives hope to many people. sun-gazing.com
The term magnum primer can be very misleading. It doesn't necessarily mean that it has a hotter or longer flame. It does usually mean the cup has a thicker wall .0025" vs .0021" for a standard primer. I usually try both and go with whichever provides the lowest standard deviation in velocity unless I'm loading for my AR's then I always go with magnum primers to reduce slam fires. In this case I tried the Fed 210 and 215 and the 215 gave me tighter distributions. The tightest distributions I've seen come from Wolf Magnum primers I can get down to 4 FPS SD for ten shots with some loads using them.
Bob
Last edited by stokesrj on Sun Sep 28, 2014 5:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
