My 9.3x62...

...kicks the shit out of me.

Honestly, I thought I do recoil alright till now, but I suppose Im getting older. Anyway this bitch of the hunting forest will rise up and punch you in the face if you're inattentive. Sometimes, after the first two shots at the range, I can't hit a goddam thing. After six rounds I have a headache and want to go home.


It weighs 8.0 pounds exactly all up. It used to be Jakewire's rifle, but now I should shoot something with it because Owen would have liked that.

I could put a heavier scope on it. I could make it heavier by putting something in the stock. (Would you put it in the front or the rear of the stock? I assumed the rear, but it make more sense in the front. If I put more weight in the rear end - the Bitch will pivot faster and smack me in the head harder)


One could load it down I suppose, although I dont care to hobble things that way. At the moment I am loading 67 grains of 2209 behind a 285 grain PPU bullet for 2390 FPS. (I have another which is with 2207 and the same bullet at 2019 fps, which is noticably softer.)

What about lighter bullets - has anyone ever seen a 232 or 235 grain .366 bullet for sale anywhere?


I shoot it at the range as litttle as possible. I have taken it out for the roar last year, but the only thing I shot with it that trip was a rabbit. (It was a trophy rabbit.) Offhand its alright.



https://i.ibb.co/YkTKjPZ/20241127-132158.jpg
upper word

Try lead up in buttstock cavity. And do download it so you enjoy it again. Flinching sucks.

Norma make or used to a 232 gr bullet that was a joy to shoot and plenty for red deer

Just got given 45 9.3 cal. 286gn. Hornady SP_RP Interlocks. No use to me. 40 dollars includes post.

Limbsaver slip on recoil pad for one. I'd try that before adding weight.

Next thing is setup - almost looks like it is set up for open sights not a scope. A cheek riser of some sort strapped to the butt might make a large difference as it helps prevent the stock from colliding with your face. Little things, big difference... Might be an option to track down a cast type pill and download the thing, still be plenty for anything in NZ!

I load 56.5gr 2208 for 2270 fps in my 9.3x62 with 286gr prvi projectiles. I’ve got a limbsaver recoil pad on mine.

I have some Norma factory 232gr ammo. And I think I’ve got some lighter Woodleighs from memory will need to check. Hate the idea of making a 9.3 rifle heavier…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by No.3

Limbsaver slip on recoil pad for one. I'd try that before adding weight.

Next thing is setup - almost looks like it is set up for open sights not a scope. A cheek riser of some sort strapped to the butt might make a large difference as it helps prevent the stock from colliding with your face. Little things, big difference... Might be an option to track down a cast type pill and download the thing, still be plenty for anything in NZ!

---

I wondered the same. When I was using a couple of different 375 H&H's It was noticeable how much the stock drop changed the felt recoil.

Beautiful rifle though.

That recoil pad looks prehistoric it appears oxidised and perished. Go the limbsaver route maybe try a slip on one first.

Sellier and bellot makes an 193 grain projectile and I managed to get some 174 gr copper projectiles from Europe. But hélas too complicated to get here.
Robert from Tokoroa casts some lead projectiles in 9.3 and you could maybe shoot them with some trail boss. That will put deer down as well as anything else . Making a discret thread at the muzzle and using a muzzle forward suppressor would be an other option.

You could always just give it to me?:thumbsup:

The getting older does affect how you notice recoil.
It is a bit like watching the young fellas at the local footy club.
Tackles that we used to relish ,shrug off would now flatten us.
I still like using the 30.06 on game but not on targets.
.243 is nicer now I am getting Winston's card in March.
I imagine the 9.3 recoil would be up there especially shooting prone.
That is a nice rifle though.

Could you try a slip-on recoil pad over the original one . It will make your LOP a bit longer but will make recoil a little easier to handle.

And maybe one of those Twin Needle type cheek risers that attach with straps and buckles. Made a difference to my 308 Norma Magnum Parker Hale - which weighs less than 8 pound......

I hate the idea of making it heavier although it's obviously how you can reduce recoil. But I hunt in the bush and anything over 8lbs I think is heavy these days. I dont hunt like they do with 9.3's in Africa and Australia, where you drive round in the landrover until you see something you want to shoot. I have to carry this sucker. And I have other rifles that are much lighter, so even though 8.5 pounds is not a big deal, it does mean that I simply choose a lighter rifle when I go. The heavier ones just dont get picked.

Lighter bullets is what I really want. Or I will use my light load with a 286g at 2000 fps. I looked up the original ballistics of the first loads that made the cartridge famous and it was about the same - 286g bullet at 2000 - 2100 fps.

The recoil pad is actually in good shape and working good. I had another 9.3 without a recoil pad once and it would literally bruise my shoulder and collar bone area, so I know the difference a good pad will make. People use to thik Id been in a car crash.
I dont think making a cheek riser will help, thats not whats bothering me, I dont mind if rifles jump in the air - that's lessoning recoil as I figure it, dissapating recoil energy in kicking if up, it doesnt hit me in the face with the stock comb, but I think I might have to move the scope further forward a bit though! I suppose its hard to describe, and also mental as all flinching is. The rifle is not actually hurting me. But I would describe the shooting of it off the bench as brutal. Ferocious.

I might have to make some kind of set up where I can stand up straight to bench it. Liek the British gunmakers used to do regulating big bore double barreled rifles.


Theres no way I am shooting The Bitch lying prone. No way...

Try the slip-on recoil pad. They are cheap as chips and it might make all the differance

Looks like you could go lower mounts too,possibly. As long as bolt clears.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HandH

I have some Norma factory 232gr ammo. And I think I’ve got some lighter Woodleighs from memory will need to check. Hate the idea of making a 9.3 rifle heavier…

---

Let me know if you find any lighter Woodleighs, I would be interested. I would like some Norma Oryx 232g ideally but good luck with ordering some of those in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fee Knicks

Try the slip-on recoil pad. They are cheap as chips and it might make all the differance

---

The recoil pad thats on it is doing fine, it's soft and sqidgey, its not perished or anything,

Is that a Husky 9.3x62?

It's just shooting off the bench that bothers me. I think it's bench technique is the problem. I am going to have to stand up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husky1600#2

Is that a Husky 9.3x62?

---

Yes. its a Husky 1600 in a custom stock. Very light stock actually despite the figure it has. It may not be walnut.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Duxbury

It's just shooting off the bench that bothers me. I think it's bench technique is the problem. I am going to have to stand up.

---

Build yourself a tall table or dig yourself a trench.

I'd download it with cast bullets and trail boss as mentioned earlier. Full house loads with lighter bullets are still going to be pretty stout.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Duxbury

Yes. its a Husky 1600 in a custom stock. Very light stock actually despite the figure it has. It may not be walnut.

---

I have a Husky 1651 in 358NM. Shooting 225 SGK's ahead of 77gn's of 2209 for 2880fps. It is reasonably comfortable to shoot, have shot it prone on gongs and deer no problems. 9.3 aint too much more than 358, maybe some lighter projectiles and a little less speed should sort the problem.

I'm not sure you're quite understanding the point some of us are trying to make - it's not a smartarse "pussy shooter" thing it's just the dynamics of the big guns and how the stock design can make or break them (or more correctly you).

The first thing I saw with that stock configuration on your rifle is that the stock looks to be proportioned for iron sights which are on top of the barrel about 45mm or so lower. This means that the bore line (or center line of the recoil forces) is above the line of the butt stock. This means two things, 1) your hold on the rifle when sighting through a scope is not 'natural' and you aren't in the best position to fully control and absorb the recoil into your bone structure and 2) the rifle is naturally going to rotate upwards which is going to make the felt recoil feel worse than it actually is.

The suggestion for a Limbsaver or the like isn't due to the current recoil pad being stuffed, the Limbsavers (and similar from other makers) have an element in them that helps control the upwards rotation and transfers it more into a straight line rearwards push which doesn't feel as bad because you have more muscle groups employed in soaking the hit up. The same point about the cheek riser, a more solid and repeatable upright position will mean the recoil is less upwards and more rearwards. You can't do much more than that with the design of the handle as it looks to be configured for iron sights first and scope second. I don't think more weight will make any difference to your recoil experience, as it will not prevent the upwards rotation under recoil that you have noted and this is what is making the thing feel so vicious. OK for a few shots standing, but anything else just hurts.

Weatherby rifles are renowned for this, as well as some of the Sako Bavarian-type stocks with the beautiful but deadly hogsback curved butt design. Modern sporting bolt actions are a heap straighter in comparison, this is for good reason as they are usually a lot lighter than 8.5Lb and they'd just be brutal with that curved stock design.

https://youtu.be/w2uacSv1Xiw?si=B9Jw77Mf1CMkbLzk

This is our original Big Bore shoot back in 2016. You can see Owen using the 9.3 in this video.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by No.3

I'm not sure you're quite understanding the point some of us are trying to make - it's not a smartarse "pussy shooter" thing it's just the dynamics of the big guns and how the stock design can make or break them (or more correctly you).

The first thing I saw with that stock configuration on your rifle is that the stock looks to be proportioned for iron sights which are on top of the barrel about 45mm or so lower. This means that the bore line (or center line of the recoil forces) is above the line of the butt stock. This means two things, 1) your hold on the rifle when sighting through a scope is not 'natural' and you aren't in the best position to fully control and absorb the recoil into your bone structure and 2) the rifle is naturally going to rotate upwards which is going to make the felt recoil feel worse than it actually is.

The suggestion for a Limbsaver or the like isn't due to the current recoil pad being stuffed, the Limbsavers (and similar from other makers) have an element in them that helps control the upwards rotation and transfers it more into a straight line rearwards push which doesn't feel as bad because you have more muscle groups employed in soaking the hit up. The same point about the cheek riser, a more solid and repeatable upright position will mean the recoil is less upwards and more rearwards. You can't do much more than that with the design of the handle as it looks to be configured for iron sights first and scope second. I don't think more weight will make any difference to your recoil experience, as it will not prevent the upwards rotation under recoil that you have noted and this is what is making the thing feel so vicious. OK for a few shots standing, but anything else just hurts.

Weatherby rifles are renowned for this, as well as some of the Sako Bavarian-type stocks with the beautiful but deadly hogsback curved butt design. Modern sporting bolt actions are a heap straighter in comparison, this is for good reason as they are usually a lot lighter than 8.5Lb and they'd just be brutal with that curved stock design.

---

I do understand what you mean, but I do disagree about straight stocks being better for heavy recoil. And I have shot this particular rifle in a stock with a cheekpeice and also without and it did also come with a limbsaver when I got it.

In my opinion rifles that recoil straight back rearwards give the shooter more felt recoil because the rifle is literally hitting them harder. A stock that causes the rifle to lift up is dissipating recoil energy into the movement. (Some people think they are being kicked to death because the rifle jumps a lot.) A heavier rifle dissapates more recoil energy because it has more mass. The more mass you get the rifle to lift instead of hitting you with it the better. The rifle coming up under recoil does not bother me, I have others that move around as much. A .30/06 with 220 grain bullets in a light rifle you will have to hold onto as well, or a Marlin .45/70. Modern rifles with straight stocks are that way for using scopes, not because a straight stock mitigates recoil any better.

In my opinion putting this rifle into a straighter stock would make the experience worse.

(I have been a bit facetious for entertainment in my first post, about the rifle jumping up and hitting me - the rifle has not actually hit me, although the scope has, once, when I had a poor shooting position.)



Thinking about it today, I really think its my bench technique that needs to alter, for example - the same way shooting prone is going be more of a bastard recoil wise than otherwise. I need to be able to sway back with the recoil, my natural bench technique it to get in low behind the thing, which is when you get walloped

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stug

https://youtu.be/w2uacSv1Xiw?si=B9Jw77Mf1CMkbLzk

This is our original Big Bore shoot back in 2016. You can see Owen using the 9.3 in this video.

---

I've never seen that video. Very cool. You can see that offhand its not bad at all. (Plus Owen was not loading his ammo up to max though either.)

I had Stug's Mauser 9.3x62 before him and it is a very light rifle with open sights, I found it very mild to shoot with factory loads but I don't recall shooting it prone. I think it still had the factory horn buttplate in those days.

Were I too shoot it again I'd get someone to check my posture on the gun, I'd want my head up, cheekweld is a benchrest invention that yank gunwriters have witters endlessly about until it has become gospel, but if you watch how the Euro hunters - yes hunters, they shoot "heads up". No3 is wrong about the hogsback stocks, yes they may offend the eye, but for offhand shooting at moving targets they are very effective, and suit powerful rifles just fine.

Ya gotta be careful what you read or are influenced by in most things, shooting as well!

I’ve shot it prone with the horn but plate, not pleasant at all. The drop in the stock lines up really well with the open sights and shooting it standing is not bad at all, especially with the slip on limbsaver.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Duxbury

Theres no way I am shooting The Bitch lying prone. No way...

---

I will bring down the 505 Gibbs........you will love the 9.3 after that :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stug

https://youtu.be/w2uacSv1Xiw?si=B9Jw77Mf1CMkbLzk

This is our original Big Bore shoot back in 2016. You can see Owen using the 9.3 in this video.

---

Need to come down for another one

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stug

https://youtu.be/w2uacSv1Xiw?si=B9Jw77Mf1CMkbLzk

This is our original Big Bore shoot back in 2016. You can see Owen using the 9.3 in this video.

---

Shooting in tee shirt must really reduce felt recoil...

Sent from my SM-A226B using Tapatalk

I have a 9.5 Mannlicher Shoenauer as well, would that count too?

Will get some of these Hammers in my next order

https://hammerbullets.com/product/36...gr-hammer-hht/

Nice & light to cut recoil down in my 9.3 :cool:

My 9.3 began life as a X 57 but some fine chap had it rechambered to X 62 in Canada.

Its a pre-WW2 M98 action so has a bit of heft but is still fairly light . I shoot the 285 range of projectiles and dont have any issues other than not using it enough to actually warrant owning a 9.3 x 62. It is in a Parker-Hale wooden stock.

You have to be a little bit careful with thinking lighter bullets will reduce recoil, as the tendency often is to increase velocity at the same time.

Recoil is a function of bullet weight, and velocity, but the velocity is a squared multiplier - that is, if you double the weight you double the recoil, but if you double the velocity you increase recoil by 4x (2x2).

Of course, if the velocity stays constant then the lighter projectile will recoil less than the heavier.

The biggest improvement in bench shooting I have had was via plugs under earmuffs - or a can, but that might be a bit orrible on such a classic rifle.

Recoil is a function of momentum, which is mass x velocity. The momentum of the system is conserved. Before firing the rifle and projectile have zero momentum because the velocity is zero. The momentum of the rifle recoiling is equal to the momentum of the projectile moving down the barrel.
Momentum is a vector quantity so has a direction, so the rifles change in momentum is opposite to the projectiles change in momentum.

I’ve shot that rifle, Borrowed it from Owen at the SI big bore shoot, a few years back, bought a box of Ppu 285 gr in ChCh, shot same as Owens load out to 200, it’s a 9.3 is going shove pretty hard,
You can try cutting the load back a bit, moving to the 270 gr Speer 9.3 bullet, at the same speed, 2350 ish, will reduce recoil a bit,
Light bullets are hard to source, for the 9.3, but 250 gr TSX and Accubonds are about.
I too, would love to get a steady supply, of 232 gr Norma, but I’ve only ever seen one box in last ten years,

So here goes with some physics

8.5lb rifle = 3.855kg. 286gr = 0.0185325 kg 232gr = 0.015kg
Factory velocities from Norma ammo 286gr = 670m/s 2200fps 232gr = 731 m/s 2400fps

Momentum of rifle and projectile is conserved
Mass(rifle)xVelocity(rifle) + mass(projectile)xvelocity(projectile) = 0
286gr at 2200 fps
3.855 x Velocity(rifle) + 0.0185325 x 670 = 0
Velocity = 3.22m/s

232gr at 2400fps
3.855 x Velocity(rifle) + 0.015 x 731 = 0
Velocity = 2.844 m/s

So a lighter faster projectile does recoil less