Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
9.3x62 vs 9.3x64
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="7ultra" data-source="post: 71053" data-attributes="member: 2152"><p>Brown Dog,</p><p>here is a ballistic comparison for you</p><p></p><p>Bullet: 250 Gr. Nosler Ballistic tip</p><p></p><p>Cartridge: 9.3x62</p><p></p><p>Muzzle Velocity: 2600 fps (pretty high)</p><p></p><p>Chart :Range Velocity Energy Momentum Drop Windage Lead Time </p><p>(yards) (ft/sec) (ft-lbs) (lbs-sec) (inches) (inches) (inches) (sec) </p><p>0 2606.1 3770.0 2.89 -1.5 0.0 0.0 0.000 </p><p>100 2426.8 3269.0 2.69 -0.0 0.7 21.0 0.119 </p><p>200 2255.3 2823.4 2.50 -4.4 3.1 43.6 0.248 </p><p>300 2090.3 2425.5 2.32 -15.7 7.1 67.9 0.386 </p><p>400 1932.3 2072.5 2.15 -34.9 13.1 94.2 0.535 </p><p>500 1782.2 1763.1 1.98 -63.5 21.4 122.6 0.697 </p><p>600 1640.8 1494.4 1.82 -103.0 32.0 153.5 0.872 </p><p>700 1508.8 1263.7 1.68 -155.5 45.3 187.1 1.063 </p><p>800 1388.2 1069.7 1.54 -223.3 61.6 223.6 1.270 </p><p>900 1281.3 911.3 1.42 -309.2 80.9 263.2 1.495 </p><p>1000 1188.7 784.4 1.32 -416.3 103.5 306.0 1.739 </p><p></p><p></p><p>Here is the same for 9.3 x64, same bullet, driven at 2760 (as per RWS factory)</p><p>Range Velocity Energy Momentum Drop Windage Lead Time </p><p>(yards) (ft/sec) (ft-lbs) (lbs-sec) (inches) (inches) (inches) (sec) </p><p>0 2766.3 4247.9 3.07 -1.5 0.0 0.0 0.000 </p><p>100 2580.0 3694.9 2.86 -0.0 0.7 19.8 0.112 </p><p>200 2401.8 3202.1 2.67 -3.7 2.8 41.0 0.233 </p><p>300 2231.5 2764.1 2.48 -13.5 6.5 63.8 0.362 </p><p>400 2067.3 2372.3 2.30 -30.3 12.1 88.4 0.502 </p><p>500 1910.3 2025.7 2.12 -55.2 19.5 114.9 0.653 </p><p>600 1761.5 1722.3 1.96 -89.7 29.3 143.7 0.817 </p><p>700 1621.3 1459.2 1.80 -135.4 41.4 175.0 0.994 </p><p>800 1490.9 1233.8 1.66 -194.3 56.3 209.0 1.187 </p><p>900 1372.1 1045.0 1.52 -269.0 74.2 245.9 1.397 </p><p>1000 1267.3 891.4 1.41 -362.1 95.2 286.0 1.625 </p><p></p><p>So what your looking at is both cartridges will deliver 2000 footpounds out to 400 (the 64 carrying it to 500), with the 64 dropping a little under 4 inches less. Granted this is comparing a hot handload to a factory load, but I don't know if the ballistic gains are enough to monkey around with all that excess work. Now you may be on to something with that 325 WSM, or 338 WSM. The action would undoubtedly cost more than a comparative standard, but it definately would offer some punch.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="7ultra, post: 71053, member: 2152"] Brown Dog, here is a ballistic comparison for you Bullet: 250 Gr. Nosler Ballistic tip Cartridge: 9.3x62 Muzzle Velocity: 2600 fps (pretty high) Chart :Range Velocity Energy Momentum Drop Windage Lead Time (yards) (ft/sec) (ft-lbs) (lbs-sec) (inches) (inches) (inches) (sec) 0 2606.1 3770.0 2.89 -1.5 0.0 0.0 0.000 100 2426.8 3269.0 2.69 -0.0 0.7 21.0 0.119 200 2255.3 2823.4 2.50 -4.4 3.1 43.6 0.248 300 2090.3 2425.5 2.32 -15.7 7.1 67.9 0.386 400 1932.3 2072.5 2.15 -34.9 13.1 94.2 0.535 500 1782.2 1763.1 1.98 -63.5 21.4 122.6 0.697 600 1640.8 1494.4 1.82 -103.0 32.0 153.5 0.872 700 1508.8 1263.7 1.68 -155.5 45.3 187.1 1.063 800 1388.2 1069.7 1.54 -223.3 61.6 223.6 1.270 900 1281.3 911.3 1.42 -309.2 80.9 263.2 1.495 1000 1188.7 784.4 1.32 -416.3 103.5 306.0 1.739 Here is the same for 9.3 x64, same bullet, driven at 2760 (as per RWS factory) Range Velocity Energy Momentum Drop Windage Lead Time (yards) (ft/sec) (ft-lbs) (lbs-sec) (inches) (inches) (inches) (sec) 0 2766.3 4247.9 3.07 -1.5 0.0 0.0 0.000 100 2580.0 3694.9 2.86 -0.0 0.7 19.8 0.112 200 2401.8 3202.1 2.67 -3.7 2.8 41.0 0.233 300 2231.5 2764.1 2.48 -13.5 6.5 63.8 0.362 400 2067.3 2372.3 2.30 -30.3 12.1 88.4 0.502 500 1910.3 2025.7 2.12 -55.2 19.5 114.9 0.653 600 1761.5 1722.3 1.96 -89.7 29.3 143.7 0.817 700 1621.3 1459.2 1.80 -135.4 41.4 175.0 0.994 800 1490.9 1233.8 1.66 -194.3 56.3 209.0 1.187 900 1372.1 1045.0 1.52 -269.0 74.2 245.9 1.397 1000 1267.3 891.4 1.41 -362.1 95.2 286.0 1.625 So what your looking at is both cartridges will deliver 2000 footpounds out to 400 (the 64 carrying it to 500), with the 64 dropping a little under 4 inches less. Granted this is comparing a hot handload to a factory load, but I don't know if the ballistic gains are enough to monkey around with all that excess work. Now you may be on to something with that 325 WSM, or 338 WSM. The action would undoubtedly cost more than a comparative standard, but it definately would offer some punch. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
9.3x62 vs 9.3x64
Top