Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: 9.3x338 loads

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    S.E. Alaska
    Posts
    198

    Default 9.3x338 loads

    Murphy,
    Since you have experience with wildcats, perhaps you or others can offer some advice.

    My 9.3x338 came in, and looks good. Now I want to develop some loads. I already worked with 250 gr bullets and IMR 4895, and that seems to be working out good.

    Today, I discovered that RWS 9.3x64 brass holds 84.4 grs of water, and my 338 brass necked up to 9.3 holds 83.9 grs of water. Half a grain ain't much, so basically the capacity is the same.

    In you opinion, does this mean that I can use published and reliable starting loads for the 9.3x64 in my wildcat?

    KB

  2. #2
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,431

    Default The 366 Kabluewy

    Yes, you've got it. You can expect very similar results using the 9.3X64 loading data. Case capacity versus bore size is the determining factor.

    The 338 uses H4350 and RL-19 powder. With the same capacity and larger bore we can use slightly faster powder, such as RL-15 for the 270-286 grain and maybe H4895 for the 232-250 grain bullets. There are, of course, many other powders well suited also. You're on the right track.

    Could you post a picture of the rifle and the loads for us? Who made the dies for this one and what did we name it, this 8 pound bundle of joy?
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    S.E. Alaska
    Posts
    198

    Default 366 Alaskan

    Thanks Murphy, for the info, and for calling it the 366 Kabluewy. I had the barrel stamped 366 Alaskan. So far it is a most satisfying rifle. I'll try to post some pictures, but it's not spectacular. It's just a SS Ruger 77 MKII with a #4 PacNor barrel, both bead blasted for a dull finish. I set it in a Hogue Stock with full bed block, but that probably wasn't necessary. The stock feels good anyway.

    I bought the dies from Redding. Aaron at Gator Guns in Kenai is the guy who put it together for me, and he has access to the reamer. He has always done a good job for me for over 20 years - I lost count of the years.

    Frankly, at this time, I'm not unhappy at all that I didn't wait for the 375 Ruger instead. Another thing - I really didn't expect the case capacity to be so close to the 9.3x64, but that's OK too. Duplicating the 9.3x64 with more readily available brass makes it easier. I wanted to use the Ruger action, which I already had, so I would make the same decision again.

    KB

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    S.E. Alaska
    Posts
    198

    Default 9.3

    Now that I read what I said about the stock, it doesn't make sense. I meant that the Hogue stock with the pillars, instead of the full bedding block, would have proably worked just as well, and cost $100 less, and weighed a few onces less too. But, I'm satisfied with it as is.

    The rifle range is snowed in, and will be for a while, so I may have to go somewhere by boat, and shoot on the beach. This winter weather is getting old.

    KB

  5. #5

    Default

    I've had one for 11 years, I am at work and don't have all of old information with me.
    62 grains imr 4350, speer 270 gr bullet, cci-250 primer, remington-peters case, chronographed at 2125 fps.
    same with 71 gr. imr4350 - 2500fps
    same with 60 gr. varget - 2300fps
    My dad had a pawley computer, knew how to use it, came up with starting loads.
    My brother ordered the first set of dies for this from rcbs, for a Christmas present, so they let him name this cartridge.
    I think he called it a 9.3HTF, never mind what it stands for.
    Hope this helps some.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •