Reloading for the 9.3X57 mauser

[HSM_miner]

I will be doing some more shooting in the next day or so. There are a few things I would like to check. First, I will stay at 48.5gr of H4895 and will play with the C.O.L. to see how it will change things, accuracy, velocity, etc. Just as an side, the Norma 285gr Alaska factory rounds had a C.O.L. of 3.000".


I will be doing some 100m shooting to see how my last loading holds up at that distance.

[gitano]

If you're interested in what Quickload predicts, for 48.0 grains of H4895, the prediction is 2241 fps at 44,500 psi pressure.

 
Hmm... I was rereading this thread and when I read this I ran the numbers through my version of QL, and I get significantly different results. Below is a screen-shot of the QL calculation page.
 

 
Do either of you see where I have some parameter off? I didn't change anything but OAL to 3.100", barrel length to 24", and charge to 48.0 grains of H4895. Everything else is the default value. As you can see, the estiamted chamber pressure is over 52,583 PSI. That's greatly different than 44,500 PSI.
 
Paul

[Brithunter]

Hmmm Gitano,

   The only thing that I can think of is groove depth/diameter :undecided: Don't know what Nels one measures but my own Model 46 has a large groove size which of course effect pressures. The free-bore he mentions will also effect this I am thinking?

[Nelsdou]

The differences I see are in the H4895 propellant table: (Yours vs mine)

Ba .7106 vs .6286
a0 .0558 vs .1636
z1 .320 vs .542
Factor b 1.2232 vs 1.5418

Also Pmax MAP of 50763 is by Piezo whereas mine is 37710 by CUP CIP. Don't know if that is a factor that can customize propellant properties.

I'm not aware of inadvertently changing the powder file but it is certainly worth investigating!

Just for grins IMR4895 is Ba .6100, a0 -.1500, z1 .643, Factor b 1.5909

Nels

[gitano]

Hmmm Gitano,
 
The only thing that I can think of is groove depth/diameter :undecided: Don't know what Nels one measures but my own Model 46 has a large groove size which of course effect pressures. The free-bore he mentions will also effect this I am thinking?

While one can change groove diameter within QL, I used the nominal figures, and QL has no capability to account for leade.
 
Nels,
 
The burn characteristiscs ARE exactly the issue. The user CAN change the burning characteristics of a specific powder, but I do not change them. Furthermore, I was using QL's default values.
 
Addtionally, the differences in Maxes is disturbing. I intend to call QL this morning and get to the bottom of this if I can.
 
If different versions of QL have different powder characteristics and Max chamber pressure values, it is a VERY serious matter.
 
Paul
 
I just checked my newest version of QL (V 3.4, the older version is 3.2), and the version 3.4 values are the same as those you posted Nels. I called NECO (the US distributor of QL) and was unable to get a person. I have always reached a person before. I left a message, and will report what I find out when I hear.
 
I just checked another powder, and there is again a difference in burning characteristic variables between V3.2 and v3.4.

[gitano]

While I still have not heard back from NECO - QL's US distributor, I have a bit of news. I read the "Read Me" file entirely, and find notes about changes to certain powders, including H4895. There is no reference to what was changed except "burning rate", still, it is noted, along with several other powders. There is no note regarding the change in max pressure or the source for the change. Looks like I'll have to load verson 3.4 on this computer, and read the "Read Me" files in their entirety on future upgrades.
 
There are noted also, several "errors" in versions earlier than 3.2. I'm going to have to look hard at every starting load I have recently worked up for the .375x55 Swiss, STS 8mm, SLT 8mm, and my hand-made bullets for the .50 Alaskan. Lots of time wasted.
 
Paul

[HSM_miner]

Hmmmm, when I checked the grove diameter on my rifle I got .368". I will have to check to see if I still have that slug laying around, as I can not remember the diameter off the the lands..... .365" comes to mind.....but very hazy:biggthumpup:

Load from a Disk shows the 48.5 gr load at about 45000 CUP

[gitano]

I just got off the phone with Ed from NECO, the US distributor of QL. There are a few "issues". For example, he doesn't believe the new 37.7 kSPI Max Pressure nor the 0.5 weighting factor for the 9.3x57 in version 3.4.
 
The bottom line is: For the time being, until I get in touch with the author of QL via email, loads calculated with v3.2 are suspect and should be taken with a grain of salt. Loads calculated with v3.4 are probably correct. Max pressure standards (the 37.7 kPSI figure for example), are suspect, but in the end have no impact on loads - or shouldn't anyway.
 
Paul

[Nelsdou]

Thanks for calling in Paul.  I had also gone through the readme notes, the user guide and back to the original disk to see if I had inadvertently changed or corrupted the powder file.

It'd be nice if NECO had a place on their website for a running readme or "bugs found" file.

Looking forward to hear what you find.

Nels

[gitano]

It'd be nice if NECO had a place on their website for a running readme or "bugs found" file.

Nels

Amen to that!
 
Paul

[Brithunter]

Hi Guys,

       Well I got my model 46 out of the cabinet and loaded 20 rounds for her. 10 with the Norma 232 grain semi spitzer bullet and 10 with the S&B 193 grain flat point bullet. Cases are Norma 9.3x57 and primers are Rem 9 1/2's.

      Looked up what I last got too and was surprised at the load levels, bear in mind that my rifle has very deep grooves, they measure 0.370" with a digital caliper, which might effect the pressures. With the 232 Norma's I used Reloader 15 and the charge weight is 50.0 grains which is 100% loading density.

With the 193 grain S&B I used H-335 and 50.0 grains is also the chargeof that . These are what I had worked up to before so I will try them again and see how the accuracy goes. The test will be on our field providing I can get to it and the weather co-operates. If they are harvesting the field behind ours then obviously I cannot shoot in that direction just in case . My rifle has an old Bushnell Scope Chief 3x fitted and I will try for 75 yards at least.

[HSM_miner]

I did get out to shoot today, with mixed success.  I did get some consistant chrony readings on the 48.5gr load.  It averaged 2234 ft/sec.
 
Then I tried to zero my scope without much success, shots grouped as before but I ran out of windage adjustment on the scope.  Alignment problem kicking me in the butt again.  Time to change out those weaver rings I think.  There are few thing I might try first, however, I have low expectations.:frown
 
I will try again in a few days, time to ponder some more.:undecided:

[Nelsdou]

Miner,

Are you going to try any other bullets in your 9.3x57?

I've got some 200 grain Hawk RNs to try out some day but I haven't decided yet on a powder. QL suggests faster powders than I'm used to and the stubby 200 grainer is gonna have to make quite a jump to hit the lands.

Nels

Oops, I missed Brit's posting, that 193 grain S&B is stubbier yet.

[Brithunter]

Nelsdou,
 
With the 193 grain S&B bullet I used H-335 which is a fairly fast powder. Plug that in and see what QL spits out Reloader 15 would also probably work. Although Reloader 12 might be better as you might run out of case capapcity with the 15. I only worked with what I had to hand. Initally I did use H-4895 but the results were not that good so I tried working up loads with these two other powders. Good luck with It.
 
Oh Lynx make the old Hilver spigot mounts, the bases have a spigot and the rings a hole which goes over it and two jam screws which locate into a waist on the spigot, This gives windage adjustment on both front and rear rings. Here is their web site:-
 
http://www.lynxoptics.com.au/
 
Sorry but the better photos were on Photobucket which I still cannot access but here is what they look like on the Model 46:-



Oh stupid me I have the same type mounts on my sporterised Swedish Mauser 6.5x55, here is a better look at them, these have the extended front base.
 

[HSM_miner]

I have some 250gr Nosler Accubonds which I just can not bring myself to shoot. They cost twice as much as the Speers. I would like to try out the Hornady bullet, but have not come across any yet. For me, it is just bullet availablity which determines what I shoot.
 
Others up here have been swagging .375" bullets down to .366". Some even have been swagging .375" bullets down to their slugged bore diameter. These bullets showed some promise, and would open up available bullets for the 9.3. I have not ventured there yet, as I have other issues with my rifle I need to iron out first.

The Speer just shoots so nicely for me,  but if I can find a cheaper bullet, I will shoot it!