doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Double Rifles, Paradox Guns & Gauge Rifles @ doublegunshop.com A double rifle retailed by Weisgerber in 9.3x72r

The 9.3x72R Sauer & Son is an entirely different class of cartridge with a head diameter close to 30-06 whereas the 9.3x72 R norm. (The one under discussion) is close to 30-30. The 9.3x72R Sauer & son is in the same class as (albeit with a lighter bullet) the 9.3x74R and is sometimes confused with it. There are no less than 3 different versions of the smaller 9.3x72R, differing mostly in case shape and all may be found with different groove diameters from .352 to .368". Luckly they all were proofed to the same pressure.
Mike

Der Ami;

Thank you for your comments on the line of 9.3x72R cartridges. I have been able to determine that the beautiful double rifle belonging to Chris is chambered for one of the smaller so called 9.3x72R cartridges from his comment on using .358" diameter projectiles--or at least is is smaller than the 9.3x72R Sauer cartridge listed in the QuickLoad data base and must be a cartridge that is the same or nearly the same as the other 9.3x72R (.360) cartridge listed in that data base.

With your knowledge of the European cartridges and your comment on the different groove diameters I hope that you can tell me what is the historical reason that these "small" cartridges that are called 9.3x72R when they are about 9mm in size; or if they are not actually 9mm in size their projectiles are clearly nearer 9mm than 9.3mm?

Further to this I was contemplating what is the most common propellant that re-loaders use for these "small 9.3x72R" cartridges and is a flat nose projectiles most commonly used?

Kind Regards;
Stephen Howell

I wonder if it was the same issue i had? My kipplauf was chambered for 360-1/4 express which has more case taper than 9.3x72rN

Stephen,
With the exception of 9.3x72R Sauer & Sohn, mentioned above, the others are basically the same and were all based on the British 360 2 1/4" case (as were other similar cartridges differing mostly by length, from 48- 85mm). There were no mandated standards when this development was happening, and it seems as though each gunmaker had its own idea as to the best shape and length (volume) as well as bullet diameter/weight. The most popular length seemed to be 72 mm, so this will only address that length, even some others have similar shape. One of the cartridges was actually called 360x72mmR. Two other main versions were the 9.3x72mm R-E (English version) another was the 9.3x72mmR- D (Deutsche version, this is the one that seems to cause the most difficulty in determining which cartridge to use. The taper seems to be a "sweep" rather than a straight taper. I think, without proof that this form may have come about by making a 9.3x57mmR chamber with an existing reamer and then extending the neck with a straight reamer until the case length was 72mm. When new reamers were required, they would have made them with the straight extension.). This caused enough confusion that one of the first attempts at standardization was for the 9.3x72R (also 8.15x46R). A standardization committee worked out a set of dimensions that would allow
most if not all the old rifles to use a common ammo. The result of the effort was the form known as 9.3x72R Normalizert (or Normal. often shown as N), this means Standardized. They standardized the rim dimensions, case shape and dimensions, and, importantly, standardized a bullet that would work with varying barrel diameters (this is the 193-grain flat nose jacketed bullet in today's commercial ammo). An examination of this bullet will show that the main diameters are for the smaller barrels but had a "driving band" to adapt it to the larger barrels while not producing undue pressures in the smaller ones. Importantly, existing rifles could be rechambered to the normal chamber dimensions by the local gunsmiths, without the necessity of resubmitting it to the proof house for a crown R repair proof. This left many rifles with different barrel diameter barrels, chambered for the normal cartridge. It wasn't until the 1939 proof law that the common name of the cartridge to be used was required to be on the rifles. By that time, there were a great many 9.3x72R normal. rifles existing, but few to none were being built (and marked) because they were prohibited for "Hochwild" (Big game). It is confusing, but it fun to work with and use.
Mike

Mike;

Thank you for the history of the small 9.3mm cartridges. Interesting comment about the sweep of the taper of the case instead of straight taper.

What time frame are you referencing as to when the standardization committee worked out a set of dimensions? It must have been before 1939.

Can one assume then that the loads for these cartridges now in 2025 would likely use such propellants as 3031, 4198 and so forth? I see on the web that Buffalo Arms has the 193g bullets;Is there another projectile maker who makes the 193-g bullet for hand loaders today? Is there any accuracy or ballistic advantage to using a 193grain bullet for the small 9.3x72R versus using say the Hawk 200 grain bullet of the same diameter?

Stephen Howell

Stephen,
Regarding the "sweep" of the case, I just figured that was the way I would do it if I had a 9.3x57R reamer already. I don't recall the approximate time the standardization was done but it was considerably before 1939. That standardization was a matter of agreement between interested parties (I don't know who they were but believe they were representives of ammo and gun manufactures and maybe hunting organizations), but the 1939 law was enforceable as a matter of law. The loads would use propellants appropriate for Proof of the gun. I don't use black powder in my guns, but 4198 is often used in NFB loads, Nitro Proofed guns could use 3031 or 4895 or similar powders very well, and Express Proofed guns could use the same powders but with different loads. Express loads are a little heavier than "nitro" but are by no means magnum level. The typical 193 grain bullet for the 9.3x72R are not only made to be safe for use in varying diameter barrels but the jackets are also made for the velocities expected. I returned from Germany with a quantity of RWS bullets, and I believe they are still made. I "fell into" a deal for some Z&B bullets for this cartridge and am sure they are still made. Since they have a "US presence now" I hope demand will be enough that they will market these and other bullets (.318"?) here. Norma has also produced these bullets in the past. I have not tried the Buffalo Arms bullets, but they look like they are re-formed from 200gr .358" RN bullets and should work fine. Members of this forum have used the 200 grain Hawk bullet made for the 9.3x72R and report satisfaction. Bullets made for 35 Remington and jacketed .38/.357(also new .350 legend, etc.) will work for those rifles with .358-.359" groove diameters. There are a lot of cast bullets that can be used without breaking the bank. The Lyman .366408 was traditional 9.3 bullet, but I'm not sure if the mold is still available, and when it was, to use it in more modern rifles required the blocks to be shortened to drop bullets of about 200 grains. Jacketed 9.3 bullets made for more powerful cartridges such as 9.3 x62/64/74R or even 57 shouldn't be used even if the barrel has .366" groove diameter.
Mike

Hi Stephen,

Thank you for the offer. I'll PM you and share an email.

My rifle is pre-standardization of the 9.3x72r cartridge. I have used 4895, without filler, and the results were not good (high variability in velocity, and poor accuracy, and velocity below factory loads.)

I switched first to H4198, without filler and that had the left barrel shooting small groups at POA, but the right barrel was off to the right and somewhat dispersed groups.) I added kapok filler to the H4198 just in time to run out of Hodgdon 4198, and switched over to IMR4198. Most recent load tested was 32grs powder and a 200gr jacketed soft point bullet by Hornady made for the 35 Remington. Bullet was 0.358" diameter. Primers looked fine after shooting. Velocity was at factory levels. Variation was greatly reduced from no-filler loads. Recoil was considerably more than the same charge and no filler. Next outing I plan to make 30 and 31 grain loads and keep everything else constant. I continue to deep clean the bore with Wipe-Out foam between outings. The bore was quite dark and is coming cleaner with each cycle. I'm not sure how good it will get.

Regards,
Chris

Do you still have the kipplauf? I have a couple of 360 2.25" express rifles, all black powder proofed. One of the appeals of having a 9.3x72r rifle is if I screw up a piece of brass, in most instances I can still cut it down to 2.25" and use it in my 360s. FWIW, the 360 Express, loaded with nitro-for-black loads, is plenty capable of taking big northern whitetail bucks.

bushveld,
In looking back over this thread, I realized that I had not addressed your question of why rifles with 9mm or near 9mm bullets are called 9.3mm. There are enough cartridges involved that I don't think just one reason will be an adequate answer. This is common with cartridges that started as black powder fueled and went to smokeless; not necessarily because of the powder itself but also because of changes (improvements?) in materials, customs, dimensions, etc. in common use at any particular time while the name of the cartridge stays the same. Muzzleloading rifles often used bullets smaller than groove diameter, even smaller than bore diameter. When someone decided to put everything together in a package (cartridge) they used the procedures they were used to. With black powder and soft lead bullets that worked, after a fashion, because of obturation. The pursuit of higher velocity and more efficient bullets have led to many changes in materials and dimensions while the name stays the same or the dimensions stay the same while the name changes. Everybody is trying to sell rifles/cartridges, and more powder, more convenience, or a better sounding name helps them do that. The nominal designation of a cartridge often no longer matches the actual dimensions, sometimes it does. The answer is: There is no enforceable rule that everyone agrees to. This applies to metric cartridges, as well as imperial and it is the same with new cartridges. A 6.5 mm bullet is not 6.5mm in diameter and a 38 caliber is not .380" in diameter, also a 350 Legend bullet and 360 Buckhammer bullet are not markedly different in diameter......That is what makes this game fun.
Mike

Beautiful double rifle!
Enjoy!
Jim