9.3x74r for buffalo?

[WAB]

I was under the impression that they were legal if the ammunition met a particular energy requirement (typically obtainable mostly through hot hand loads or custom loads) ?

You are correct. The 9.3’s are legal in Zim if they are loaded to meet minimum energy requirements. Don Heath was a huge proponent of the 9.3’s and as I understand it, was instrumental in ensuring that the laws allowed their use.

 

[sgt_zim]

I definitely believe you meant the 9.3x74, much more powerful than the x72
I am torn about whether my decision to sell a great 9.3x74 was a good decision after all. I went with 375 H&H because of legality.
I also remember Kevin Robertson's penchant for the 505 Gibbs...

Yep, type-o.

 

[Roger Cox]

I've killed two with a Chapuis 9.3X74R with Woodleigh PP 286 grain bullets. I shot this one 4 times. YYMV.

 

[csmcclain]

Why insist on using cartridges that are marginal when so many other better alternatives exist..?
Many buffaloes were killed with 7x57, .303 etc. back in the day..but how many were lost..?

A friend of mine shot a buff in Tanz. with a .308Win., one shot kill (neckshot) with no backup. What if the animal did attack..?

I own a 9,3x74R double..lovely rifle but I draw the line with .375H&H..

If you read my post and subsequent replies, you’ll know that I’m not insisting on it, but just here for thoughts.

My main reasoning is because this would be a combination gun usable for virtually any situation in the world… birds, deer, antelope, elk, and, where legal, dangerous game. If it’s not the right choice, then it’s not the right choice, and I have no qualms about it. It’s just whether this is practical or not.

 

[txtrout75218]

In listening to a very experienced PH, he said that many European clients bring a 9.3x62/74 for Buffs and they work. But a 375 is more common and works better, and a 416 is a whole lot better.

And he thinks that swift A-frames are the best for Buffs , and I trust his judgement.

 

[One Day...]

9,3 x 74 and the 9,3 x62 are not legal in Zimbabwe for buffalo, elephant and hippo. I am not sure about other countries. ...

You are confused......

Minimum rifle energy requirement for big dangerous game (elephant, hippo, buffalo) is 5300 Joule or 9.2 diameter. Equivalent 3909.0 ft/lbs

That is not correct.

To be specific, and we need to be when it comes to legal requirements, the regulation does not say "is 5300 Joule or 9.2 diameter", it says "9.2mm WITH 5,300 Joules" (see section (3) here under)..

Therefore, the 9.3x62 and 9.3x74 satisfy the minimum caliber requirement, but they fail the minimum energy requirement with factory loads, hence Nhoro is fundamentally right, the 9.3x62 and 74 are generally illegal for Class A in Zim.

The most accurate answer was provided by Hunter-Habib:

I was under the impression that they were legal if the ammunition met a particular energy requirement (typically obtainable mostly through hot hand loads or custom loads) ?

This being said, while it is relatively easy to reach 3,900 ft/lbs with the 9.3x62 by shooting lighter bullets at higher velocity (e.g. 250 gr TSX @ 2,650 fps):

1. Shooting lighter bullets at higher speed has never been a good recipe for DG hunting, and it goes in the opposite direction of "Doctari" Robertson endorsement of the 9.3x62 on Buff as a marginally adequate cartridge for hunters sensitive to recoil.
2. I doubt very much that this can be done safely in a 9.3x74 double, without loosing the regulation, and I would anyway be very leery of hot loads in a double to begin with...

It is actually interesting to see what Robertson says exactly. I cannot help but notice "not strictly legal"; "adequate for buffalo -- even if marginally so" and "little is gained by speeding up these two calibers".

Where Nhoro is fundamentally right:

... but if something goes wrong i.e. you wound a buffalo and it escapes or worse injures someone, you will be in trouble with the authorities, read that as officials will take great pleasure in harassing you and your wallet will likely be emptied.

Here is the exact regulation:

To make a long story short, csmcclain, some PH will allow you to use the 9.3x74, some will not, but at 3,500 ft/lbs of energy, it IS illegal in Zimbabwe for Buffalo with commercial loads. Period. Whether it is indeed (minimally) adequate or not is beside the legal point, and each will make their own decision as to whether they feel comfortable exposing themselves legally in Africa, or not.

By the way, this also applies to Botswana, Namibia, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, some Provinces of South Africa, Central African Republic, etc.

Since 9.3x62 and 9.3x74 are ballistic equivalents, you can check these threads for further discussions

Thread 'If the 9.3x62 became the new legal minimum?'

Jan 4, 2021

If the 9.3x62 became the new legal minimum caliber for dangerous game in all of Africa:
- Would you consider replacing your 375 with a 9.3 (If you did not currently own a 9.3x62)?
- For a one rifle safari, which included plains game and Cape buffalo, would you feel comfortable with only the 9.3x62?
- For someone who owns neither, but plans on hunting Africa (someday), asks you to help them choose between the 9.3x62 and 375?

I realize this has probably been kicked around in one form or another but, was hoping to get everyone’s thoughts.
Thanks...

• Randy Bo

• 

Thread '9.3x62'

Mar 22, 2025

Is the 9.3x62 legal for DG in Zim?

• smp005

• 

 

[One Day...]

What would you recommend as a minimum? Are .375 HH or Ruger that much ballistically superior to the 9.3? Or would you go higher than even those?

We all know that energy does not kill, so let us not start this one here, but we also all know that energy is a quite reliable predictor of killing power when discussing similar calibers, shooting bullets of similar constructions, at similar speeds (all 3 criteria being important in this statement).

This preamble being established:

• 9.3x62 / 9.3x74 R 286 gr develop 3,500 ft/lbs.
• .375 H&H 300 gr develops 4,300 ft/lbs (+800 ft/lbs).
• .416 Rem 400 gr develops 5,100 ft/lbs (+800 ft/lbs).
• .458 Lott 500 gr develops 5,900 ft/lbs (+800 ft/lbs).

Telling, is not it? Add to this if you will the effect of heavier bullets and increased frontal area.

Or as the common say goes: ".375 will kill them, .416 will numb them, .458 will stop them".

Millions of Buff have been killed by the 9.3x62 and the .375 H&H, but darn few have been stopped by them, so it comes down to whether you delegate stopping duties to your PH (many will argue that it is his job), and how well you can shoot the big guns (which is why Robertson likes the 9.3x62 because many don't).

In the end, the common wisdom is to use the biggest gun you can shoot consistently accurately and reliably. For example, my wife hunts DG with her 9.3x62 where legal, because this is all she can handle, but she only does so if I back her up with my .458 Lott, in addition to whatever the PH shoots, because occasionally PHs get mauled or trampled and need the client to shoot the darn thing off them.

 

[Sideshow]

As a surgeon I learned long ago that a lot can be learned from a careful Autopsy!

Aren’t your patients ment to survive

 

[Foxi]

I haven't read everything, but the average impact force at zero is 440 kg with a 9,3x74R(300gn bullet).
My minimum permissible load for my .375 H+H at zero is 475 kg, which pierces both shoulder blades of a strong Cape buffalo so that you can feel the bullets on the outside of the skin. All with a bullet weight of 300gn.
Honestly, does anyone really believe that a few kilograms difference in impact force matters when you use good bullets?

Just my2 cents.
Foxi

 

[IvW]

9.3 producing the minimum required specs are legal....rather simple.......

 

[One Day...]

9.3 producing the minimum required specs are legal....rather simple.......

Which is why the 9.3x64 is a great caliber, although sadly eclipsed in popularity by the .375 H&H. It might have turned differently had the Germans won the two World Wars, but I am digressing. Actually darn few makers still chamber for it and load ammo for it, which is really too bad, because it is arguably every bit as good as the .375 H&H, and people in the know would argue that it is actually better, because more efficient with its ahead-of-its-time fat beltless magnum design, short enough to fit in standard K98 action. A great round indeed
(Note: I guess the newish 9.3x66 Sako, with performance roughly halfway between 9.3x62 and 9.3x64, also qualifies, but who has ever seen one in Africa?)

Which is also why the 9.3x74 R in double rifles is about impossible to get to legal standard because messing up with high pressure loads invariably wrecks havoc with the regulation, not to mention the risks of overpressure in break open rifles
(Note: forget the 9.3x72 R...)

And finally, as previously mentioned, which is why the 9.3x62 is problematic because getting the 9.3x62 to legal standard can only be achieved by loading over SAAMI pressure (ooops!), or lighter bullets at higher speed, which is not exactly a smart move, as Robertson indicates
Not to mention that it is difficult to demonstrate the legality of the load in the field when arguing with a local government official well decided to show the whities who is boss...
(I know that it is unlikely ... until a problems arises, in which case you will be crucified if you have even one toe over the legal line.)

Anyway, there is no convincing some in the 9.3 fan club that 9.3x74 R, sadly, is in fact illegal in many countries for Class A game, and the 9.3x62 is, hmmm, let us just say problematic, and I am not trying to do so

I am just providing factual answers to legitimate questions. Some may like it, some for sure dislike it, but facts are facts, and unless I am confused the question was "9.3x74 R on Buffalo", and the answer stands, in Robertson's own words:
-- "not strictly legal",
-- "adequate for buffalo - even if only marginally so",
-- "little is gained by speeding up these two calibers",
-- "lack frontal surface area and consequently stopping punch",
-- "relatively light recoiling".

That's all there is to it, and it is what it is, and everyone will make their own choices, but, hopefully (and is not it one of the main purposes of Africhunting.com?) with full knowledge of the facts

So.......... yes "9.3 producing the minimum required specs are legal" but it is NOT "rather simple" because 9.3x64 is all but a unicorn nowadays; 9.3x62 or 9.3x74 R effective DG commercial loads (286 gr bullets) do NOT produce the minimum required specs; and getting loads to do so either exceed SAAMI specs (never a good idea!) or drop bullet weight to increase velocity (never a good idea either in DG loads).


PS: On a personal note, I actually like the 9.3x62 (and ballistic twin 9.3x74R), because "even if only marginally so", it IS "adequate for buffalo", and as previously mentioned, it is the round I selected for my petite wife's DG caliber, because her limitations fit Robertson's description. I certainly wish the regulations would change to lift this legal limbo that always makes me uncomfortable, but it would be irresponsible to hide it from newcomers or encourage them to break the law...

 

[One Day...]

I haven't read everything, but the average impact force at zero is 440 kg with a 9,3x74R(300gn bullet).
My minimum permissible load for my .375 H+H at zero is 475 kg, which pierces both shoulder blades of a strong Cape buffalo so that you can feel the bullets on the outside of the skin. All with a bullet weight of 300gn.
Honestly, does anyone really believe that a few kilograms difference in impact force matters when you use good bullets?

Just my2 cents.
Foxi

100% agreed Foxi

But the real potential issue is legal compliance

Admittedly, everything is fine, until a problem occurs, and a scapegoat is needed

Caveat emptor...............................................