New rifle? 9.3x74 O/U Kipplaufbüchse

[Gaffi]

I also think 9,3x62 should be redesigned. Although i have no experience with this weapon in RL, it somehow does not feel right for 9,3 mm. A bit weak and wobbles too much, compared to the other weapons. I also notice no difference to 7mm at 100m. It's all about immersion and things like this, destroys the Illusion for me. There are not many things in this game that bother me, but 9,3x62 is definitely one of them.

[Sherab86]

I definitely belong to those with would like to see weapons/ammo to perform as close to reality as possible. And this seems to be not always the case. Maybe this is justified to some point by the fact, that otherwise there would be no signifficant differences in performance (at least terminal ones, for similar but different calibers) within render distance. And it is quite important, that in-game we have possibility to choice only one, given model of ammo for given caliber. This mean, that each caliber and weapon chambered for it, are designed for given purpose. And it simply seems like 9.3x62 in-game was designed as just another deer-rifle. Do we like it, or not. And from EW perspective, there is no point to change this now, when they release 9.3x74.

It would be nice however, if we would have possibility to choice different ammo for same caliber (different weights and/or velocities, or maybe even of different construction). To follow EW "philosophy", those "additional" cartridges could be payware only - membership or not. So one would have to decide do one prefer to pay for differently performing ammo each time one's need it, or to buy more powerful caliber rifle paying just ones.

Btw. I guess that guys like us are the reason for EW stopped to give us info on ammo model, like weights or velocities.

[RidgeBack69]

I think the 9.3x62 is fine and should not be changed. I have said it before and I will say it again this is not Real Life it is a game. further more it is a pay to play game so things are balanced for sales! Once we all get that every thing will fall into place.

I own the 9.3x62 and I will buy the 9.3x74 when it is released. Just because it is a double rifle and my hopes are that it preforms as well as the .30R.

[Gaffi]

Nope, 9,3x62 is not a "Deer-Rifle" for me. Perfect caliber for Piccabeen Bay.

Unnecessary and certainly not a caliber for Europe. Yes, you can shoot Red Deer and Hogs with 9,3x62 in Europe and many do, but thats Overkill for me. .308, .30-06, 7x64 or 8x57 are more then enough. You also have to consider the recoil and accuracy of a weapon and 9,3x62 is a cannon. .308 is perfect for me.

[gas56]

The 9.3 x 62 and the 9.3 74R are very comparable if loads are comparable also for hunting as most people will attend to this.
On the other hand when custom loads can be max up for the 9.3 x 74R hotter powder loads, we will now see a more tremendous impact above what the 9.3 x 62 can produce at its performance in the game.

I have to disagree a bit on the 62 vs. 74r and which one is more potential, when I browse my reloading manual and compare the 9.3x63 and 9.3x74r, no matter what powders are used, they both are very comparable up to 250grain bullet weights, BUT going for 270grain and 286grain bullet weights, the 9.3x62 ALWAYS produce even up to 55m/s faster muzzle velocities at max loads, no matter what powder brand or type is used the 62 seems to be more potential.

That's why I only compared what was used in the game with both rifles.
And put the charts for anyone to check them IRL....

Custom loads usually doesn't mean just custom powder usage,.. as what good is a bullet if it can't handle those speeds and fragmentation happens?
A lot of big game hunting guides will make their own loads and field test what combination of products produces better results or even mold there own bullets.
Most of the manufactured loading data even gives the compressed load info for max loads on some shell manufactures as we should know of powder expansion when ignited and some powders
work better uncompressed.
The bullet that may travel the fastest doesn't mean it is as deadly as one that travels at a lesser speed that mushrooms out and staying intact and does a lot more damage to big game animals
is the choice I would always prefer.
For that matter everyone would be using smaller steel jacketed bullets @3200 + FPS with a 9.3 X 62 shooting foxes at 200 + yards ....
Have a good 1.............GAS

[Sherab86]

Nope, 9,3x62 is not a "Deer-Rifle" for me. Perfect caliber for Piccabeen Bay.

Unnecessary and certainly not a caliber for Europe. Yes, you can shoot Red Deer and Hogs with 9,3x62 in Europe and many do, but thats Overkill for me. .308, .30-06, 7x64 or 8x57 are more then enough. You also have to consider the recoil and accuracy of a weapon and 9,3x62 is a cannon. .308 is perfect for me.

IRL I would probably consider .308 as perfect too, for European game (and in more world-wide perspective, I would probably prefer somwhat larger, like .339, but non-magnum cartridge for highest versatility if only such one would be aviable).

But in case of 9.3x62 I was reffering only to in-game cartridge, with assumption that it's performance is indeed based on 225 gr. and 2260 fps. Especially with deforming (expanding) bullets, this feels somewhat insufficient for realy large and dangerous game, as Buffalo. I think mainly about weight, because if previously mentioned by me data holds true for actual, living tissues, velocity (in case of deforming projectiles) give us mostly the range and flat trajectory, but above 1600-1800 fps at impact, it may not increase penetration at all.

[Gaffi]

Nope, 9,3x62 is not a "Deer-Rifle" for me. Perfect caliber for Piccabeen Bay.

Unnecessary and certainly not a caliber for Europe. Yes, you can shoot Red Deer and Hogs with 9,3x62 in Europe and many do, but thats Overkill for me. .308, .30-06, 7x64 or 8x57 are more then enough. You also have to consider the recoil and accuracy of a weapon and 9,3x62 is a cannon. .308 is perfect for me.

IRL I would probably consider .308 as perfect too, for European game (and in more world-wide perspective, I would probably prefer somwhat larger, like .339, but non-magnum cartridge for highest versatility if only such one would be aviable).

But in case of 9.3x62 I was reffering only to in-game cartridge, with assumption that it's performance is indeed based on 225 gr. and 2260 fps. Especially with deforming (expanding) bullets, this feels somewhat insufficient for realy large and dangerous game, as Buffalo. I think mainly about weight, because if previously mentioned by me data holds true for actual, living tissues, velocity (in case of deforming projectiles) give us mostly the range and flat trajectory, but above 1600-1800 fps at impact, it may not increase penetration at all.

It's ok mate, is not that important. I created something for myself, with min. Score for Top 100 and RL Ballistic, because of RPG

[pirahna590]

Was just checking out the 9.3x74 in the store ... kind of surprised to see its legal for Roe Deer, Coyote, Feral Goat, and Grey Wolf as well, isnt that a bit of over-kill? No need to field dress these smaller sized game animals, the round will do it for us lol

[BuckWill]

The 9.3 x 62 and the 9.3 74R are very comparable if loads are comparable also for hunting as most people will attend to this.
Lets get something straight about bullet knowledge of the 9.3 x 62 and the 93. x 74R cartridges.
So far everybody acknowledges that the x 9.3 x 62 cartridge is used in bolt action rifles that are rimless,
and the 9.3 x 74R cartridges is used in single shots, and doubles.
Now there may be speculations about the 9.3 x 62 being faster with the slightly smaller gr bullets that are loaded max up,
But that's where it ends with the 9.3 x 74R that factory loads are not max up and therefor produces the slower bigger gr bullets.
On the other hand when custom loads can be max up for the 9.3 x 74R hotter powder loads, we will now see a more tremendous impact above what the 9.3 x 62 can produce at its performance in the game.
The 9.3 x 74R shell has more room for powder then the 9.3 x 62 and when you have more you get more speed simply put for non-gunners understanding of how it works.
There's really no argument if you understand the differences of bullet loads.
The game box show a 225 gr bullet on the 64 which is pretty much not adequate for Buffalo, and the 74R is standard with a 286 gr bullet.
Now granted bullet weights can be reduced to produce even more speed on both bullets, but simply put, you wouldn't really want to reduce bullet size weight(length) to hunt Water Buffalo.
I want that heavier bullet to do as much damage as it can possibly produce with the powder load that it can handle for the capable rifle that is used with it.
I wouldn't want shrapnel blowing up in my face from an incapable rifle/gun,...
but really we don't have to worry about that in this game,.. so enjoy what we can have and play along with there allowable guns without all the details and everything will turn
out peachy keen in the scheme of things.
Everyone have a great 2018 year, and we've just begun!

Here's a good read on the 74R
http://www.chuckhawks.com/hornady_9-3x74R.htm

compare the bullet loads yourself which are pretty comparable...

I have to disagree a bit on the 62 vs. 74r and which one is more potential, when I browse my reloading manual and compare the 9.3x63 and 9.3x74r, no matter what powders are used, they both are very comparable up to 250grain bullet weights, BUT going for 270grain and 286grain bullet weights, the 9.3x62 ALWAYS produce even up to 55m/s faster muzzle velocities at max loads, no matter what powder brand or type is used the 62 seems to be more potential. Most distinctive is the 286grain bullet weight and Vihtavuori N540 powder, 9.3x62 can be loaded to 754m/s with max load of 3,85g(59,4grains) of N540 powder, while the rimmed 9.3x74r with the same 286grain Nosler Partition and same Vihtavuori N540 produces only 698m/s and max load is 3,63g(56,0grains) of N540, that would be 2474fps vs. 2290fps, or 184fps faster for the 9.3x62. Both were also tested with 610mm lenght barrel and same primers so the difference does not come from barrel lenght diffence either. Also in the pictures you shared, I see the 9.3x62 pushing the 286grain bullet with max loads slightly faster than the 9.3x74r, the difference is much smaller than what my manual says for different Vihtavuori and Norma powders but still, 9.3x62 always comes out faster on 286grain bullet weights and max loads. Up to +50m/s difference with the N540 can be considered as quite a clear advantage on the 62. Even if I pick the N540 load for the 9.3x62 with 754m/s (2474fps) and the fastest 9.3x74r load on your picture, the IMR4350 with max load and producing 730m/s (2398fps), the 9.3x62 still has the edge over the 9.3x74r, and max loads are max loads.

Bigger case volume does not always straight forward mean that you can showel more powder in it especially when it's rimmed vs rimless cartridge, on those 2 calibers it is seemingly obvious that the lower max pressure of the 74r is the limiting factor, not so much the case volymem, when comparing the two with same powders, the 74r can't really be loaded with more of same powder than the 62, for example the RL15 powder, the max load on 62 is a tad bit bigger with the RL15 and it has 101% load volume whereas the max load with RL15 on the 74r is little less, and giving only 91% density, I think it's the pressure again what limit's the 74r to be loaded any hotter than that. It is many times possible to go over 100% load density and press more powder on the smaller 62mm casing but if the limiting factor is pressure levels there's not much you can do, when you start to get the clear signs of overpressure you've found the limit. In this light the rimless 62 can be pushed much hotter than the 74r. On lighter bullet weights they are very close but heavier the bullet weight, more obvious it seems that the 9.3x62 has more potential when handloaded close to max pressure levels, 74r may have slightly more case volume but the lower max pressure seems to tip the balance for the 62. I'd still say that the difference is so small that it doesn't really matter, both of the calibers do the same job just as good, so in my opinion it is sad that the ethical lists are the way they currently are, it's wrong to make two almost identical calibers to perform so differently.

I agree that in the game that 9.3x62 load is loaded with very light 225grain bullet weight with super weak load of 2260fps(if that is correct on the virtual cartridge box on the store), for crying out loud, in my reloading manual the starting loads for 232grain bullets produce faster muzzle velocities what the load in this game is, so honestly that 9.3x62 load in this game is quite ridiculously weak! It would definitely not be suited for any big and dangerous game like buffalo BUT, it's a game, and in this game many other loads are also not well suitable for the allowed species to shoot with. Perhaps they should wipe off that 225grain nosler partition part of the 9.3x62 package and make it like it should be, just for the sake of realism. IF we are not provided with the luxury of choosing between different loads on the game, they should at least have somekind of logic on what the calibers are cabaple of, not making perhaps a more potential caliber much weaker just because well, "we decided to load the other one with a super light light load and super light bullet, yet we decided to load the other one with a decent big game bullet and a normally performing load". Ehhh, how about just getting rid of any particular bullet or bullet weight then and just make those guns and calibers to work how they would be cabaple of? Or simply overhaul the 9.3x62 and let it have the 286grain bullet with a decent load too?! I'd be happy with that.

I will still buy the new 9.3x74r when it comes out but I hate to see the devs making stuff so ****ed up just in the name of "game balance", and to boost sales on new items. I'd like to see those guns and caliber the way what they really are capable of, not just how the devs decided to make them without better knowledge or in this case I think that the 9.3x62 in the game would need and overhaul to put it where it needs to be. It does not take more than fix the permitted animals list and wipe off that 225gr and 2260 from the ammo box on the store and make them two perform the same, that would be the ultimate fix to make them both work the way they should in relation to each others.

The rimmed cases are always longer than rimless because the bolt action has a limited size especially when Mauser was one of the few to be able to create a magnum bolt back in the day.The big doubles were always loaded to keep pressures down because of the weaker action and the hot African sun they were usually used in created higher pressures , pushing them to dangerous levels. With the powders and stronger steel it’s less of an issue now days.the companies that create ammo always keep it on the lower side because not everyone has a new 10k double ( that’s actually cheap). Though if you feel those extra few FPS are going to make a difference you can push the rimmed version closer than factory loaded ammo,Just look at the .375 H&H Magum versus the rimmed version. All are fine rifles and I know some African countries limit the size for the big 5 or 6 they list .375 but some go by energy created so the 9.3 squeaks by in a few countries.

[gas56]

The rimmed cases are always longer than rimless because the bolt action has a limited size especially when Mauser was one of the few to be able to create a magnum bolt back in the day.The big doubles were always loaded to keep pressures down because of the weaker action and the hot African sun they were usually used in created higher pressures , pushing them to dangerous levels. With the powders and stronger steel it’s less of an issue now days.the companies that create ammo always keep it on the lower side because not everyone has a new 10k double ( that’s actually cheap). Though if you feel those extra few FPS are going to make a difference you can push the rimmed version closer than factory loaded ammo,Just look at the .375 H&H Magum versus the rimmed version. All are fine rifles and I know some African countries limit the size for the big 5 or 6 they list .375 but some go by energy created so the 9.3 squeaks by in a few countries.

As it goes, this post actually came up as the new Sambar deer were first released and a lot of rifles that should have worked more than adequate on them were just barely capable
of putting them down. The 9.3 x 74 was a new hope for a better rifle in the game as since then the Sambar have been tweaked down just a tad,.. and players were hearing of how
9.3's were used in Africa to take down Buffalo and not allowed in the game. I've been wanting a double gun for the game and so far I can only speculate if the new 9.3 x 74r will do the job on the new reserve and the other new released rifle like the .405 lever action just doesn't interest me. Whether or not IRL specs are used on rifles when it comes to game balance all of that is practically thrown out the window to some degree, so no matter if a gun is used IRL or just don't have enough punch the game is a total other playing field..
Have a good 1...................GAS

P.S. I used to buy every gun that came out to do missions, but now I am just a little more picky when it comes to what I want and need or what really interests me.