No, you didn't get us mixed up Mike. I didn't know there was another 9.3 X 75R in the country. You and dr are correct, the X74R will not chamber in the X75R as the head diameter is bigger I believe. Yes, that's right, I just miced two cases. My X75R head is .427 and the X74R is .462. I made my X75R cases from pricey 9.3 X 82R cases. That's the one I had to get a Lee 38-55 die, grind out the threads in the sizing die for the decapping pin and use that to swage the body down just a bit so it would chamber. I had to anneal the case body also to prevent longitudinal case splits. I don't recall my bore/land dimensions offhand but I shoot .358 unaltered bullets in it with excellent results. I want to say the groove dia. is .359-.360. Mine is also a T&S and from what Axel and I discussed the cartridge was proprietary to T&S. I'm not aware of any other maker chambering this T&S cartridge and it seems, from what Axel thinks, that it was something of a transitional cartridge between black powder and smokeless with evidently a very short commercial life. What threw the kinks in my work with the X75R was that it was stamped "X74 1/2" and the obvious difference in head size from the chamber cast to the 9.3 X 74R case. Axel identified the cartridge for me. I understand 'Cartridges of the World' published my load data for the 9.3 X 75R in the new, 17th edition.
I'm completely ignorant of LeHanne. This is merely my thought; if Doc's drilling was made post WWI it seems unlikely it was originally chambered for the 9.3 X 75R Nimrod cartridge. However...even for no longer than I've been seriously fooling with German drillings and the like I've learned there are no such words as 'never' and 'always'.
Last edited by sharps4590; 01/28/15 08:23 AM.
