About 3300fps at muzzle with the standard 130gr. BT (140s & 150s also available but less prevalent). FWIW I wasn't overly impressed with my copy and ended up selling shortly after buying. That said, some folks love theirs.
That seems a little more than necessarry for a .270 caliber rifle. At least for deer. I would imagine it would be great for something like mountain goat or big horn sheep.
Okay folks, a question of practicality: Remember that .358 I mentioned earlier? I was talking to a family member, and he seemed dead set that a .358 would be a smarter choice. His logic was that it could be loaded with lighter .357 magnum bullets for plinking and varmints, that ammo would probably be more available for it (after researching this I found the .358 and 9.3x62 ammo to be equally available), it would be easier to reload for (This point is arguable, but I do have to acknowledge that .308 brass can be necked up to .358 for the cost of a third die. Die prices and availability, however, are roughly the same.), that it would be a better hog gun because the speed of a lever-action rifle should thing get hairy with an angry pig. Also, according to him, it can cover a lot of the smaller animals the 9.3 is too large to take, although the 9.3 has more capability for the top end of the game-size spectrum.
After checking it out, ammo availability is the same. Reloading for each is the same rough cost. The smallest I'd take with the 9.3 is a white-tail with the proper load. The smallest I'd take with a .358 with a 180grn bullet (the smallest I've seen) is a blackbuck. Not much diferrence there in the bottom-spectrum of capable game for each cartridge. With a .358 I'd take all animals up to and including moose and black bear, MAYBE a grizzly if it was the perfect condition for the shot (pssh... that might as well be a no at this point.)
With a 9.3, I'd go grizzly no problem, and then eland. Really, the only things I wouldn't take with a 9.3 are Cape Buffs and up- not that a 9.3 can't do it. With a .358, I'd stop just short of eland, which is the largest african antelope. So there. The two cartridges are capable of taking many of the same animals- the difference is with a .358 I'd feel okay going one animal lighter, and with a 9.3 I'd feel okay going two to three animals heavier (Grizz, Polar bear, and eland. The only two north american animals and the only african antelope that I would not use a .358 on). The difference is only a few animals, but then there is also effective range- a .358 is a great deer rifle at 200 yards, with most people passing on anything at 250 yards. Reloaders claim this to be 300-350 yard capable rifle. A 9.3, most people are comfortable out 350 yards, while reloaders will often push that figure a little. So the 9.3 wins the range contest. The .358, however, wins the speed contest, being a fast lever-gun- also, it reloads faster because of a Detachable mag. Each rifle has its own benefit, and the cost difference isn't much. Though I have found BLR's for low prices used. But that's used, and it makes me nervous.
It's a long question, and I'm still leaning 9.3 at the end of asking it. But what do you guys think? That speed in a hog hunt can sure be handy, but an eland sure is a neat animal. And like a mentioned in a previous post, I do plan to own both eventually- (that may be years down the road, though.) So in essence, which is a better starting point?
(not a big loss on that species, though.) On a white-tail or axis deer, however, that can be be made into hamburger, pan sausage, or chili ground- provided the round doesn't trash the shoulders like the TSX does. I suppose that the 9.3 would be just the ticket to keep that meat intact. I guess I'll have to try it.
