Results 1 to 41 of 41
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    2,361

    Default 9x23 vs 9mm largo horror stories ?

    I have a friend who is being a bit stubborn about the large difference in pressure between the 9x23 Win and the 9mm Largo. Anyone have any first hand stories, preferabbly with photos, to help convince him? He bought a Super B from a fellow who had shot about 20 round of 9x23 Win out of a box through it and included the remaining 30. I think it would be very foolish for him to shoot up the remaining 30 rounds. Thanks, Steve.

  2. #2
    Bob In St. Louis's Avatar
    Bob In St. Louis is offline Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member/Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Small padded room, no windows
    Posts
    19,609

    Default

    Well, first of all, a Super B is in 9mm Parabellum!
    Godfather, Eibar Mafia

    El Jefe Loco

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    2,361

    Default

    Sorry, it is a Super A.

  4. #4
    Clyde's Avatar
    Clyde is offline Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    56,398

    Default

    It is STILL foolish to shoot 9x23 Win in it. the 9x23 runs 40K CUP, and I while can't find pssure data for the 9mm Largo (I know it is out there, i just can't seem to find it tonite), except some comments about it running a bit lower than either 38 Super or 9x19 (which is currently standardized by SAAMI at 35K PSI piezo measured - and 130% higher proof, or 45.5K psi proof). CUP and PSI don't convert well one to the other, but my view is that you are essentially running proof loads when you go to shooting 9x23 Win in a gun designed and proofed for 9mm Largo. A persistent diet of blue pills is a recipe for having a KABOOM, ot at least breaking something expensive (cracked frame, or slide, that sort of thing).....
    Absent comrades (sound of breaking glass)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    280

    Default

    Just because it didn't fail doesn't mean it won't. It's like running a heavy truck over a bridge not rated for it. The bridge may hold up, and it may not. The gun may hold up, and it may not. Sorry I don't have any pictures or direct observations. CB

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    256

    Default

    Besides all of the pressure arguments against doing this, there is a simple economic one: Factory 9x23 ammo runs $0.75 - $1.00 per round. Surplus 9mm Largo runs $0.20 or less per round.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Pennsylvania where Johnny Reb got new shoes !
    Posts
    652

    Default

    Sometimes you cannot fix stupid. Be careful if you are at the range w/ your friend. Would stand well away from him when he is shooting..............................

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,257

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan Ivanovich View Post
    Sometimes you cannot fix stupid. Be careful if you are at the range w/ your friend. Would stand well away from him when he is shooting..............................
    And have the local paramedics on speed-dial ..................

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    Sorry that I can not give you any horror stories. I've been shooting 9x23 Winchester through my Star Super A for a couple of years. I haven't had any problems at all. YMMV.
    I reload, and I make my own 9x23 Winchester out of once fired 223 brass. Just trim it to length, and swage the crimps in the primer pocket. Then reload as you normally would. I only use small rifle primers. I get the brass for less than 2 cents a case ($115 for 2500 cases). Since the brass was designed to hold the 60,000 CUP of the 223, I'm not worried at all that the case won't hold.
    Here is a copy of a post I wrote last September on the Surplus Rifle Forum:

    FWIW.
    I have been shooting the 9x23 Winchester 124 grain in my Star Modelo Super A for about a year and a half, I have had no problems whatsoever with it. No damage to the pistol at all. YMMV, I am not suggesting you do so. This is just for information. I accept no liability for what you do. I am not a gunsmith, engineer or in any way an expert.

    The 9x23 cartridge was designed to contain all that pressure in the brass, it is supposedly the strongest centerfire handgun brass made. You can hang the head off an unramped barrel, no problem. The Star Super A easily handles the 38 Super, IMHO. All this stuff about don't shoot Super through it is bogus. They were making the pistol all the way up to 1983, you think they didn't allow for 38 Super in all that time? I have copies of an article from gun digest from back in the 80's called "Our Spanish Cousins". In it the author says that the 38 Super is the cartridge to use if you can't get 9mm Largo. He even lists reloading data in the article. Since the 9x23 Winchester was developed to let guys who shot 38 Super use a more powerful round in an unmodified pistol, I figure I'm good to go.
    Now to the 9x23 Winchester:
    From a few posts of mine on a thread at The High Road from March and April of 2008:

    The thread is at http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=346913
    My post follows:
    *****************
    From the people selling the Star Modelo Super A in 9x23 Largo, Sarco Inc:

    Ballistic Comparison
    38 Super: Muzzle Vel.= 1200 pps / Muzzle Energy = 368 ft. lbs.
    9mm Largo (9x23mm): Muzzle Vel.= 1280 pps / Muzzle Energy = 420 ft. lbs.

    I have no worries at all in firing a 9x23 Winchester in my Star Modelo Super A. The 9x23 is rated at 50,000 CUP. The Super A's have been tested at 60 and 70,000 CUP with no problems. People have been firing 38 Super in these guns for years. The pistol is built like a tank. Just my opinion, YMMV, I have fired the 9x23 Winchester in my Star Super A I just bought from Sarco, no blow-ups, no problems.
    WARNING! DO NOT attempt to fire these rounds in the older handguns chambered for the 9x23 Largo, most of the early pistols won't handle it.
    I also have converted a Tokarev to fire the 9x23 Winchester. No problems there either.

    I know I'm going to get dumped on, but there you are.
    *****************************************
    I keep on running into comments like this as I do my research:

    ROBERT W. XXXXXX

    Posted on Wednesday, July 24, 2002 - 2:45 am:
    IS THERE ANY WAY TO FIND OUT FOR 100% SURE IF A PISTOL IS A 9MM LARGO VS. A 38 SUPER, WHEN WE BOUGHT MINE IT WAS SOLD AS A 38 SUPER AND WE HAVE FIRED OVER 2,500 ROUNDS OF SUPER AMMO IN IT AND HAVE HAD NO PROBLEMS AT ALL, I RELIZE THAT THIS DOESN'T MEAN SOMETHING COULDN'T GO WRONG, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO KNOW FOR SURE WHAT IT IS. ANY HELP WOULD BE GREAT, ALSO, CAN I GET PARTS FOR MY SUPER? ARE THEY INTERCHANGABLE WITH OTHER STAR MODELS?

    **************************************
    I got into shooting 9x23 Winchester through my Star Super A due to a series of posts by Clark, who posts here (see below). I then researched his statements, and decided that he was correct.
    John Ricco designed the 9x23 so that competitors using the 38 Super could make major power factor using their unmodified 38 Super guns. The brass is the strongest centerfire handgun cartridge made. The web can sit out over an unsupported barrel and never bulge under that 50,000 CUP pressure. The brass is what is holding the pressure. The web is twice the thickness of the 38 Super.

    Edit: The 1982 edition of Gun Digest had an article by Wm H. Smith, where he reviewed the Llama and Star pistols. He used 38 Super in these pistols with no problems with 38 Super power levels. He even stated that the 38 Super was the best substitute for 9mm Largo for American shooters. This was on page 200.

    Here is the post by Clark:
    From http://www.thehighroad.org/showthrea...t=tokarev+9x23
    It is Post #21

    CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The High Road, nor the staff of THR assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.


    **************

    I also have converted a Star Super B.
    That pistol frame with long enough magazine for 9mm Largo, but is chambered for 9x19.
    I converted one for 9x23mm and have been shooting it with
    158 gr LSWC, 10 gr LONGSHOT, 1.129"
    In contrast, Hodgdon in 2002 showed for maximum load for 357 magnum:
    158 gr HNDY XTP JHP, 8.4 gr LONGSHOT, 1.580" 1394 fps, 43,200 c.u.p.

    To deal with heavy recoil, I reamed out the recoil spring coweling of the Star slide from .431" to .4375", to use a spring from Wolff gunsmith pak #14 with OD = .433". More can be reamed out and a still better spring can be used, the guide rod must be reduced in diameter.



    From http://www.burnscustom.com/showarticle. ... AreWe.php3
    You might want to read the whole article:
    Fully supported barrels are not needed with 9x23 Win. brass. The primer is the weak link in hot loads. Small rifle primers are recommended just for that reason but certainly not mandatory.


    From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9x23mm_Winchester
    The main advantage of 9x23mm Winchester is a much strengthened case that does away with the semi-rimmed case design of the .38 Super. The case is not necked down like the .357 SIG, 9x25mm Super Auto G and 9x25mm Dillon, thus allowing greater magazine capacity and better feeding. The strengthened case allowed the much higher internal pressures to be used than would be safe with .38 Super. The 9x23mm Winchester could operate in the 40,000 CUP while .38 Super maxed out around 30,000 CUP.

    Just my thoughts on the matter, I know will get slammed, but there you go.

    EDIT: I just looked back at that article in the 1982 Gun Digest. The author states that he was using hot +P 38 Super loads

    Also from the article:

    For the American shooter. the most reasonable substitute for the 9mm Largo is the 38 Super Auto. This cartridge is among the most powerful of pistol cartridges. In comparison with the shorter 9mm Luger it uses a bullet that is 4 grains heavier at a higher velocity (130 gn @ 1280FPS vs a 124 gn at 1100 FPS for the Luger). The difference gives the 38 Super a muzzle energy of 475 ft-pounds which is 136 ft-pounds over the Luger and a 140 ft-pound advantage over the 45 Auto.

    And:

    Even though both pistols were made some 50 years ago, there were no mechanical failures considering that they digested loads ranging from the hot Remington +P ammunition which exceeds the 9mm Largo's ballistics by a considerable margin, to reduced velocity loads without any problems proved that they are not the worthless pieces of Spanish junk some think them to be.

    Note that he is reviewing the Star A, not the newer Star Super A.
    Last edited by Mastiff; 04-26-2010 at 12:50 AM.

  10. #10
    Clyde's Avatar
    Clyde is offline Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    56,398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mastiff View Post
    Sorry that I can not give you any horror stories. I've been shooting 9x23 Winchester through my Star Super A for a couple of years. I haven't had any problems at all. YMMV.
    I reload, and I make my own 9x23 Winchester out of once fired 223 brass. Just trim it to length, and swage the crimps in the primer pocket. Then reload as you normally would. I only use small rifle primers. I get the brass for less than 2 cents a case ($115 for 2500 cases). Since the brass was designed to hold the 60,000 CUP of the 223, I'm not worried at all that the case won't hold.
    Here is a copy of a post I wrote last September on the Surplus Rifle Forum:

    FWIW.
    I have been shooting the 9x23 Winchester 124 grain in my Star Modelo Super A for about a year and a half, I have had no problems whatsoever with it. No damage to the pistol at all. YMMV, I am not suggesting you do so. This is just for information. I accept no liability for what you do. I am not a gunsmith, engineer or in any way an expert.

    The 9x23 cartridge was designed to contain all that pressure in the brass, it is supposedly the strongest centerfire handgun brass made. You can hang the head off an unramped barrel, no problem. The Star Super A easily handles the 38 Super, IMHO. All this stuff about don't shoot Super through it is bogus. They were making the pistol all the way up to 1983, you think they didn't allow for 38 Super in all that time? I have copies of an article from gun digest from back in the 80's called "Our Spanish Cousins". In it the author says that the 38 Super is the cartridge to use if you can't get 9mm Largo. He even lists reloading data in the article. Since the 9x23 Winchester was developed to let guys who shot 38 Super use a more powerful round in an unmodified pistol, I figure I'm good to go.
    Now to the 9x23 Winchester:
    From a few posts of mine on a thread at The High Road from March and April of 2008:

    The thread is at http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=346913
    My post follows:
    *****************
    From the people selling the Star Modelo Super A in 9x23 Largo, Sarco Inc:

    Ballistic Comparison
    38 Super: Muzzle Vel.= 1200 pps / Muzzle Energy = 368 ft. lbs.
    9mm Largo (9x23mm): Muzzle Vel.= 1280 pps / Muzzle Energy = 420 ft. lbs.

    I have no worries at all in firing a 9x23 Winchester in my Star Modelo Super A. The 9x23 is rated at 50,000 CUP. The Super A's have been tested at 60 and 70,000 CUP with no problems. People have been firing 38 Super in these guns for years. The pistol is built like a tank. Just my opinion, YMMV, I have fired the 9x23 Winchester in my Star Super A I just bought from Sarco, no blow-ups, no problems.
    WARNING! DO NOT attempt to fire these rounds in the older handguns chambered for the 9x23 Largo, most of the early pistols won't handle it.
    I also have converted a Tokarev to fire the 9x23 Winchester. No problems there either.

    I know I'm going to get dumped on, but there you are.
    *****************************************
    I keep on running into comments like this as I do my research:

    ROBERT W. XXXXXX

    Posted on Wednesday, July 24, 2002 - 2:45 am:
    IS THERE ANY WAY TO FIND OUT FOR 100% SURE IF A PISTOL IS A 9MM LARGO VS. A 38 SUPER, WHEN WE BOUGHT MINE IT WAS SOLD AS A 38 SUPER AND WE HAVE FIRED OVER 2,500 ROUNDS OF SUPER AMMO IN IT AND HAVE HAD NO PROBLEMS AT ALL, I RELIZE THAT THIS DOESN'T MEAN SOMETHING COULDN'T GO WRONG, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO KNOW FOR SURE WHAT IT IS. ANY HELP WOULD BE GREAT, ALSO, CAN I GET PARTS FOR MY SUPER? ARE THEY INTERCHANGABLE WITH OTHER STAR MODELS?

    **************************************
    I got into shooting 9x23 Winchester through my Star Super A due to a series of posts by Clark, who posts here (see below). I then researched his statements, and decided that he was correct.
    John Ricco designed the 9x23 so that competitors using the 38 Super could make major power factor using their unmodified 38 Super guns. The brass is the strongest centerfire handgun cartridge made. The web can sit out over an unsupported barrel and never bulge under that 50,000 CUP pressure. The brass is what is holding the pressure. The web is twice the thickness of the 38 Super.

    Edit: The 1982 edition of Gun Digest had an article by Wm H. Smith, where he reviewed the Llama and Star pistols. He used 38 Super in these pistols with no problems with 38 Super power levels. He even stated that the 38 Super was the best substitute for 9mm Largo for American shooters. This was on page 200.

    Here is the post by Clark:
    From http://www.thehighroad.org/showthrea...t=tokarev+9x23
    It is Post #21

    CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The High Road, nor the staff of THR assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.


    **************

    I also have converted a Star Super B.
    That pistol frame with long enough magazine for 9mm Largo, but is chambered for 9x19.
    I converted one for 9x23mm and have been shooting it with
    158 gr LSWC, 10 gr LONGSHOT, 1.129"
    In contrast, Hodgdon in 2002 showed for maximum load for 357 magnum:
    158 gr HNDY XTP JHP, 8.4 gr LONGSHOT, 1.580" 1394 fps, 43,200 c.u.p.

    To deal with heavy recoil, I reamed out the recoil spring coweling of the Star slide from .431" to .4375", to use a spring from Wolff gunsmith pak #14 with OD = .433". More can be reamed out and a still better spring can be used, the guide rod must be reduced in diameter.



    From http://www.burnscustom.com/showarticle. ... AreWe.php3
    You might want to read the whole article:
    Fully supported barrels are not needed with 9x23 Win. brass. The primer is the weak link in hot loads. Small rifle primers are recommended just for that reason but certainly not mandatory.


    From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9x23mm_Winchester
    The main advantage of 9x23mm Winchester is a much strengthened case that does away with the semi-rimmed case design of the .38 Super. The case is not necked down like the .357 SIG, 9x25mm Super Auto G and 9x25mm Dillon, thus allowing greater magazine capacity and better feeding. The strengthened case allowed the much higher internal pressures to be used than would be safe with .38 Super. The 9x23mm Winchester could operate in the 40,000 CUP while .38 Super maxed out around 30,000 CUP.

    Just my thoughts on the matter, I know will get slammed, but there you go.

    EDIT: I just looked back at that article in the 1982 Gun Digest. The author states that he was using hot +P 38 Super loads

    Also from the article:

    For the American shooter. the most reasonable substitute for the 9mm Largo is the 38 Super Auto. This cartridge is among the most powerful of pistol cartridges. In comparison with the shorter 9mm Luger it uses a bullet that is 4 grains heavier at a higher velocity (130 gn @ 1280FPS vs a 124 gn at 1100 FPS for the Luger). The difference gives the 38 Super a muzzle energy of 475 ft-pounds which is 136 ft-pounds over the Luger and a 140 ft-pound advantage over the 45 Auto.

    And:

    Even though both pistols were made some 50 years ago, there were no mechanical failures considering that they digested loads ranging from the hot Remington +P ammunition which exceeds the 9mm Largo's ballistics by a considerable margin, to reduced velocity loads without any problems proved that they are not the worthless pieces of Spanish junk some think them to be.

    Note that he is reviewing the Star A, not the newer Star Super A.
    A lot of people hve done a lot of things over the years - and gotten away with them. Doesn't make it smart, and i am NOT prone to shoot ammo that runs notably higher in pressure than what a gun was designed and chambered for.
    Absent comrades (sound of breaking glass)

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    According to the author of that article, Wm Hovey Smith, the Star A was designed to shoot 38 Super. I believe him.

  12. #12
    Bob In St. Louis's Avatar
    Bob In St. Louis is offline Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member/Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Small padded room, no windows
    Posts
    19,609

    Default

    Wm Hovey Smith was grossly mistaken.
    Godfather, Eibar Mafia

    El Jefe Loco

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    You could be correct, Bob. I don't think so, though. The Spanish military was buying these pistols up into the 1980's, and 38 Super came out in the 30's. The Spanish authorities must have known that 38 Super would get fired in those pistols, it was inevitable. I really believe that they would have made sure that their pistol could handle it. If they didn't they would have been stupid, and I have never heard that claim made about them.
    Like I said, I've been shooting 9x23 Winchester in my Star Super A for about 2 years. I haven't had any problems whatsoever. I also have not even heard of a Star Super A blowing up because of firing 9x23 Winchester. The original poster asked for horror stories and pictures of blown up pistols. I do not think that is going to happen. These pistols are built like tanks, and the 9x23 Winchester case is the strongest center-fired pistol case out there.
    Believe me, I did a lot of research before I started shooting the 9x23 Winchester through my Star. If I thought there was any chance that the pistol would blow up, I certainly would not have done it.
    As it is, I think I have the perfect marriage of pistol and cartridge. The Star Super A is a better pistol than the 1911, IMHO. The 9x23 Winchester is the ballistic duplicate of the 357 Magnum, that can actually be shot out of a semi-auto. Less recoil, less muzzle blast, more shots and faster reloads. What's not to like?

  14. #14
    Bob In St. Louis's Avatar
    Bob In St. Louis is offline Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member/Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Small padded room, no windows
    Posts
    19,609

    Default

    The Spanish military issue ammo was 9mm Largo (9mm Bergmann Bayard) up until 1976. Their sole intent, sole design was for the 9mm Largo round, and "38 Super" did not even enter the equation in their design considerations for military issue pistols. The Star Model A was designed specifically for 9mm Largo, and the Star Model A design evolved in the mid-1920s - not the 1930s. Those marked "9mm/38" had the bolt face opened ever so slightly to also accept 38 ACP cartridges; 38 ACP is balistically and power rated about the same as 9mm Largo, and this later adjustment was done to pistols surplused for the commercial market so they could be sold in the US and Mexico. The misconception that these pistols were "Designed for" or "Intended to use" 38 Super comes from a misinterpretation of this caliber designation on the slide. The Star A was never intended to use 38 Super, and I will never condone the use of 38 Super in any 9mm Largo pistol.
    Godfather, Eibar Mafia

    El Jefe Loco

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    I guess Mr Smith was unaware of that fact, Bob.
    Not condoning the use of 38 Super is definitely your prerogative, Bob. I will respectfully have to disagree with you, though. You clearly know a lot more about these pistols than I ever will. I just know that my particular Star Super A has handled a steady diet of 9x23 Winchester for 2 years, and is none the worse for wear. If it has held up this well with 9x23 Winchester, I can't see that I would have any problems with the much weaker 38 Super. You can call me foolish or stupid for it. I did my research before I started, and my experience since then tells me that my conclusions seem to be correct up to this point. Maybe the pistol will blow up in my hand the next time I shoot it. I highly doubt it, though.

  16. #16
    Clyde's Avatar
    Clyde is offline Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    56,398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mastiff View Post
    I guess Mr Smith was unaware of that fact, Bob.
    Not condoning the use of 38 Super is definitely your prerogative, Bob. I will respectfully have to disagree with you, though. You clearly know a lot more about these pistols than I ever will. I just know that my particular Star Super A has handled a steady diet of 9x23 Winchester for 2 years, and is none the worse for wear. If it has held up this well with 9x23 Winchester, I can't see that I would have any problems with the much weaker 38 Super. You can call me foolish or stupid for it. I did my research before I started, and my experience since then tells me that my conclusions seem to be correct up to this point. Maybe the pistol will blow up in my hand the next time I shoot it. I highly doubt it, though.
    PROBABLY won't blow up with 9X23. Quiite likely to break things, though. Your pistol, your hands, your eyes, your option. And - I'd call you foolish to do it. Bob will have to decide what to call you himself.
    Absent comrades (sound of breaking glass)

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clyde View Post
    PROBABLY won't blow up with 9X23. Quiite likely to break things, though. Your pistol, your hands, your eyes, your option. And - I'd call you foolish to do it. Bob will have to decide what to call you himself.
    I will respectfully disagree.
    I knew you guys would give me hassles about it. I do not consider myself either foolish or stupid. I posted because my experience and research disagreed with everything you guys here had posted regarding 9x23 Winchester in the Star Super A. I'm not foolish enough to think you'd turn around and embrace my position. However,at least the original poster now knows that there are people who have not had pistols blow up because of firing 9x23 Winchester in the Star Super A, much less 38 Super. My research is there for everyone to see. Anyone reading this thread can make up their own mind.
    Good night and take care, Clyde.

  18. #18
    Clyde's Avatar
    Clyde is offline Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    56,398

    Default

    Well, I was trained as an Ordnance Officer many years ago, have piddled around small arms shops when i could, talked to some top-end small arms evaluators, and done a ton of reading and shot a few hundred thousand rounds of various sorts of metallic ammo over the years.

    Been around a few small arms "kabooms".

    And - my own experience, observation, and formal training tell me "This guy is doing something foolish". You may (have so far) get away with it. May forever. And yes - people not only can, but will (and will have to) make up their own minds. I hope that they will behave conservatively and safely instead of indulging in risky behavior with firearms.
    Last edited by Clyde; 05-10-2010 at 10:25 PM.
    Absent comrades (sound of breaking glass)

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    2,361

    Default

    Just to make things clear to someone reading through this thread, some pressure specs should be mentioned. Standard 9mm Largo operating pressure is 30,000 psi, .38 super is 33,000. Factory loaded 9x23 is 50,000+. I am sure that some guns can handle it for a while, but I'd certainly worry about a cracked slide or frame.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9x23mm_Winchester
    The main advantage of 9x23mm Winchester is a much strengthened case that does away with the semi-rimmed case design of the .38 Super. The case is not necked down like the .357 SIG, 9x25mm Super Auto G and 9x25mm Dillon, thus allowing greater magazine capacity and better feeding. The strengthened case allowed the much higher internal pressures to be used than would be safe with .38 Super. The 9x23mm Winchester could operate in the 40,000 CUP while .38 Super maxed out around 30,000 CUP.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    256

    Default

    The qualities of the 9x23 Winchester case would be relevant if we were discussing issues such as head separation or case cracking. But, I believe, the issue here is whether or not it is safe to operate older Spanish pistols at these pressure levels. The determining factors are really things like the ability of the barrel locking lugs to maintain their integrity during firing. Additionally, the strength of the frame rails and their ability withstand the much greater recoil loads is also of interest. So, in other words it all comes down to metallurgy issues in the pistols major components (slide, barrel, and frame).

    As a minor point, when the 9x23 Winchester was first released 15 years ago or so its case strength was a major development. At this point similar case capabilities are commonly available in the various competition grade 38 Super brasses. This brass can be had in either the traditional semi-rimmed form or rimless.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    2,361

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimm2003 View Post
    The qualities of the 9x23 Winchester case would be relevant if we were discussing issues such as head separation or case cracking. But, I believe, the issue here is whether or not it is safe to operate older Spanish pistols at these pressure levels. The determining factors are really things like the ability of the barrel locking lugs to maintain their integrity during firing. Additionally, the strength of the frame rails and their ability withstand the much greater recoil loads is also of interest. So, in other words it all comes down to metallurgy issues in the pistols major components (slide, barrel, and frame).

    As a minor point, when the 9x23 Winchester was first released 15 years ago or so its case strength was a major development. At this point similar case capabilities are commonly available in the various competition grade 38 Super brasses. This brass can be had in either the traditional semi-rimmed form or rimless.


    +1 to above along with the velocity of the slide. Higher muzzle velocity=the faster the slide is moving in recoil.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    39

    Default

    I know of one Destroyer Carbine that sheared the lug with a SINGLE round of 9x23 Winchester. DONE!

    Now that's not a pistol. I agree the 9x23 brass is strong, and is usauble to make loads for 9mm largo. But why when you can get Starline 9mm Largo Brass?

    JW

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    Two reasons:

    I can get the 223 cases for less than 2 cents each, the Starline 9mm Largo runs over 16 cents a case. And the 223 cases can be reloaded almost indefinitely. I'm retired on a fixed income, so I save $$ where I can. My money is more valuable than my time, and I enjoy reloading anyway.

    I can reload anywhere between wimpy 9mm Luger through full house 9x23 Winchester power levels and not have to worry about the case. I couldn't do that through the more expensive Starline brass.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    central Ks
    Posts
    3,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mastiff View Post
    Sorry that I can not give you any horror stories. I've been shooting 9x23 Winchester through my Star Super A for a couple of years. I haven't had any problems at all. YMMV.
    I reload, and I make my own 9x23 Winchester out of once fired 223 brass. Just trim it to length, and swage the crimps in the primer pocket. Then reload as you normally would. I only use small rifle primers. I get the brass for less than 2 cents a case ($115 for 2500 cases). Since the brass was designed to hold the 60,000 CUP of the 223, I'm not worried at all that the case won't hold.
    No, it won't.

    There is no brass case in the known world that will hold 60,000psi.

    It will hold about 20,000psi in the heavy web area near the head, the rest is ALL transferred to the chamber walls (made of steel).

    9mmLargo is a lower pressure round than the 9mmParabellum, the exact figure I am trying to find, but, 9mmP is 35,000psi max.

    You are basically running Largo +P+ in a gun designed to survive 9mmLargo STANDARD.

    Oh well, carry on.

    I'd maganaflux that barrel, arround the chamber, every hundred rounds or so, so you can spot the cracking before it splits wide open on ya, which it will sooner or later.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    256

    Default

    Mastiff,

    I notice that the extractor grove on the 223 case head is considerably narrower than on most 9x23 designs. Have you experienced any issues with this in your Star pistols?

  27. #27
    Clyde's Avatar
    Clyde is offline Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    56,398

    Default

    Case head and body diameter is notably smaller than 9mm Largo, 9x23 or 9mmx19 P as well - .375" instead of .392-.393" for the 9mms. .223 makes real good 9mm Steyr...
    Absent comrades (sound of breaking glass)

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimm2003 View Post
    Mastiff,

    I notice that the extractor grove on the 223 case head is considerably narrower than on most 9x23 designs. Have you experienced any issues with this in your Star pistols?
    I haven't had any problems at all with the extractor. Actually, I haven't had any problems at all with firing the 223 cut back to 9x23.
    You guys, however, have convinced me to get a stronger recoil spring, firing pin spring, and to install a shock buff. I much prefer my Star Super A to my Argy Sistema Colt in terms of the trigger, the sights, and the fit to my hand. The loaded chamber indicator is a nice touch, also.
    I recently ordered an Argy FM-90 Hi-Power. I'm in the government mandated waiting period until I can take the pistol home. I'm a great fan of the Spanish and South American mil-surp pistols.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    About Alabama, Florida, and Georgia
    Posts
    40

    Default

    It is interesting to know that the stars can take at least some 9x23 rounds. Could be useful in an emergency. I will not voluntarily fire it in my pistol. One of the issues is battering and stressing of the metal. When I first bought mine in the early 90's it would not function with the blazer aluminum case 9 mm large due to a rough chamber. I obtained a few rounds of PMC .38 super. I turned down the rims and it worked ok and later I openned up the bolt face. I ended up switching out the barrel for the 9 mm parabellum round.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    central Ks
    Posts
    3,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by barnetmill View Post
    It is interesting to know that the stars can take at least some 9x23 rounds. Could be useful in an emergency. I will not voluntarily fire it in my pistol. One of the issues is battering and stressing of the metal. When I first bought mine in the early 90's it would not function with the blazer aluminum case 9 mm large due to a rough chamber. I obtained a few rounds of PMC .38 super. I turned down the rims and it worked ok and later I openned up the bolt face. I ended up switching out the barrel for the 9 mm parabellum round.
    All firearms are made to tollerate some ammount of overpressure. That is why "proof-loads" exist. Typically 125% of SAAMI pressure, according to data I stumbled accross someplace. That's 24,000PSI in my .45 Auto's, 43,750 in 9mmP, 77,500spi in my .308, 71,250psi in my Mosin (x54R).
    Guns are built to survive this ONCE OR TWICE, to prove they will not just explode ("suffer a catastrophic failure") under normal SAAMI pressure exposure for their lifetime.
    +P is an official SAAMI pressure, memory says about 7% overpressure, +P+ is NOT an official, but, is usually about 4 or 5% higher.
    That's looking at 10-12% over, while a proof load is 25% over.
    A standard gun will take "+P" or "+P+" ammo, but, WILL WEAR at a faster rate.


    9mmLargo factory ammo pushes a 124/125gr bullet at arround 1100fps, according to chrony tests I have found.
    CCI set it's factory spec. pressure @ 30,000psi for Largo ammo.
    Every data source I have found states categorically "Do not fire 9x23 in 9mmLargo weapons".
    My Speer manual #13 states in it's loading data, page 507, "The Winchester competition cartrige operates at NEARLY TWICE the pressures of the Largo and would surely destroy these older pistols" (capitolization mine, not Speer's).
    Apparently 9x23 is spec'd at 40,000CUP, which converts to, holy crap, try 55,000psi!!!!


    OK, you go ahead with x23 in that Largo-chambered/designed pistol.

    I'm glad you won't be next to me.

    My advice to magnaflux that barrel every 100 rounds or so is now ever 25 or so.

  31. #31
    Clyde's Avatar
    Clyde is offline Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    56,398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldstuffer View Post
    All firearms are made to tollerate some ammount of overpressure. That is why "proof-loads" exist. Typically 125% of SAAMI pressure, according to data I stumbled accross someplace. That's 24,000PSI in my .45 Auto's, 43,750 in 9mmP, 77,500spi in my .308, 71,250psi in my Mosin (x54R).
    Guns are built to survive this ONCE OR TWICE, to prove they will not just explode ("suffer a catastrophic failure") under normal SAAMI pressure exposure for their lifetime.
    +P is an official SAAMI pressure, memory says about 7% overpressure, +P+ is NOT an official, but, is usually about 4 or 5% higher.
    That's looking at 10-12% over, while a proof load is 25% over.
    A standard gun will take "+P" or "+P+" ammo, but, WILL WEAR at a faster rate.


    9mmLargo factory ammo pushes a 124/125gr bullet at arround 1100fps, according to chrony tests I have found.
    CCI set it's factory spec. pressure @ 30,000psi for Largo ammo.
    Every data source I have found states categorically "Do not fire 9x23 in 9mmLargo weapons".
    My Speer manual #13 states in it's loading data, page 507, "The Winchester competition cartrige operates at NEARLY TWICE the pressures of the Largo and would surely destroy these older pistols" (capitolization mine, not Speer's).
    Apparently 9x23 is spec'd at 40,000CUP, which converts to, holy crap, try 55,000psi!!!!


    OK, you go ahead with x23 in that Largo-chambered/designed pistol.

    I'm glad you won't be next to me.

    My advice to magnaflux that barrel every 100 rounds or so is now ever 25 or so.
    And this old Ordnance officer repeats prior suggestion - don't do it at all.
    Absent comrades (sound of breaking glass)

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    I started out saying that the higher pressure rounds should not be fired in the older pistols. CCI loads the Largo cartridge down to prevent damage in the older pistols.

    9mm Largo - Spanish name for the 9x23 size 9mm Bergmann-Bayard. Rimless. SRM13 notes that CCI Speer has limited pressures to 30K

    PSI in deference to the old Astra 400 blowback pistols. 124gr JHPs from 1000 to 1100 fps. They note that .38 Super is a tad hot for the old blowback Astras, and that the semi-rimmed case of the Super also causes feedin problems in them.

    And:

    Though the 9mm Bergmann-Bayard may have been a lower pressure cartridge, Many of the Largo chambered guns were also chambered for the 9mm parabellum (Luger) ie. the same gun, same model. Star peestolas with the loaded chamber indicator were manufactured until in the 80s. The largo and the parabellum have the same headsize, and the latter functions at 30,000psi up to 50,000psi (european loadings). At least the later star pistols will handle the pressure, though it might beat your gun up pretty fast to shoot those hot loads due to fast slide travel speeds.

    The CCI 9mm Largo is toned down because there are older pistols that can not handle the pressure that the Star Super A can handle with ease. You really think the Star Super A is that much weaker than the Star Super B?? I certainly do not.
    I'll refer you back to Wm. Hovey Smith's article, and the experience of all those people who have been shooting 38 Super for years through the Star Super A. You keep thinking what you want. I'll be out enjoying the heck out of my Star Super A, a much stronger and better made pistol than you think it is.

  33. #33
    Clyde's Avatar
    Clyde is offline Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    56,398

    Default

    Where do you get the idea we don't think the Super A is well amde? It is. Just not made for 9x23.
    Absent comrades (sound of breaking glass)

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    central Ks
    Posts
    3,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clyde View Post
    Where do you get the idea we don't think the Super A is well amde? It is. Just not made for 9x23.
    Pretty much, right there.

    Even if you consider it for 9mmP, it's a designed for 35,000psi gun, not a 55,000 psi gun.

    Oh well, people will all do as they wish in this free country (as it should be).

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    My error. Let me restate that comment: You consider that a pistol made up to 1983 was only made strong enough to fire cartridges appropriate for a blowback pistol designed in 1921. That didn't sound well made to me. You clearly do not think the pistol is anywhere near as strong as I think it is.

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldstuffer View Post
    Pretty much, right there.

    Even if you consider it for 9mmP, it's a designed for 35,000psi gun, not a 55,000 psi gun.

    Oh well, people will all do as they wish in this free country (as it should be).
    Which was the point of the 9x23 Winchester cartridge in the first place. The cartridge was made to contain that pressure, and so not transmit it to the pistol. The case can hang over the unsupported feed ramp and not even bulge, much less blow. It is the same idea behind the 45 Super. The 45 Super was based on the 451 Dectonics case, that runs at almost double the pressure of the 45 ACP case. The stronger case is why 45 Super doesn't blow up the 45 Colt 1911's it is fired in.

  37. #37
    Clyde's Avatar
    Clyde is offline Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    56,398

    Default

    Invincible failure and refusal to see reality is - incurable. I think I'm out of here.
    Absent comrades (sound of breaking glass)

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clyde View Post
    Invincible failure and refusal to see reality is - incurable. I think I'm out of here.
    We just have a difference of opinion on who is refusing to see reality, Clyde. IMHO, it is you.
    We've got guys out there firing the equivalent of full bore 44 Magnum loads out of Norinco 1911's by using cut down 308 brass. If the brass didn't contain the pressure, these pistols should be scattered over the landscape after the first shot. You think 9x23 Winchester is over the top, check this out:
    From http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?p=2564540 post #28
    The Armco 45-08

    What is it?

    This is actually nothing new. Enterprising shooters have been creating stronger .45ACP cases for over 80 years, using first 30-06 cases, and recently .308. The mechanism by which this is achieved has varied, with more or less usable results.
    Three things were needed and have recently come to pass:
    1. First, a workable, professional way to prepare the cases, as opposed to the old methods of hacksawing and trimming the cases to length and then reaming the necks by hand. This resulted in uneven case wall thickness and poor cases (and worse accuracy). We have developed a die that holds the .308 case perfectly concentric to the reamer which then bottoms in the web of the case, ensuring a consistent depth of cut and identical case volumes. This is of course necessary in order to ensure consistent, safe, accurate loads. The cutting to length is achieved at the same time, with the case locked in place in the lathe. Repeatable and achieving a reasonable cost per case.
    2. The second need was a good powder. Until a couple of years ago, shooters were experimenting with Unique, Blue Dot, even very good powders like Vihtavuori N105, the one I had the highest hopes for. The pressure was not a problem for the cases, but we hit the wall with primers. Even magnum rifle ones flowed and perforated, indicating pressures well above the 60,000 psi range. Mind you, we were getting a LOT of speed! Hodgdon brought out their new “Longshot” powder, and boy did it work! All of a sudden, another hundred plus FPS was attainable, with PISTOL PRIMERS!
    3. The third need was for an understanding of how to keep a 1911 running under brutal conditions. That came from the experience of pistolsmiths such as myself with the knowledge of how to keep these guns running for a hundred thousand rounds or more of full power ammo. A few hundred rounds – even a couple thousand - of this stuff is no problem for a strong gun.

    How does the gun survive 200 grain bullets at 1400+ fps? Contrary to the guys touting the .45 Super (a pretty anemic round compared to this), and even the .460 Rowland (which also uses a comp to control the slide speed), we do NOT need a 28 lb recoil spring. These brutal springs introduce new problems (we’ve tried them) such as harsh feeding and bullet setback and feed failures. Ejection really didn’t seem to be any less violent. A 20 or 22 lb spring works really well, especially if coupled with the excellent .200” Red Buff by Chuck Hiett. A necessity (because of the slide speed) is good, stiff magazine springs. New ones work, especially Para Ordnance ones, but worn out mag springs WILL cause nose-up feed failures. I recommend HD Wolff ones. The rest of the gun needs no modification, except that it needs to be a good strong, tight gun, with sufficient barrel lug engagement in order to avoid barrel and slide lug battering. No AMT’s or Auto Ordnance guns need apply. No surprise to me, we have a lot of Norinco’s in the woods with these loads, and they seem to last well. Not pretty but strong as hell. Sometimes a slightly longer link is beneficial if your barrel lock-up is less than optimal. A full length guide rod is nice, but not essential.
    How about the shooter? One modification that REALLY helps is a good (not a drop-in) beavertail. Recoil gets quite noticeable. I have a guy running this stuff in a stock Commander, but it KICKS! And he’s not running max. loads… All that aside, these guns really don’t hurt like a Casull, or even a .44 Magnum. Pretty similar to a REALLY hot .38 Super. Everyone who shoots one asks for another magazine…




    Now, as to loads. You can run almost whatever you like because of the tremendously strong cases, but for the HOT loads, try Longshot. We start at 10 grains of Longshot and a 200 grain hard cast SWC bullet. Large pistol primer. I know it seats a little below flush, but it works great. I’ve used Winchester and CCI with good results. For some guns with small firing pins – a couple of Springfield models, for instance – we have experienced pierced primers and have gone to rifle primers. If you use rifle primers in yours, loads stay the same and they go off just great. For 230’s, start at 9.0 grains. MY maximum (I suggest you stop before that) is 12.5 grains with the 200 for over 1500 fps, and 11.0 grains with a 230 grain Jacketed flat nose bullet. My suggestion is a MAXIMUM of 11.5 and 10.5 grains for these two weights. I have not played with lighter bullets because our need here is for a bear defense load, and we need penetration above all. This is the reason for the 200 grain hard cast bullet. The flat nose cuts through clean and at 1400 fps (the 11.5 grain load), it goes a long ways through muscle and bone. At 1500 it REALLY hits hard! The 230 grain Noslers I tested at about 1300 generated more slide speed and ejection (and pressure). I like the 200’s as the energy numbers (yes, I know, I know…) are substantially higher. My own loads generate a half ton of energy, and that’s exactly what my 4” 629 does for me. And the revolver – much as I dearly love it - is a noticeably bigger gun, slower to shoot (EXACTLY half the split times between aimed shots), and holds 6 rounds compared to 11 for my Para Ordnance. AND not nearly as nice to carry as a 5” 1911, even a “wide-body”.

    Shootability? We have played a lot with these guns and my best time for four A-Zone hits on an IPSC target at 12 yards was .8 seconds. That’s from the first to fourth shot for just over a quarter of a second per shot. Not a pretty group but all four were center hits. Pretty slow by IPSC standards, but my best with the revolver is double that. That’s where we justify a load and gun combination like this in Bear Country. A bear at 12 yards starts a charge. You basically have time for 8 aimed shots with the auto and 4 shots with the revolver – If you have it out and ready. Given a shooter thoroughly familiar with the 1911, he has a hell of a lot better chance of walking away.
    As a point of interest, my initial testing almost two years ago was with a commander-length barrel in a Springfield Defender. It ran a 2 port compensator, and was a sweet gun to shoot with these loads. It was when I switched to a non-compensated gun that the slide speed gremlins caught up with me and I had to pop new HD springs into my old Shooting Star magazines. I don’t need to mention that the gun should have a good well adjusted extractor in it to pull these empties out reliably, but we have never had a problem getting empties out!!
    To date, the threshold is caused not by pressure or gun battering, but by recoil and slide speed, as well as primer flow and blowby. Not that we need to push past that particular threshold at all. I think we have what we need. A gun that will never match a .454 Casull, but is a very viable alternative to a short, carryable .44 Magnum with more firepower, similar power, and better ergonomics.

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    central Ks
    Posts
    3,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mastiff View Post
    Which was the point of the 9x23 Winchester cartridge in the first place. The cartridge was made to contain that pressure, and so not transmit it to the pistol. The case can hang over the unsupported feed ramp and not even bulge, much less blow. It is the same idea behind the 45 Super. The 45 Super was based on the 451 Dectonics case, that runs at almost double the pressure of the 45 ACP case. The stronger case is why 45 Super doesn't blow up the 45 Colt 1911's it is fired in.
    I think I'm with Clyde.

    The brass case does NOTHING to hold 55,000psi of pressure.

    Go ahead, put a loaded cartrige in a piece of copper tube, put it in a vice just enough to hold it, and figure out some way to slam the primer and set it off.

    Just don't do it with a punch and hammer unless you have an EOD suit on.

    According to you, the case will hold in the 55,000psi of pressure, so the copper tube arround the case will NOT blow, the bullet will get launched whichever direction.
    If you lay a stack of plywood pieces below the vice, 5 or 6 pieces ought to keep it from ricochetting off the floor, catch it in the wood.

    Go ahead, try it, take pix too.

    The brass case will let go quite nicely, like a mini-grenade, because no brass cartrige case exists that holds 50,000+ psi internally WITHOUT THE BARREL/CHAMBER TO BACK IT UP.
    That case may be thicker than .38 Super, but it isn't nearly as strong as you think it is, and it is passing more strain to the gun's barrel & chamber than you think it is.

    And, BTW, the .45 Super runs 2x the .45 Auto's 20,000psi because of a fully supported, RAMPED barrel, not because of the brass case.

    Go ahead, take a .45 you don't care for, and put a 40,000psi loaded .45 Super in it, in the ACP chamber. If you leave the magazine out, MAYBE it'll all vent down out the frame without harming the hands wrapped arround it. It'll blow the barrel up too, and likely ruin the slide from swelling IT.
    I'm NOT loaning you MY .45 to try it with.

    With a Ruger Revolver, or a Thompson/Center Contender, you can take normal .45 Colt up to serious pressure levels, stand that cartrige up next to .44 RemingtonMagnum in power, SAFELY.
    Put one of these loads in a Colt, a Smith, a Taurus, it'll blow sky high. Why? It isn't the brass case, it's the thicker steel arround that brass case.


    Whatever Mastiff.

  40. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    211

    Default

    45 Super does NOT require a ramped barrel, so right there you are wrong. The case holds the pressure in over the unsupported portion of the barrel. See Below from Hindeman's website. Also reread my last post where the guys are using normal 1911's to run 44 Magnum pressures. No ramped barrels there, either. Just 308 cases trimmed to 45 ACP length.
    How do you explain the people running around with 1911's at pressures approaching 60,000 or so PSI with unramped barrels? They should be blowing up left and right if your assertion is correct. The fact that they are not disproves your statement. 60,000 PSI is about 3 times what the 1911 is rated for.

    From Ace Hindeman's website:

    To do this Grennells went straight to the problem, pinpointing the weakest part of the M1911 system - the cartridge case itself! The standard 45 ACP leaves a significant portion of the case hanging unsupported over the angled feed ramp of the barrel, thereby limiting pressures and velocities to low levels. The unsupported section is forward of the case head and the brass there is thin, this poses no particular problem since the standard 45 ACP is loaded to levels not much greater than black powder loads, and standard brass is amply strong to handle this! However this scenario does present a serious barrier to increased ballistic performance! (There are some who would argue: that there is no need for increased ballistic performance for the 45 ACP, for those who are of that mindset we leave them there!)

    To address the case weakness of the standard .45 ACP Grennell used a modified .451 Detonics magnum case. This case was longer than the 45 ACP, with thicker walls and a heavier web area to withstand higher pressures. These cases trimmed to proper 45 ACP length and then inside neck reamed to accept 45 ACP bullets, provided the basis for the "45Super"®!

    EDIT: And from Dane Burns regarding the 9x23 Winchester. Note he is building them on a 1911 pistol:

    9x23 is a "different" caliber. In a 1911 you are running rifle chamber pressures in a handgun with the Winchester factory loads. Only Winchester brass is made to take it. Second choice in brass is 9mm Super Comp brass from Starline. BEWARE, the brass is not equal! Do not treat them as such. The 9x23 Winchester brass was made to run at 50K CUP and from a correctly fitted, unramped barrel. If you are going to run other than Winchester brass I would HIGHLY suggest building your gun on a ramped barrel. That said I have build dozens with an unramped barrel with zero problems. Barrel throating and the correct frame ramps are critical to a safe 9x23. Winchester brass is an extra margin of safety in either design with maximum loads. (which factory ammo is)

    and

    7) Unramped barrels shooting 170 PF loads, or more, are not an issue with Vectan powder and Winchester brass. The case was designed to do just that and the guns are more reliable IMO. If in doubt or you want to use other brass safely, have the gun built with a ramped barrel.
    Last edited by Mastiff; 05-16-2010 at 01:28 AM.

  41. #41
    Bob In St. Louis's Avatar
    Bob In St. Louis is offline Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member/Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Small padded room, no windows
    Posts
    19,609

    Default

    I think this thread is going off into ad-nauseum tedium. We are done on this one.
    Godfather, Eibar Mafia

    El Jefe Loco

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •