9x23 Brass manufacturers

[mildot1]

Can anyone give me some insight on case capacity between the following brass makers??

I have the following headstamps

WIN 9x23 WIN

CP 9x23

Starline 9mm Supercomp

I have read that the WIN 9x23 has a very heavy case thickness? Does this reduce capacity compared to the others??

I had no trouble making a major load with the Win brass(124 mg,7.5 Win SuperComp)

Can I run it all the same or will it need more testing??

Thanks

Mildot

[G-ManBart]

Those are things you can check yourself....no need to wait. Fill a case with powder, weigh it. Do the same with all the cases and you'll know exactly what each one holds. You can measure the mouth of the cases easily enough to compare...a dial caliper is good enough. If you want to compare the web, a dremel tool and a cutoff wheel will slice right through a case pretty easily (they do get hot).

They may all work just fine in your gun, and if they do, don't worry about it. I'd compare the extractor grooves very carefully and avoid any that look dissimilar for anything but practice. R,

[gm iprod]

Starline 9mm SuperComp is essentially 9x23, but Starline don't stamp it as such as I suspect that Winchester may have trademarked 9x23.

CP according to some sources is an English Company, but in this case I don't think it is them. CP in this case (pun intended) is most likely Fiochhi, and is reasonably well made. I have no personal experience with 9x23 other than when it gets mixed into me 38Super and we hold it aside.

Some more info here.

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9152

http://www.thehighroad.us/showthread.php?p=5223274

[gm iprod]

OK possible error in previous post.

http://www.afte.org/ExamResources/gallery2/v/Headstamp-Gallery/Letters_001/C/CP+S.jpg.html

CP bullets had some brass made with the 9x23 headstamp as per attached link.

Very good chance the brass was made by Starline, although the colouring on the case is a bit odd. Maybe just the picture was taken with dodgy light.

[eerw]

IIRC...

John Ricco ( CP Bullets ) designed the 9x23. and had Winchester did the initial run of brass for him. some design changes were made. George ( EGW ) Smith had some input. his name is on the patent.

Winchester made some design changes and went to market with the 9x23. There was legal entanglements that followed.

The CP brass is thick. really thick as is the WIN brass. never played with the Starline brass..as I had plenty of WIN and CP brass ( and it lasts a long time)

Here is a cross section photo that I have on my computer

Edited February 1, 2010 by eerw

[Baer45]

I wonder if thick is neccesarily (sp)better? Thanks for the great pictures....

[Action Pistolero]

The original 9x23 was called the 9 Super Cooper. It was made from a 223 case trimmed down to 23mm in length. John Ricco (CP) then did more development on it and then got Winchester involved. Winchester changed the angle the extractor groove and called it their own.

Layne Simpson wrote an article in Shooting Times on the 9x23 back in 1994. In it he stated that he did not know if the Starline brass would hold up as well as the Win. I contacted Starline and they sent me 25 cases to try. I loaded them 25 times to 175 pf and had no splits or pressure signs. I've been using Starline ever since. My guns never liked the Win brass because the extractor groove is too abrupt. For me, the Starline is cheaper and works better.

I spoke with John Ricco several years ago and at the time he was working on a 9x23 load for Win. that pushed a 95 grain bullet at over 1800 fps. Yikes!

[buddy_fuentes]

I've played around with 9x23 for a good while now. I have one Colt factory 9x23 and a Springfield Armory 9x23 that eerw had worked over by EGW. I don't use them for competition, but they are great carry guns. A 125 grain bullet traveling at 1400 to 1500 fps. is pretty impressive.

I started off thinking a 9x23 would be a good bowling pin gun, but quickly found out that wasn't the case. So I started playing around with loads to see the most accurate and the softest shooting. I used Winchester brass at first and then got curious about the Starline brass. I bought a thousand rounds of Starline and gave it a try. I have never seen any difference in the strength of either case. Both have performed to higher standards than I expected; with some cases used more than 18 times with no noticeable change. There has never been a split case or problem of any kind. (Most are loaded around 1400+ fps with a 125 grain bullet and a good many were loaded with a 147 grain at 1200 + fps. The 147's were loaded until I saw pressure signs [1300 +] and I backed off.)

I loaded them on 9 mm Dillon dies for a while until I ran across a set of 9x23 (Lyman?)and I started using them. I see no difference in the dies either.

This is a great caliber.

Buddy

[Shadow9x19]

the Starline is cheaper and works better.

My experience is exactly the same. I've loaded some Starline cases up to 40 times without any visible signs of wear and tear.

[RoryW]

Can anyone give me some insight on case capacity between the following brass makers??

I have loaded the win9x23 and it loads with less powder than the supercomp due to thickness of the case. depending on load, i have loaded up to .5grn less in the win9x23 than supercomp. I tend to save all my 9x23 for practice where i can pick them up and load them over and over. i'm yet to see one split or buldge.

[buddy_fuentes]

Take one of each cases and fill with powder and then weigh each one to see the difference.

[photoracer]

Take one of each cases and fill with powder and then weigh each one to see the difference.

I shoot 9x23 with a rare Bul M-5 IPSC. However due to physical limitations I do not shoot IPSC, IDPA, or USPSA. Can't move around that well, so steel matches are my thing right now (including .22 matches).

I spent a couple years shooting Win factory ammo (124 Silvertips) and saving the brass. Now I'm reloading. I found a good load for steel right off at 5.6g of Unique pushing 125 Rainiers. However a couple of weeks ago a friend whose family shoots pro sold me a lot of 9x23 brass, about 1500 rounds worth all new. 1100 were primed (SRP) Win. brass and the other 400+ was Starline. Starline brass used to say "9 Super Comp" as CorBon used that in their hot loads as was noted above. Current Starline 9x23 is marked "9x23 Comp". The sellers told me the internal design of the Starline brass was changed to facilitate the use of 147g bullets, which can't be used in the Win. brass. From that I assume they changed the inside taper to allow a longer bullet. I have not measured the difference between the three types of brass in powder capacity as yet.

[buddy_fuentes]

I really love this round. Too bad the major ammo manufactures don't promote it like they did for the 357 Sig. It out does the Sig and would be an ideal Law Enforcement round.

I don't know if the differences in case capacity makes much difference as for velocity. The small volume cases probably produce more pressure and therefore a bit more speed. I really cannot see the advantage of shooting a 125 grain bullet at 1600 fps. as opposed to 1450 fps.

I like a 9mm 1911 for steel. Falling steel I use a 147 grain load and 125 for stationary.

[G-ManBart]

I really love this round. Too bad the major ammo manufactures don't promote it like they did for the 357 Sig. It out does the Sig and would be an ideal Law Enforcement round.

I don't know if the differences in case capacity makes much difference as for velocity. The small volume cases probably produce more pressure and therefore a bit more speed. I really cannot see the advantage of shooting a 125 grain bullet at 1600 fps. as opposed to 1450 fps.

I like a 9mm 1911 for steel. Falling steel I use a 147 grain load and 125 for stationary.

I think it would make an outstanding law enforcement round as well, but I think it would be a struggle getting people to shoot it well. Heck, we struggle getting people to shoot well after 3,500 rounds through a .40 Glock. I don't even want to think what would happen if it was a snappy round like 9x23! Still, I would LOVE to have the option to carry one

If you can push the same weight bullet an extra 150fps, you can make the bullet tougher, so it will penetrate more, at the same diameter, or be better at defeating intermediate barriers....all pluses.

I'm wondering how 38 Super Lapua compares (it's another version of 9x23)....I heard it was quite good, with some extractor groove improvements. R,

[buddy_fuentes]

Hey G-Man, I find the 9x23 much easier to shoot than a forty. Recoil comes straight back rather than jumping, however it does make a good bit of noise. It is like a .357 Mag without the recoil.

Our department issued .357 Mags for years and the scores were pretty low, too. The autos were adopted in the late 80's and the scores went up.

No matter the round being used, some will never shoot well. Too bad they don't usually give you the option to carry a reasonable round/pistol.

Buddy

[photoracer]

I shoot both 9x23 and 357 Sig in competition sometimes. I've got a ton of 357 Sig brass but don't reload yet. At least as long as I can get those Rem Ultramax reloads for $16/box from Midway. They are an easier to shoot at 1225 FPS verses most factory ammo that is at 1350 FPS. But they are a little messy. I really liked the 357 Sig as a carry round initially, and the ammo was cheaper than 9x23. But once I started reloading 9x23 and got a lower powered steel load worked out I found that I could keep the muzzle down on my Bul and compete with the big time shooters in my club. The gun hardly flips at all with that load and it has a PF of around 135-140. Much easier to control in a Limited gun compared to the factory ammo at something like 180+ PF. Early on with the 357 Sig (HK USP Compact and Sig P229 Sport) I shot nothing but Speer Gold Dot HP in competition till good FMJ FN ammo started coming around.