Pistol Smith Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
555 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Here are a couple of photos of 38 super brass vs CP9X23 (the prototype to the WIN9x23) You can really see the difference in the thickness of the brass.





<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: eerw on 2001-05-24 19:46 ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,831 Posts
WOW..Nice photos! Thanks!

There is no diference in the original CP by weight with the current Win. 9x23. Helps to know that Winchester actually made the CP brass by the patened process. When they stated maked their own 9x23 brass with Ricco's designs, he sued and won.

Ricco/CP won the suit and Winchest paid for the rights to build the current 9x23 brass. The Starline brass in 9mm Super Comp and 38 Super Comp is inbetween the strength and weight of regular 38 Super and 9x23 Win. in strength and weight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
500 Posts
eerw, Thanks for the photos. When talking to John one day he tried to explain the difference in the cases, it had something to do with the taper in the web. He mentioned something about a double step in the original,but manufacturing limitations prevented the making of them. He also holds another patent for a secondary design on the 9x23.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
It is obvious from the photos that the 9x23 brass is much thicker than the 38 Super. I reload within published limits of the 38 Super, however I know a few that go way past these limits, over 50,000 PSI.
My question to the gunsmiths of the world -- is the brass really limiting the pressure limits or is it the basic pistol design that sets the maximum PSI?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,831 Posts
My question to the gunsmiths of the world -- is the brass really limiting the pressure limits ( of a 1911 I presume)
Yes, in the 9x23-38 Super it is a brass limitation. 9x23 Winchester brass uses the design of the 1911 to its limit. The weak link then becomes the primer cup.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,831 Posts
Am I wrong to add that Ricco's CP case was a straight wall opposed to Winchester's slight tapered 9x23. This design would eliminated the need for supported barrels and perhaps enough of a change not to infringe on John's patent.
The dbl blend process which Ricco owned and patented is what allowed the unsupported barrel. The courts already decided that infringed on Riccos patent and Winchester paid the damages to Ricco.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
876 Posts
Anecdote Warning!
When the 9x23 Win was new, I read about it and picked up various 9mm-.38 brass to examine, by weight and cross-section. The 9x23 CP I found was thick but soft, much easier to cut with hacksaw and Dremel than any other caliber or brand. The owner of the gun said he got few loadings out of the brass because the rims peened out and interfered with feeding and extraction. WW 9x23 brass is said to be of Casull or rifle temper.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top