The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

Clark · May 22, 2001, 11:01 PM

I have had dozens of case failures, and they are expensive and dangerous. I now only try the hot stuff with guns I am ready to sacrifice and with a trigger string. I use a folded over moving blanket to catch the parts. Flying extractors from CZ52s could be deadly, so I don't do this around others.

I have learned some things from the experements: 40 S&W and 357 Sig have almost no safety margin and I do not consider safe at max published load book levels with factory cut chambers.

9x23 and AA loads in CZ52s are not far behind in the thin ice department.

Calibers I have tested with more safety margin are: 7.62x54R, 8x57mm, 32 acp, 32 sw, 380, 9x19, 38 sw, 38 Special, and 45acp.

I have not tested, but it is my guess that the new 2001 357 mag loads from Accurate are in the thin ice catagory.

May 22, 2001, 11:01 PM	#12
Clark Senior Member Join Date: December 4, 1999 Location: WA, the ever blue state Posts: 4,678	I have had dozens of case failures, and they are expensive and dangerous. I now only try the hot stuff with guns I am ready to sacrifice and with a trigger string. I use a folded over moving blanket to catch the parts. Flying extractors from CZ52s could be deadly, so I don't do this around others. I have learned some things from the experements: 40 S&W and 357 Sig have almost no safety margin and I do not consider safe at max published load book levels with factory cut chambers. 9x23 and AA loads in CZ52s are not far behind in the thin ice department. Calibers I have tested with more safety margin are: 7.62x54R, 8x57mm, 32 acp, 32 sw, 380, 9x19, 38 sw, 38 Special, and 45acp. I have not tested, but it is my guess that the new 2001 357 mag loads from Accurate are in the thin ice catagory.