November 26, 2016, 02:28 PM | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 3, 2006
Location: Brockport, NY
Posts: 3,715
|
I am going to bet that he is using cut down .223 remington brass for his cartridge, which may explain why it hasn't blown up yet......yet. 223 is thicker at the head and base, which should provide a slight degree of insurance against high velocity spontaneous disassembly of his Glock
that being said, pressure issues in straight walled cases are very, very hard to spot before you reach the point of failure.
__________________
You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth. |
November 26, 2016, 02:35 PM | #52 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 17, 2012
Posts: 1,085
|
Quote:
TCB
__________________
"I don't believe that the men of the distant past were any wiser than we are today. But it does seem that their science and technology were able to accomplish much grander things." -- Alex Rosewater |
|
November 26, 2016, 02:36 PM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,486
|
I recall an old old article in which a gunsmith discussed, tongue in cheek, means for increasing chamber pressure without pressure signs... until the gun exploded. He advised shooting with your mouth open to equalize the shockwave like old pictures of artillerymen.
|
November 26, 2016, 02:45 PM | #54 | |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,929
|
Quote:
Assuming similar brass (as I did in my previous post), the pressures have to be over 55KPsi. With thicker brass the pressures are almost certainly off the charts. Off the charts in the literal sense--higher than any rifle or pistol cartridge currently available.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
|
November 26, 2016, 02:48 PM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 16, 2014
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,633
|
I think he's inferring that the pressure is even lower than 45 ACP...
Just because the brass springs back and can be inserted into the chamber doesn't mean anything other than your under 80,000 PSI. Any handgun brass will slip back into the chamber it was fired from. How do you think the brass gets pulled out when it's ejected? You resize handgun brass to ensure it will work in any gun and so that you get proper neck tension. |
November 26, 2016, 03:09 PM | #56 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 3, 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 970
|
And the 10, don't forget the 10!
|
November 26, 2016, 03:38 PM | #57 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 14, 2015
Posts: 138
|
All
JonSka,
All your conclusions are based on supposition, therefore are actually assumptions. If any one of them were correct, I would've had trouble long ago. I can't fathom why people on a so called pro gun site would make such horrible misstatements about innovations. Some think that all that can be invented, has been invented...very 18th. century of them... Another shows multiple examples of attempts to do what I am doing, as evidence it can't be done, when the fact of the matter is this cartridge is so desired, hundreds have attempted it and failed to fulfill the intent. Some misunderstand the importance of proof of concepts. Autocad is only a theoretical guess. How many are aware of the fact that a dreamed up concept must be proven or disproven by intrepid individuals, not by those sitting behind a computer? If those theoreticals were so reliable, then why would we need engineers, techs or inventors? There've been some good input here, but there's also been quite a bit of hyperbole from those who seem quite conservative in research and knowledge of practical application, yet liberal with opinions and misstatements, if not plain insults. Get over it. I've achieved success as intended. Maybe one day, those who've downed this will understand the importance and effectiveness of a heavy bullet will always outweigh the light bullet...and again, it's self-evident. So far: 125gr 1500+fps 140gr 1385+fps 147gr 1365+fps 158gr 1300+fps 170gr 1150+fps 200gr 1000+fps Improvements in velocities still being researched...more to come. Pre-orders are available for those interested. Thanks guys, Dave |
November 26, 2016, 04:12 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 11,654
|
I'm looking at these figures and have a totally non-confrontational question and am genuinely interested--what will this cartridge bring to the table that something like the 10mm doesn't already do?
__________________
"Everyone speaks gun."--Robert O'Neill I am NOT an expert--I do not have any formal experience or certification in firearms use or testing; use any information I post at your own risk! |
November 26, 2016, 04:14 PM | #59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,486
|
Awaiting pressure tests.
If this is anything but walking on the safety margins of gun and brass, I will be surprised. |
November 26, 2016, 04:19 PM | #60 | ||||
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,929
|
Quote:
Quote:
1. Statements from your posts. 2. The physical limitations of the pistol(s) you are using. 3. The physics of firearm operation: pressure, case capacity, etc. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
||||
November 26, 2016, 04:47 PM | #61 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 11,654
|
Quote:
__________________
"Everyone speaks gun."--Robert O'Neill I am NOT an expert--I do not have any formal experience or certification in firearms use or testing; use any information I post at your own risk! Last edited by stagpanther; November 26, 2016 at 05:04 PM. |
|
November 26, 2016, 05:07 PM | #62 |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,929
|
Magazine capacity. The design requirements are 9mm magazine capacity with true .357Mag performance out of a 1911/10mm frame.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
November 26, 2016, 05:18 PM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 6,079
|
The one thing I still don't understand is why, as part of this process, there hasn't been a visit to a lab that could confirm the pressures.
The fact that the OP feels, because of circumstantial evidence, that the pressures are below X or not above Y is irrelevant. If this development is supposed to have some commercial value, the OP will need to find a company that will give it backing. If it's a gun maker, they will want to know that they can sell it to the public. If it's an ammo company, they'll want to know that they can sell it to gun makers, to sell to the public. In both those cases, they will not touch it if they don't also know another aspect is addressed: the risk of lawsuits. The onus is on the OP to show investors that this cartridge is safe for the operator and dangerous for the target. The former needs actual pressure values to prove that current gun designs can have a chamber made that will handle it again and again and again. And it seems to me knowing those values sooner will save a lot of R&D money for the OP. If ROF is running at excessively higher pressures, then it's dead in the water as a handgun cartridge. Better to know now.... I mean, I'm all for another interesting cartridge, but it's got to be more than just some chrono' readings. That is my view.
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic. Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
|
November 26, 2016, 05:21 PM | #64 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 11,654
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"Everyone speaks gun."--Robert O'Neill I am NOT an expert--I do not have any formal experience or certification in firearms use or testing; use any information I post at your own risk! |
|||
November 26, 2016, 05:58 PM | #65 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 21, 2011
Location: Southern Louisiana
Posts: 1,399
|
Quote:
It's just a matter of time until statistics catch up with you and you end up on the wrong end of the bell curve (same thing that makes casinos so profitable), suing the poor sucker that manufactured the brass and gun you blew up for the loss of your fingers and/or eyes while claiming you were shooting factory ammo. |
|
November 26, 2016, 06:55 PM | #66 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 14, 2015
Posts: 138
|
All
Stag,
One advantage is simply additional rounds in the 20 sf...+3 in factory mags, with a substantial power factor. Yes Stag, so far it is similar to the 9x25, but with a higher magazine capacity. The conversion units and brass. The load data will be sent when I have finished proofing... The 200 grain LRN seem mild because I won't push them too hard to produce leading. 45 auto, I will never pull such a trifling liberal stunt as you mention. I've already contacted Glock and told them what I'm doing. I'm a man of honor. Pond, If you're offering to help, I'd welcome it, but money is the drawback at this time. Jon, For some of this information to be placed here, would be like lifting my kilt...sorry, you're gonna have to wait for the stone toss like everybody else. Has anyone looked at the latest videos on youtube? Thanks guys |
November 26, 2016, 07:10 PM | #67 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 9, 2011
Posts: 1,293
|
The only thing your YouTube videos show is excessive recoil which equates to too much time for an accurate follow up shot. Don't matter how powerful your cartridge is if it can't be shot accurately.
|
November 26, 2016, 07:16 PM | #68 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Quote:
125@1500+fps ==> 624 ft-lbs 140@1385+fps ==> 596 ft-lbs 147@1365+fps ==> 608 ft-lbs 158@1300+fps ==> 593 ft-lbs 170@1150+fps ==> 499 ft-lbs 200@1000+fps ==> 537 ft-lbs Turning now to some representative, commercially-available .38 Super loadings, we get the following: 90 gr JHP @ 1,557 fps ==> 485 ft-lb 100 gr FMJ @ 1,450 fps ==> 467 ft-lb 115 gr FMJ @ 1,395 fps ==> 497 ft-lb 130 gr FMJ @ 1,305 fps ==> 492 ft-lb 150 gr FMJ @ 1,148 fps ==> 439 ft-lb So you are generating more muzzle energy than commercial .38 Super ammunition. So now let's take a look at 9x23 commercial ammo: 124 gr JSP @ 1,460 fps ==> 587 ft-lb 125 gr JHP @ 1,450 fps ==> 583 ft-lb The .38 Super runs at 36,500 psi. As JohnKSa has noted, the 9x23 Winchester runs at 55,000 psi. The external case dimensions of .38 Super and 9x23 are the same, but the 9x23 is a thicker case, meaning less interior volume. So .38 Super loads in 9x23 cases would automaticaslly generate higher pressures -- which the case was designed to accomodate. But if we look at your data for similar weight bullets, in 9x23 there's only 124-grain and 125-grain data available. At 1,450 fps, these generate approximately 585 ft-lbs of muzzle energy. You have a 125-grain bullet pushing 1,500 fps (3 percent faster) but producing almost 7 percent more muzzle energy. There is only one way that can be done ... higher pressure. Since the 9x23 is running at 55,000 psi, your pressures must be greater than 55,000 psi. That's a given ... even your cartridge is subject to the laws of physics. The early 1900s 9x23 Bergmann-Bayard also seems to have been limited to bullets up to 125 grains in weight. I found some loading data for that cartridge, indicating 1,350 fps and 506 ft-lbs of energy. Again, the ROF is generating higher velocities, and thereby higher muzzle energies. The only way to send a bullet out of the barrel with more energy being carried is to impart more energy to the bullet by the firing cycle. More energy ==> more pressure. The other thing I don't understand is why this is being promoted as a new cartridge. So it uses heavier bullets -- so what? I can take .45 ACP brass and load it with 255-grain or 300-grain Long Colt bullets. Does that make it a new cartridge, or is it still .45 ACP loaded with heavier bullets? |
|
November 26, 2016, 07:23 PM | #69 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 14, 2015
Posts: 138
|
TMD
So, you haven't seen the latest...nor have you acknowledged my arthritis...nice.
I sincerely hope you never have to deal with these things...but if it happened, I hope you don't have to be subjected to the same attitude I've found by some here... Thank you for being so observant. |
November 26, 2016, 07:54 PM | #70 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 14, 2015
Posts: 138
|
Eagle,All
You would be SO right IF I were using a 23mm cartridge, but I'm not, so your statement is moot...as well as wrong.
Sorry, but I will not be goaded into lifting my kilt. What kind of people are you folks associating with anyway? Charlatans? Con artists? Liberals??? I'm not offering anything to hurt good people. I'm only offering something I see as better in some way, than what's already there, to protect you and yours. With the excessive usage of semiautos in the world today, no one seems to know what a real magnum revolver feels like or looks like when fired. Of course it's gonna reel more than the 9...but try to explain to a 9er how the 10 or 45 feels... And using those "physics" examples, there is no way a 460 or 960 could possibly exist. Believe me, if I could, I'd show all about it...and end the peanut gallery. All, no need to fear this...it's a simple offering...heavier bullets, higher capacity, better stopping power. As noted in my owners manual, hot loads in these revolvers from Colt and S&W will shorten the life of the revolver and not recommended for a steady diet...so no, I'm not hell bent on reaching 1600+fps with a 170 grain bullet...ain't happening in this cartridge...it ain't a bear gun. It's intent, as noted is midrange 357 performance. So please don't dump your sweet 357 revolvers. They have their place. I just needed something which physically performs better than the 9mm and 38 spl. with heavier, penetrating bullets. A question...how long does a 9x23 last in a Glock? 9x25? Aren't there magazine issues with the 9x23 in the 10mm mags? Do the 9x23 or 9x25 shorten the life or void warranties of the Glock? It seems everyone will void the warranty if you handload. |
November 26, 2016, 08:21 PM | #71 | |||
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,929
|
Quote:
That's absolutely ridiculous. Even your statement indicates that only "some" of the information would be proprietary. So use what's not proprietary and point out the some of what you say is in error. Quote:
Practical case capacity (the amount of empty space left in the cartridge when a bullet is seated) is going to determine the pressure at a given performance level. If the ROF has the same practical case capacity as the 9x23 (regardless of the length of the unloaded cartridge casing) then it's going to have to operate at higher pressures to achieve better performance. Again, you've posted a lot of words but provided nothing at all that disproves or even calls into question any of the conclusions made. This is getting to be a pattern. People point out issues and provide technical information to support their concerns and you respond by saying they are wrong and then rant about attitudes and persecution but without addressing any of the concerns or commenting on the technical issues raised. Clearly you want to be taken seriously and you want to sell your product, but your current strategy is not going to achieve either goal. Quote:
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
|||
November 26, 2016, 08:49 PM | #72 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 14, 2015
Posts: 138
|
JohnSKa
So, you're still trying to goad me?
Ain't hapnin. Your pressure assumptions in a semiauto are based on what chamber design? What throat? What groove depth? What twist rate? What powder? What primer? What crimp? What bullet? What's ridiculous, is asking half a question, then getting snotty when I can't give an answer to an improper question. As a matter of fact, this line of question is inappropriate and I'll not entertain it. Honestly...as freaky as some are about this issue, I know they'll never pull a trigger. Fixate on one thing, and you miss the rest of the parade. Relax...enjoy the ride. |
November 26, 2016, 08:54 PM | #73 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 3, 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 970
|
I got a good idea at what he's making and it may be feasible.
He was using Glock 20 and 29 for his tests. The pistols are capable of chambering 25mm cartridges and that he had a barrel made for his 357rof. My guess is it's the 9x25 straight walled cartridge. |
November 26, 2016, 09:04 PM | #74 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,486
|
An overloaded Mauser Export?
Overloaded is the operative word. If he doesn't lift his kilt and show us some psi, approval ain't happening. Pressure testing is not cheap. The bare minimum would be a Contender barrel with a strain gauge rig. Low kilobuck range. The industry standard would be a real PV barrel for a Universal Receiver, multi-kilobuck range. But the designer has Youtube. |
November 26, 2016, 09:11 PM | #75 | ||||
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,929
|
Quote:
In other words, you can take the 9x23 case and turn it into a 9x30 case, but there still won't be any more space for powder. That's because you can't seat the bullets out any farther than before--if you do the loaded cases won't fit in the magazine. Therefore getting more performance will require more pressure because you're trying to get more performance out of the same powder space and that equals greater pressure. The OP has stated that the outside diameter of the case is more or less the same as the 9mm and that the round is supposed to operate in 1911/10mm platforms. That places outside bounds on the case capacity and therefore on the performance possible at a given pressure. The bottom line is that the 9x23 has as much case capacity as is reasonably possible for a 9mm/.357 cartridge that will fit in a 1911/10mm platform. That means getting more performance out of the ROF than the 9x23 provides will require more pressure. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
||||
Tags |
357 ring of fire |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|