10mm guns could be chambered in 9x23 win?

[74A95]

At the end of the day, converting a 10mm pistol to 9x23 isn't super cheap and simple. There's a barrel change, mag swap (or modification), and for reliability i would want a slide dedicated.

FWIW 9x23 is capable of 357 mag ballistics with all bullet weights, in a pistol with roughly the same dimensional capacity as 9mm. Glock should partner with Winchester and be all over this. There would be a market for true, full 357 mag capabilities in a service sized high capacity semi-auto.

Standard 357 SIG is close, and 357 SIG loads from Underwood, Double Tap and Buffalo Bore equal the 357 mag / 9X23.

 

[agtman]

* * * Glock should partner with Winchester and be all over this. There would be a market for true, full 357 mag capabilities in a service sized high capacity semi-auto.

There already is such a gun.

It's called a Glock 20 with a 9x25 Dillon barrel installed - except the 9x25 cartridge offers better than .357Sig/.357 Mag ballistics in a 'service-size' autoloader that's not a boat-anchor (like the Desert Eagle ), and the stock 10mm magazine gives you more capacity (15+1) than the single-stack .357 Coonan.

When McNett first offered Double Tap's 9x25 ammo line, there were 5 loads, as follows:

1) 90gn GDHP @ 2100fps/881fpe;

2) 95gn FMJ @ 2000fps/844fpe;

3) 115gn GDHP @ 1800fps/827fpe;

4) 125gn GDHP @ 1700fps/802fpe;

5) 147gn GDHP @ 1600fps/835fpe.

Here's what DT offers today in 9x25 Dillon ammo:

http://www.doubletapammo.net/index.php?route=product/category&path=303_372

Here's Underwood's 9x25 line:

https://www.underwoodammo.com/collections/handgun-ammo/cartridge_9x25mm-dillon

 

[stagpanther]

* * * Glock should partner with Winchester and be all over this. There would be a market for true, full 357 mag capabilities in a service sized high capacity semi-auto.
There already is such a gun.

It's called a Glock 20 with a 9x25 Dillon barrel installed - except the 9x25 cartridge offers better than .357Sig/.357 Mag ballistics in a 'service-size' autoloader that's not a boat-anchor (like the Desert Eagle ), and the 10mm magazine gives you more capacity (15+1) than the single-stack .357 Coonan.

When McNett first offered Double Tap's 9x25 ammo line, there were 5 loads, as follows:

1) 90gn GDHP @ 2100fps/881fpe;

2) 95gn FMJ @ 2000fps/844fpe;

3) 115gn GDHP @ 1800fps/827fpe;

4) 125gn GDHP @ 1700fps/802fpe;

5) 147gn GDHP @ 1600fps/835fpe.

Here's what DT offers today in 9x25 Dillon ammo:

http://www.doubletapammo.net/index.p...y&path=303_372

Here's Underwood's 9x25 line:

https://www.underwoodammo.com/collec..._9x25mm-dillon

There's more to it than that agt: if you take the comparable bullets and velocities of the other pistol-useable cartridges (I don't really consider the 357 mag as "commonplace offering in a pistol") you can see that the 9 x 25 Dillon beats them all in terms of range/energy efficiency.

 

[5whiskey]

There already is such a gun.

Not that does this...

in a pistol with roughly the same dimensional capacity as 9mm.

I'm not knocking the 9x25 dillon, or 10mm. 9x25D has far superior ballistics than both 357 or 9x23. But at the end of the day you would have to sacrifice SOME capacity to approximate grip dimensions of the same pistol in 9x23. 357Sig suffers from the same issue to a lesser degree. Honestly this isn't even a huge issue for me, as I have large hands. My point remains though.

 

[tipoc]

FWIW 9x23 is capable of 357 mag ballistics with all bullet weights, in a pistol with roughly the same dimensional capacity as 9mm. Glock should partner with Winchester and be all over this. There would be a market for true, full 357 mag capabilities in a service sized high capacity semi-auto.

I'm not up on everything but I was unaware that the 9x23 could chamber 200 gr. bullets or get a 180 gr. bullet to over 1300 fps fps from a 4" barrel.

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/9...-180-grain-lead-flat-nose-gas-check-box-of-20

Or that the 9x23 handled 158 gr. bullets as well as the 357 Mag does.

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1...158-grain-xtp-jacketed-hollow-point-box-of-25

The 357 Magnum from a wheel gun or lever gun is very hard to beat. Semis operate successfully over a much narrower range of bullet weights than do wheelguns. "Full 357 Mag capabilities" are impossible from most semis.

tipoc

tipoc

 

[JohnKSa]

"Full 357 Mag capabilities" are impossible from most semis.

Yup, actually the 10mm is about as close as you can get. In terms of both energy and momentum, the .357Mag and 10mm are neck and neck. The 10mm will even handle bullets up to 220gr without too much trouble which is something that stretches even the .357Mag.

 

[RickB]

What I'm vague on is why convert a 10mm to 9x23? The 10mm is a larger diameter cartridge so would not the extractor and ejector not function properly? The mags also would need to be different. The breech face would be different as well.

A lot of "1911s" use the same breechface for 9mm, .38 Super, .40, and 10mm.
Colt used to use different breechface dimensions for each round, but that may have been discontinued in the '50s or '60s.
A buddy of mine had his spare .40 converted to Super, and it involved fitting a new barrel and extractor.

 

[tipoc]

A buddy of mine had his spare .40 converted to Super, and it involved fitting a new barrel and extractor.

Wouldn't the ejector also need to be changed? Where the ejector hits the case effects the angle of the ejection. A larger diameter case will effect that.

The 40 is also shorter than the Super.

It's fairly easy to convert from a 40 to 357 Sig or from 9mm to 38 Super to 9x23

I need to look into this more as I'm ignorant on this.

tipoc

 

[RickB]

All the 9/.38/.40 cartridges use an ejector of the same width, but different cartridges might need to have the length or shape varied.

For many years, all Colt Commanders used a wide, 9/.38 ejector, regardless of chambering, but today, most guns chambered in 9mm use an extra-long ejector that would be too long to allow ejecting live .38 Super rounds.

I'm skeptical of claims of reliable guns that can be switched among four or six different calibers with only barrels and extractors being swapped, but changing ejectors is a five-minute job, so even if you needed, say, a wide/long ejector for .40 and 9, and wide/short one for Super and 9x23, it wouldn't be too much of a hassle to swap them back and forth.

 

[JohnKSa]

Wouldn't the ejector also need to be changed?

Ideally, yes.

A full caliber conversion for a different diameter case would require a different/modified magazine, barrel, extractor, ejector, and probably a recoil spring.

But people do get away with running just a conversion barrel and different mags (maybe different springs) to run 9mm conversions in a 10mm/40 gun. If they shoot it enough, they will almost certainly note that it's not quite as reliable as the native pistol and that is why experts don't recommend that kind of "partial conversion" for a duty/self-defense pistol--only for range use.

 

[rock185]

Really interesting discussion generated from the OP's post you guys. I recall reading of that 9mm Mag. 115gr at 1475 FPS back in the day. No doubt easily achieved with the 9X23 Win. now days. Perhaps boutique loaders are already doing that? FWIW, I experimented a bit with Col. Cooper's "Super 9"/Super Cooper, using .223 cases trimmed to .900". In a 5" barrel, I got to 1625 FPS with a 115 JHP before deciding that discretion is the better part of valor, and not pushing my experiments further. Cooper's gun had a longer 6" barrel, and IIRC, experimenters using Cooper's personal pistol achieved results significantly surpassing mine.


COSteve, 165gr at 1589 FPS is impressive! That is a "fire breathing" 10mm load for sure. I don't recall achieving much more with 165/170 grain bullets than 1400 FPS or so in 5" semi-auto pistols. I had a S&W 610 revolver with 5" barrel that routinely produced higher velocities than my 5" semi-autos. Have to check some old chronograph notes, but doubt similar bullet weights in the revolver got anywhere near what your 6" gun produced.

 

[74A95]

Cooper used a barrel that measured just under 6.5", and in the .223 cases approached 1750 fps with 125 grain bullets, and 2000 fps with 90 grain bullets.

Cooper, J. 1973. Debut of the “Super Cooper” 9mm Magnum. Guns and Ammo, December 1973, Vol. 17, #12, pp. 30-33.

 

[rock185]

74A95, thanks for the info. I didn't remember the actual numbers, but your info is consistent with my recollection that others far exceeded my results with that longer barrel.

 

[stagpanther]

This has been a very interesting thread--and has reminded me it has been a very long time since I fired my 9 x 25 Dillon, so I whipped up some cartridges and will see how it goes. The Glock 20 sf has never been a gun I could get a really good grip on; but it is powerful.

 

[Radny97]

At the end of the day, converting a 10mm pistol to 9x23 isn't super cheap and simple. There's a barrel change, mag swap (or modification), and for reliability i would want a slide dedicated.

FWIW 9x23 is capable of 357 mag ballistics with all bullet weights, in a pistol with roughly the same dimensional capacity as 9mm. Glock should partner with Winchester and be all over this. There would be a market for true, full 357 mag capabilities in a service sized high capacity semi-auto.

Yep


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[stagpanther]

Here are the results of some of the warmer Dillon loads above--though not my hottest. The TacTx's have a bucket-size hollow point, so they peel velocity off fast. I'm going to order some extreme penetrators out of curiousity.

The glock 20 is the perfect platform in terms of shooting the "big bangers"with aplomb--my ability to shoot it well unfortunately isn't what I wish it could be.

 

[COSteve]

Really interesting discussion generated from the OP's post you guys. I recall reading of that 9mm Mag. 115gr at 1475 FPS back in the day. No doubt easily achieved with the 9X23 Win. now days. Perhaps boutique loaders are already doing that? FWIW, I experimented a bit with Col. Cooper's "Super 9"/Super Cooper, using .223 cases trimmed to .900". In a 5" barrel, I got to 1625 FPS with a 115 JHP before deciding that discretion is the better part of valor, and not pushing my experiments further. Cooper's gun had a longer 6" barrel, and IIRC, experimenters using Cooper's personal pistol achieved results significantly surpassing mine.
COSteve, 165gr at 1589 FPS is impressive! That is a "fire breathing" 10mm load for sure. I don't recall achieving much more with 165/170 grain bullets than 1400 FPS or so in 5" semi-auto pistols. I had a S&W 610 revolver with 5" barrel that routinely produced higher velocities than my 5" semi-autos. Have to check some old chronograph notes, but doubt similar bullet weights in the revolver got anywhere near what your 6" gun produced.

The 'secret' is the 6" KKM target barrel vs a 4.6"-5" stock barrel. Power Pistol absolutely loves longer target barrels with a bit tighter chambers. As I said in other threads here, my neighbor's stock length G20, shooting my handloads, produced something around to 175+fps slower velocities than my custom G20L did. In addition, my G20L also produces less muzzle rise and a lower felt recoil (more of a push) because the extra 4¾oz of weight at the muzzle balances the pistol better, especially with the 17+1 rds on board ready for anything.

28% longer sight radius, better balance, smoother recoil control, less muzzle flip, faster recovery for second shots, and all in a package that's more compact, lighter, holds 3 times the capacity, and produces higher velocities with larger, heavier bullets than a 6" S&W 686. What's not to like about a 6" G40?

 

[Sevens]

I missed this (recent!) conversation the first time around and I will add my props for all the great discussion and commentary that is in it.

I found this thread with a quick search for 9x23, because I came in to a deal for a small stash of factory new, primed Winchester 9x23 Win brass. I couldn't pass it up.

The timing is fortuitous -- I recently added a pistol in an even more oddball chambering and one that absolutely belongs in this conversation: a Smith & Wesson Performance Center 3566 Limited, in the obscure .356 TS&W.

I'd love to hear more chatter on this subject and on the .356 TSW round. Doomed from day-minus-one it seems. Now I have an accessory and factory fitted 9x19 barrel for this new-to-me grail gun, but I have the original .356 TSW barrel as well. And as I have heard... I can lop 1.5mm off some 9x23 Win brass and have .356 TSW brass as a result?

Let's hear more about all of these nutty, ballsy 9mm's!

 

[74A95]

I missed this (recent!) conversation the first time around and I will add my props for all the great discussion and commentary that is in it.

I found this thread with a quick search for 9x23, because I came in to a deal for a small stash of factory new, primed Winchester 9x23 Win brass. I couldn't pass it up.

The timing is fortuitous -- I recently added a pistol in an even more oddball chambering and one that absolutely belongs in this conversation: a Smith & Wesson Performance Center 3566 Limited, in the obscure .356 TS&W.

I'd love to hear more chatter on this subject and on the .356 TSW round. Doomed from day-minus-one it seems. Now I have an accessory and factory fitted 9x19 barrel for this new-to-me grail gun, but I have the original .356 TSW barrel as well. And as I have heard... I can lop 1.5mm off some 9x23 Win brass and have .356 TSW brass as a result?

Let's hear more about all of these nutty, ballsy 9mm's!

You might want to start a new thread with 356 TSW in the title 'cause it might get lost here.

 

[Sevens]

Also-- the 9x25, a 10mm case necked down to 9mm: is this brass easily formed with simply a sizing die and some case lube, going slowly? I have experience necking .44 Mag brass to .357-44 Bain & Davis and that round is precisely that easy.