9x19 to 9x17 and a question for casters


Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Gear & Accessories > Ammunition & Reloading > 9x19 to 9x17 and a question for casters

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-04-2011, 02:17 AM   #1
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
BigByrd47119's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 3,401
Liked 1102 Times on 677 Posts
Likes Given: 2389

Default 9x19 to 9x17 and a question for casters

Allow me to start off by saying thanks for the patience! I know at least the first question must have been covered before.

Can the 9x19 be trimmed to 9x17? I cant see an issue with this, but I dont want to find out you cant the hard way...

For you casters out there: What can be done voluntarily to effect change in the .380 round to allow for more reliable expansion? Is the issue related to the jacket? Perhaps a softer bullet itself would facilitate more effective expansion? Could a deeper cavity make the change I would like to see? Can any of these things be done without bleeding off massive quantities of penetration? Please! Someone create a .380 round that will end this ".380 isnt effective" debate that we always hear!

Thanks again.



__________________

“Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.”
---Ron Paul

"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetuate it."
---Dr. Martin Luther King

"If you think we are free today, you know nothing about tyranny and even less about freedom."
---Tom Braun

BigByrd47119 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 09-04-2011, 06:23 AM   #2
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Tucson,AZ, for now
Posts: 214
Liked 7 Times on 7 Posts

Default

Of course you can trim a 9x19 case to same length as a 9x17.
However, the 9x19 is a very tapered case with a case head diameter of 0.394", while the 9x17 is much less tapered and has a smaller case head.
It "might" work, but why ruin good brass?



__________________
noylj is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2011, 01:45 PM   #3
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
c3shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Third bunker on the right,Central Virginia
Posts: 17,059
Liked 9381 Times on 4045 Posts
Likes Given: 1473

Default

Developed by different people at different times and different places. Not a good idea to try swapping.

9x19mm_parabellum.jpg

380acp.jpg

__________________

What we have here is... failure- to communicate.

c3shooter is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2011, 04:07 PM   #4
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 659
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts

Default

For reliable expansion, the .380 is simply limited by power.

For reliable expansion, you need velocity. But, for reliable penetration of an expanded bullet, you need heavier mass for the caliber. The .380 doesn't have the power to achieve both of these consistently. Usually what you end up with are lighter bullets that expand well and penetrate poorly, or heavy bullets that don't consistently expand.

There are two options, IMO: A lighter bullet but with a small cavity, so that expansion is relatively moderate for the bullet weight. This will keep the bullet from opening up too much and stopping the bullet too early. Otherwise, a heavy bullet but with a large cavity, to hopefully allow for expansion at the lower velocities. But, those are just conjector.

If I carried a .380, it would be with truncated-cone (because it's still more effective than round-nosed Ball), non-expanding bullets. That way I KNOW that if I can put the bullets where they need to go, they'll make it the rest of the way. I wouldn't like the idea of not knowing whether or not my bullets are just going to stop in the BG's bicep to let him shoot me with his other hand.

__________________
Lindenwood is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2011, 02:50 PM   #5
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
BigByrd47119's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 3,401
Liked 1102 Times on 677 Posts
Likes Given: 2389

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by noylj View Post
It "might" work, but why ruin good brass?
Because I no longer own a 9mm and 9mm casing is literally less than a dime a dozen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by c3shooter View Post
Developed by different people at different times and different places. Not a good idea to try swappin.
Point taken. Its a real shame I have to say. I might have to do some more research into the topic and see if anyone else out there has done it and what kind of results they have got. Thanks for saying so though, god knows what I mighta done to myself

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindenwood View Post
For reliable expansion, you need velocity. But, for reliable penetration of an expanded bullet, you need heavier mass for the caliber. The .380 doesn't have the power to achieve both of these consistently. Usually what you end up with are lighter bullets that expand well and penetrate poorly, or heavy bullets that don't consistently expand.

There are two options, IMO: A lighter bullet but with a small cavity, so that expansion is relatively moderate for the bullet weight. This will keep the bullet from opening up too much and stopping the bullet too early. Otherwise, a heavy bullet but with a large cavity, to hopefully allow for expansion at the lower velocities. But, those are just conjector.

If I carried a .380, it would be with truncated-cone (because it's still more effective than round-nosed Ball), non-expanding bullets. That way I KNOW that if I can put the bullets where they need to go, they'll make it the rest of the way. I wouldn't like the idea of not knowing whether or not my bullets are just going to stop in the BG's bicep to let him shoot me with his other hand.
This pretty much falls in line with what I expected. How would one go about creating such an experimental bullet? Or perhaps a better question is why hasnt anyone done so?

My theory on JHP .380 ammo is this. If the round fails to expand due to bullet failure (clogged cavity) then I have essentially a ball round. No harm no foul. However, if the round does expand, I am happy with 10 inches of penetration. Ballistics that I have seen consisting of gel, pork ribs, a cotten shirt, and a heavy coat have indicated that 10 inches of penetration are consistently possible with certain rounds. Oddly, the one round that did horribly was Hornidays Critical Defense, which penetrated the ballistics gel to about 3 inches and shreded itself to 25+ pieces. Not confidence inspiring. Golden Sabber however was a different story.


__________________

“Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.”
---Ron Paul

"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetuate it."
---Dr. Martin Luther King

"If you think we are free today, you know nothing about tyranny and even less about freedom."
---Tom Braun

BigByrd47119 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
.243 win load question and powder question Mantids88 Ammunition & Reloading 8 10-17-2010 12:55 AM