Substitute 9x21 data for 9x23 data?

[El Bibliotecario]

Just as it seems reasonable to safely use .38 Special loading data for loads in .357 cases, so it seems reasonable to use the 9x21 reloading data in the Lyman Pistol and Revolver Handbook for loading 9x23 cases, allowing for a .02mm difference in seating depth and consequent overall cartridge length. Am I missing anything here?

[Der Gebirgsjager]

On the surface this sounds O.K. What firearm is involved?

[El Bibliotecario]

On the surface this sounds O.K. What firearm is involved?

*laff* Not, as you possibly suspected, an Astra 400. A Colt 9x23 Govt Model

[jdfoxinc]

The 9x21 is loaded the same as the 9x19 in Europe. The 9x21 was developed when the EU made it illegal for civilian ownership of a military/NATO caliber weapon. The 9x23 was developed to 'make major In IPSIC matches, like the 9mm Dillon.

[26Charlie]

i used 9x19 data in the 9 mm Largo Astra 400, with cast bullets, once the brass came available. That was quite a while after the Astras were available on the surplus market. I don't know about the other 9s.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

*laff* Not, as you possibly suspected, an Astra 400. A Colt 9x23 Govt Model

Verrry Good., El Bibliotecario! You're psychic. Exactly the possibilities I entertained. I suspected that you had a Colt, but also considered you might shoot the 9x23 in the Astra. I am an Astra fan/collector, so that was a natural progression.
I guess you want to download and still have something effective? Nothing at all wrong with the 9mm Largo round. Like others have said, I have used 9x19mm info for the Largo quite successfully. I believe that in today's world they are considered equal, the Parabellum and Largo, but originally it was not so, with the Largo having the edge. There just isn't that much 9mm Largo info to be found in current manuals, so I suspect the recommendation of interchanging load info stems more from that than precise fact.

I recently purchased some very nice cast 122 gr. 9mm .356" dia. boolits from Casting Machine of this forum. This because I acquired one each Astra 400 and 600/43 on Gunbroker and wanted to try them out, but didn't want to subject them to corrosive Spanish surplus ammo of which I have a pretty good stockpile. Also, the shape of Casting Machine's boolits looked like they might be pretty effective with their flat noses, but still shaped to feed well. So I spent one day researching and loading 50 rounds for each pistol, and settled on 3.8 gr. of Bullseye for the 9x19 and 4.6 gr. for the Largo. Then, reconsidering the entire thing because of the fact that so many folks and manuals consider the two rounds to share data, I became a little apprehensive about the 4.6 gr. Largo loading, and was even considering a thread here for opinions if it would be safe. But, after checking and rechecking the manual (which had listed 4.8 gr. and I had dropped back to 4.6 gr.) I found an even slightly hotter load published in an older manual, and decided to try it. The Astra 400 handled it very well, and it proved quite accurate. So, considering that your Colt is newer and very likely stronger, being built for the 9x23mm, you might try this Astra 400 load. You could also see what's listed for .38 Super ACP for which there are many loads published. I used factory new Starline 9mm Largo brass from Midway.

[rintinglen]

Taking a quick check of Speer Reloading Manual #14, pp 853 and 858, comparing the data for the 9mm Luger with the 9mm Largo, with 115 grain bullets shows little variance. In most cases, top end loads were within.1 grains of one another. Interestingly, while most loadings showed the Largo using the larger amount of powder, but in a few cases, the situation was reversed with the smaller case using the larger charge. Given that they allege the 9 mm Luger loadings were 35,000 psi or less, while the 9 mm Largo loadings were held to 30,000 psi in deference to older Astra and Star pistols, I would have no qualms about loading 9 x 23 brass with 9 x 19 loads. At least, I would trust published loads from reputable sources. Random writings from unkown internet sources maybe not so much.

I would not use any 38 Super data. Starting loads in the same Speer manual for the 38 Super were from .5 to 1.4 grains heavier than the maximum 9mm Largo loading with the same powder/bullet combination.

[dtknowles]

Just as it seems reasonable to safely use .38 Special loading data for loads in .357 cases, so it seems reasonable to use the 9x21 reloading data in the Lyman Pistol and Revolver Handbook for loading 9x23 cases, allowing for a .02mm difference in seating depth and consequent overall cartridge length. Am I missing anything here?

There are at least 6 different 9x23 cartridges and reading the rest of the posts your gun is chambered for 9x23 Win

Not 9mm Largo

Not 38 APC

Not 38 Super

Not 9mm Bergmann–Bayard

Not 9mm Steyr

What are you using for brass?

9mm Largo brass will have more internal volume than 9 x 23 brass. The same load will produce more pressure and velocity in the 9 x 23 Win brass but the 9 x 23 Win brass can handle more pressure. I would think that 38 super data would be better than 9 x 21 data. All that said why not use 9 x 23 Win data?

There are a few loads in this article and good discussion.

https://www.shootingtimes.com/editorial/cartridge-review-9x23-winchester/99601

I have a very unusual 9 x 23 it is more like a 9 x 25 as it is a CZ52 with a 9mm barrel chambered for 9 x 23 but will run with cartridges with an overall length of 1.38" instead of only 1.30" This allows for a greater variety of bullets especially heavier ones and more velocity at lower pressures, but you do have to burn more powder. I have used largo brass, 38 Super brass and 9 x 23 Win brass.

SAAMI max avg. pressure for 9 x 23 Win is 55K psi vs. 35K psi for .357 mag.

Tim

[nicholst55]

Hodgdon lists a total of one load for the 9X23 Winchester on their website, with a 125 grain JHP and W231 powder. That's not very helpful, really.

[dtknowles]

Hodgdon lists a total of one load for the 9X23 Winchester on their website, with a 125 grain JHP and W231 powder. That's not very helpful, really.

The link I posted has 10 loads.

Tim

[nicholst55]

The link I posted has 10 loads.

Tim

Indeed it does. I had a desire to own a 9X23 Winchester 1911 at one time, but I got over it. It really sounds like an excellent cartridge, but I feel it's too much of a niche cartridge. Read that as: ammo and brass too difficult to locate, and the pistol that I truly WANT (essentially a Concealed Carry Officer in 9X23) is not available from a factory - neither are the magazines to facilitate building one myself.

[dtknowles]

Indeed it does. I had a desire to own a 9X23 Winchester 1911 at one time, but I got over it. It really sounds like an excellent cartridge, but I feel it's too much of a niche cartridge. Read that as: ammo and brass too difficult to locate, and the pistol that I truly WANT (essentially a Concealed Carry Officer in 9X23) is not available from a factory - neither are the magazines to facilitate building one myself.

I would think that 38 super mags would work fine.

I don't think if it as niche as much as uncommon. It is a .357 sig without the short neck problems. It is a .357 mag. in a semi-auto. Mine is lighter than a S&W mdl 19 or a 1911 commander and thinner than either and holds 8 + 1 rounds. The only thing not to like is the location of the mag release.

Tim