C2E experimental 9mm

While at SLICS last week I picked up the complete IAA journal CD from Gary Muckel which has all journals up until 2005. While pouring over the 2000 to 2005 journals (which were previously unavailable on CD) I found a piece written by Jean-Francois Chavalley on an experimental 9mm loading that was possibly of Fiocchi origin, or loaded by Fiocchi anyway. Its 99gr projectile consisted of an aluminum disc with a brass pin screwed into it - and this pin held a spring in place against the disc. There were sections of a lead core around this and the bullet was jacketed if I gather the description correctly? Does anyone know what became of this? Here is the photo from IAA journal #440 - Nov/Dec 2004:

and a box label from a 50rd plain-white box of this ammo:

I’ll email Jean-Francois in the meantime, but I wondered if anyone here had seen these yet, other than in the journal? This would be a great one for Paul to section!


The headstamp is GFL 9mm LUGER in small letters. The primer is black and the primer seal is red. Following is a photo.

I documented this item in 2005 but I believe it was produced in 2002. These appear to have been a one-time experimental and have not shown up since.



Wow, that’s a pretty ambitious and gadgety design. Thanks!

Remembered I had a photo of a cutaway of this cartridge.

I have no idea why it has this complex construction. Why the spring? When it hits a hard target is the brass pin intended to push back and shear the threads on the aluminum plate and allow the cartridge body to break up? If so what good is the spring? A strange bullet. Would appreciate opinions on why it is constructed this way.



I think your estimation of the way the bullet is supposed to work is correct. This is sort of like a 21st century backwards-functioning Omnishock that actually works I would guess. When the brass pin / bullet-tip hits a hard enough surface it will drive the screw in and cause the bullet base to expand and splinter at the back of the projectile which should open up the rear of the wound cavity as it enters allowing for great penetration at the front since the solid copper tongs in front shouldn’t mushroom too much. It might be like a backwards hollow-point in this sense, where the rear of the bullet opens up and the front of the bullet stays true. As for the spring, my experience with springs on screws like this is that they are to keep tension on screws so that they don’t move unless they are intentionally acted upon. This way the screw stays exactly where the factory might have wanted it to stay despite shipping or jostling of any kind, until real pressure finally presses or screws it in. This is all a best guess, otherwise the project almost looks like the fanciful daydream of an engineer with too much time on their hands.

The 9mm projectile in its pristine form is fairly small. The bits and pieces coming off of the back of the projectile would be very small and could not penetrate deep enough or cause enough bleeding to perform the main function of an expanding bullet, which is to cut a wider wound channel to allow more bleeding, a quicker loss of blood to the brain, and unconsciousness, which is the idea and why big bullet diameters are often better fight-stopping cartridges. I don’t see how, by the theory expressed, this Fiocchi bullet would be any better than a 9mm FMJ projectile. I am not expert enough on the dynamics of such construction to know if the theory expressed is valid or not, however. One thing is sure, there would be surely a lot of junk for the doctor to take out of the wound! Methinks this is another “wonder bullet.”

John Moss

My 2¢ is that Matt & John have it’s design figured correctly but perhaps on a ‘soft’ body it might not perform/break-up as designed? So perhaps the intended use was in the frangible market against a hard backstop? Just a guess… Or maybe for James Bond using a poison bullet?

OK, my $.01 worth on this very interesting design…

The nice section view Lew shows seems to indicate a solid copper forward body with the aluminum plug held against its base only by the spring force acting on the brass plunger being pushed forward. Without the spring, the base plug / plunger assembly would be free to move axially the distance seen in the forward body cavity that the spring occupies.

Total guess on intended function: As the projectile enters a soft target, the plunger is pushed back and the forward body acts as a typical hollow point. The fancy part is what happens in the rear as the aluminum plug moves away from the forward body creating a void. The void’s vacuum wants to be filled thus causing more disruption of the soft material it’s passing through. That, or someone had a whole bunch of ball point pen parts they couldn’t find another use for…


Hi Matt & Lew, while I was searching through my files for some information on the AP round recently posted I came across this design discussed years ago. This is a controlled expansion bullet patented by Fiocchi in 2004 (application filled July 28, 2003). As you can see, there are several differences with the sectioned specimen (an O-ring is used instead of the spring, for example).

DK - I was looking at this thread again. Was the initial question a joke? I ask that, because your signature line cartridge, below your name and on every one of your entries, appears to be the cartridge in question, but you were asking, for instance, if Paul had cut one away yet, although you have a very nice cutaway in your own picture below your name.

Were those same pictures there when you first asked about this cartridge?

Just curious.

John - no that little photo in the signature line was not there when I had first asked the question, and it was probably a year after that thread that I came up with the idea of inserting a photo into the signature. I chose it because it seems to exemplify the extreme lengths that some will go to in search of a “better mouse trap” in terms of gadgety projectile creations.

I saw one of these in person at SLICS last week as Pepper had one in his section display - very neat.

It seems as though the acquisition of the “EMB” enhanced mono bloc design from Hirtenberger by Fiocchi (around 2009?) put an end to this projectile idea since the EMB is a much less costly and more simple version which achieves a similar goal.

O.K. - that makes me feel better. I tend to agree with you that the EMB put an end to this design.