Defence Industries 9mm drill round

Still digging through my old dummies. Since this is not my things forgive me if this is a dumb question. Judging from the primer crimp marks on the base this was probably made from a fired case. The case is blackened and the bullet is attracted to a magnet. The primer pocket is completely drilled out and the case is filled with something? Is this a typical DI drill round construction?

DI 9mm dummy primer pocket


1 Like

I have one the same date,except my case is not blackened and mine has 4 small holes drilled through it…Pete.

Paul - the 9 mm dummy rounds with blackened cases are quite typical for Canada. However, they don’t always show residue primer crimps. I have a specimen that matches yours in features, but sans the triangular residue crimps. For world war two yearsthree, I have in my own collection, only the headstamps DC 42 9 MM (Two types - blackened case and nickeled case), DI 42 9 MM (four variations) and DI 43 9 MM (three variations). All three of these headstamps have darkened-case variants.

John M

Some 9mm pics,2 dummys DI 1942,1943,plus some loaded rounds in
DI 1942,43and 1944.I ever wondered if they made a 1945 in DI.The 2
DA 1945 come in brass case and chrom,is the chrom case already
commercial production???The 2 P24 stamps are for perusal the one is
Swiss (THUN) the other FN.See difference in the 4s.

Sorry some of the pics did not turn out well

I tried 2 new ones hope the are better

The DAC-headstamped 9 mm rounds with plated cases (chrome or nickel?) are not commercial loads, but rather proof loads. These 1945-made proof cartridges come in two different variations, relating to the primer crimping method.

I do not think you will ever find a “DI”-headstamped 9 x 19 mm Parabellum cartridge dated “45.” None have ever been reported, and Lew Curtis, in his 9 mm Parabellum headstamp book reports this headstamp on 9 mm only for 1942, 1943, and 1944. It is likely, even though Defense Industries existed after WWII, that its primary function after 1944 was in the shutting down of their activities. In 1945 and 1946, the headstamp on 9 mm was DAC (broad arrow enclosed in the “C”). I think the 1946 date is quite scarce. I have never seen one, but again, it is reported in Lew’s book, which is certainly the best single source we have for headstamp, including reported dates, on that caliber.

In researching my answer to this thread, I came across a piece of information that I had either forgotten, or that had passed by me in previous years, concerning the green primer seal found on DI 42-dated 9 mm rounds. According to Mr. J. W. Houlden, an executive with the Canadian Ammunition Industry, the green seal denoted an older case loaded some time after its manufacture. “Ref. your questions, green primer lacquer until 1965 used on cases of old manufacture loaded at later date, ie: DI 42 case loaded at Dominion Arsenal 1950 (example only).” I think his note in parenthesis, “example only,” likely indicated he did not recall the date of the 9 mm round known, with green seal. In actuality, the headstamp on that cartridge is “DI 44 9 MM.” I have not seen the green seal on any other dated case.

Canada produced, during WWII and after, an amazing amount of 9 mm dummy-round variations. I doubt any of us has seen them all, at least in any single collection.

John Moss

Thanks John for the reply,learned something again
These nickeld cases being proof loads was a surprise
Thanks Sherryl

after some checking,the info you gave,is right on,there is nothing on the
1942 rounds in regard to color,however I have 3 1944 and 2 have the
green annulus the third has nothing.please help me out once more I have
a 9mm dominion with a chromed case,is that a proof load also?The info
given me when I got said made for the Mexican police.

The DOMINION headstamped cartridge with a nickel case is ordinary ball, not a proof load. I, too, have been told it was a Mexican contract. The nickel case would fit in with that. I have a .38 Auto (Probably Super) with a nickel case, which, of course, in .38 Super is the norm. I got this one in 1972, and was told, and confirmed, that it was a contract for Mexico as well. it was made by Sellier & Bellot, and the entire headstamp is only the caliber marking; it is anonymous as to the maker, but the German friend, Manfred Buetter (RIP) I got it from had information on it from contacts at S&B.

I do not know why the Canadian rounds such as you describe have no primer seal. My DC 42 and DI 42 headstamps both have purple primer seals, the norm for 9 mm ball ammunition in “The Empire” during this period. However, I have two DI 43 rounds that have no visible seal. One has three triangular primer crimps, normal on some of these round, while the other has SIX of triangular crimps. Things like this may simply be anomalies that exist today because they were rejected, or perhaps they were accepted because of the “War Needs” situation at the time. I simply don’t know. If purposeful, I don’t know what, if anything, the lack of a colored-primer seal indicates.

John Moss

thanks for the reply,I did some more checking,I have more 42,43 and 2 more
1944 non has a seal except one 1944 round,and yes of course they all
have the triangular stitching around the primer.
however I am at it again I found some 7,65mm amongst my pistol rounds
One has the STAMP GEVELOT 7,65 with 2 stars?? the other is a SFM
with the matching logo sign and 3 36 case is steel.The Gevelot one is
brass and has a red annulus.The third one is 9mm short or 380 brass case
nickel bullet with the STAMP D W A and a star can you help??

Sheryl - not sure what information it is you want. Gevelot and SFM (Société Française des Munitions). They made ammunition under both the Gevelot name and the SFM name. The factory was at Issy-Les-Moulineaux.

Your .380 was made by Deutsche Werke A.-G. of Germany, which was acquired c.1924 by the Gustav Geschow & Company, of Durlach, Germany.

Please check the date on your steel case S.F.M. 7.65 mm cartridge, and also confirm whether it is caliber 7.65 mm French Long or 7.65 Browning (.32 Auto). If 7.65 mm Browning, the date kind of throws me. These were made in steel case primarily in the first years following the end of WWII. My versions with the dated headstamp on steel cases are:

4 S.F.M. 46 GG - FMJ CN FMJ bullet, brass flat primer cup (“GG” as explained below).

1 S.F.M. 47 GG - FMJ GM RN bullet, brass, domed primer cup (the “GG” are in Monagram Style, back to back and intertwined, and stand for the old name of the factory, “Gevelot & Gaupillat,” used as the full name, according to a German ammo book I have, only from 1883-1884.

I have not seen a steel-case French .32 Auto Round that early, not a steel-case French 7.65 French Long cartridge with that style of dating or from S.F.M. that early. I do not collect dates in this caliber, but I am fairly cognizant when I see something unusual in a caliber I collect, and would have acquired such an early date, if available, or noted it if not, even if just to replace a higher date I had already.

Is it possible that your S.F.M Steel case round’s date is actually “3 46” as that would fit right in?

John Moss

Yes you were right,that french 7,65mm is a brass case I cleaned the bottom off.However
that whole case had the color of steel.It is SFM the entwined GG and the date 3- 36
the 7.65mm Gevelot is listed in the IAA journal as an VRS(531)I would like your
opinion on that.You know many moons ago a similar thing happened to me with 2----303cal
I would have sworn they are steel,until someone from the Forum told me otherwise.

You can’t always tell about case material, which is why a magnet is such a valuable tool to a cartridge collector. I have a Swedish brass-washed steel case 9 mm Para round that looks more like brass than does the same headstamped brass-case specimen in my collection!

As it appears on normal calibers, Gevelot, representing simply the company name, is a common headstamp. However, there is a cartridge case type referred to as the 7.65 mm
mm S.F.M. Beaux, which is listed in Erlmeier-Brandt Volume III as item 77A, on page 49. One of the synonyms shown for this cartridge is “7.65 mm Gevelot.” This is a bottle-necked cartridge with a (nominal) 18.3-18.5 mm case length. I have a NUPE case with separate bullet in this case type. The case is brass, with a copper primer. The headstamp on mine I presume to be * S.F.M. * GG (I say “presume” because it is not well stamped, and only an off-center “S” is visible, but obviously due to its position on the head and the rest of the headstamp, should say “S.F.M.”

I do not know why “Collector Cartridge Prices” on page 53 of IAA Journal 531 (Jan/Feb 2020 issue) shows the cartridge “7.65 mm Gevelot” as being item 71A in E&B, as there is no item 71A in Volumes I or III. Further, the 7.65 mm Beaux, which they also show in the IAA Price LIst as “E-B 77A 7.65 S.F.M. Beaux” is the same cartridge, and properly shown as such on the IAA List.

In summary, do not confuse the 7.65 Browning or the 7.65 French Long cartridges headstamp “Gevelot” with the rare, bottle-necked cartridge shown, erroneously in my opinion, on the IAA List, as 7.65 mm “Gevelot” and then repeated on the list as “7.65 mm S.F.M. Beaux.”

The cartridge was evidently requested by the Italian company of Leon Beaux, which had strong French ties. It is shown on S.F.M. drawing number 10137 dated 18 August 1906. The only cartridges known were reportedly found during a disposal of obsolete items as the S.F.M. factory in 1984. See E-B Volume III item number 77A for measurements and a picture of this cartridge.

John Moss

John, the combined, 706 page volume of Erlmeier-Brandt published in 1998 has number 71A, titled 7,65 mm Gévelot. The shown specimen is from the collection of Antonius Rauch.
Headstamp is S.F.M. * GG *
The main difference is the case length: 71A 18.00 mm, 77A is a 18.30 mm. Hope this helps.

Thanks for the info,even I have all 3 Brandt books,I did not realize that the word BEAUX
referred to a cartridge by itself like 71A i had assumed the word BEAUX was part of a
regular normal 7,65mm round I looked it up and things beginn to make sense now.
however the 2 rounds in my possession are exactly the same given the normal tolerances
Yes the ignorance is on my part,I had always wondered were these numbers inside the
page of the Journal were coming from and what they were not realizing they were most
often from E+B.I will pay much more attention to them in the future.And yes they will give
a much better idea what one is dealing with.I will try to post some pics when the light is
right for making them.As said before they are both the same.One is stamped SMF GG 3-36
the other GEVELOT 7,65 and 2 stars. John thanks a lot

Peelen - that is a big help. I think I have the combined edition of E-B. I will have to check. I seem to recall buying one when it came out, but found so many uncorrected errors, even though Tony had sent Brandt a bunch of corrections which were evidently totally ignored by him, that I simply put it away and I use only my originals.

That’s why I missed 71A. My own case (with bullet, but either never loaded, or the bullet pulled and powder discarded before I got it. Generally, I keep rounds in the same state as that when I received it) is Item 77A, with the 18.3 mm case length. It has the same headstamp as you mention for the 71A version.

Thanks for the correction. I guess I am going to have to resurrect that combined volume, if I can even find it (sometimes I give away books I have no further use for). I had forgotten, if I ever noticed at all, that there were additions to it not in Volume III.

Sherryl - sorry for the wrong information I gave you. I use the E-B books extensively, because aside from the revolver stuff, they address my main collecting specifically, although if I find I have given away the revised edition, at my age, I will not bother to seek out another copy.

Mea culpa.


John you did not give me wrong info,as a matter of fact I appreciated what you did
you made me aware of something that I would never have thought of myself,however
it makes one aware of how much there is to learn in this business.John sometimes
I fell sorry for the ones that are coming into this at this time.Boy did I pay a price for
learning over a period of more than 50 years,

Here are the 2 rounds in question