My Last Finds-Early 7.62 NATO and related items


#1

I read recently great information about the incendiary LC 69
I am looking for information about :

  • the aluminum case T 9
  • the pre-nato observation F A 51
  • the pre-nato F A 52 with a 10 ogive brass projectile who no react to magnet
  • the tracer + FA 59
  • the + FA 65 with a two part projectile
  • the caseless

Thanks
Michel


#2

Michel

I can help a little. I will do the easy ones and leave the rest to the experts who know more about them than I ever will.

LC 69 Incendiary - Described on the Forum earlier. The bullet is a Cal .30 M1 Incendiary and should have an added cut cannelure for crimping.

Aluminum cased T9 - One of several loaded by Olin (WCC) in the late 60s or early 70s as a reserach project. Bullet should be Ball GM/steel core.

FA51 Observation - If the bullet is 7 ogive it is the T103E1. If it’s 10 ogive it’s the T103E2.

FA 52 w/10 ogive brass bullet - If the bullet is solid GM it would be one of the later Overhead Fire Application bullets, the XM178. However, I’ve never seen an OFA solid bullet this early. Maybe a dingbat?

Tracer FA (+) 59 - An M62 Tracer marked for special tests at Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG). Several variations of the yellow band are known. I’ve never seen anything describing what the “special tests” were.

Ray


#3

Further information on the T103E1 observation cartridge (including a sectioned cartridge) can be found in an earlier thread at http://iaaforum.org/forum3/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=8009&p=57295&hilit=t103#p57295

The cartridge with the solid brass bullet is not a dingbat but an experimental loading from 1952

NATO Dave


#4

Hey Dave - Thanks for the clarification on the experimental solid brass load. It’s one that you must have been hiding. ;-) ;-)

Did it have a “T” number?

One more cartridge that I have to look for.

With your OK I will keep a hard copy of the box in my files.

Ray


#5

The label for those experimental solid bullets says that it (bullet) is the same dimensions as the T65E4 bullet which was the FAT21. Since the OFA XM 178 used the same bullet, I think I’m safe in assuming that the experimental was the prototype for the XM 178.

Correct??

Ray


#6

Is the weight of this solid brass bullet known?


#7

JPeelen

Yes, it’s 150 grains +/-. Mine weighs 151.7 grains.

Ray


#8

Thanks for these greats information
Any idea about the right one with an odd projectile ?


#9

The 2nd round from the left with what appears to be an orange plastic bullet and an orange plastic primer is a commercial dummy is probably a commercial product made by S. T. Action Pro Inc, Sharpes Florida. I first encountered them in 2001 and they are made in a wide variety of calibers, all apparently using whatever cases are available. Most of their later production of pistol ammunition has been in Starline cases.

The only question I have about this identification is that the S.T. Action Pro 9mm rounds have a depression in the orange primer which is not shown in your drawing.

Very nice cartridges-good post!

Thanks,
Lew


#10

I need to clarify my last post.

The bullet weight that I gave, 151.7 grains, is the actual weight of a bullet from an XM178 OFA cartridge, hs FA (+) 62. It is not a bullet from an FA X30-1792. I’ve been advised that the Woodin Lab has a carton of the experimental cartridges, and that three bullets that have been weighed range from 132 to 137 grains.

The XM178 bullet that I weighed has dimensions identical to the FAT21 bullet as loaded in the T65E4 cartridge. Since the Experimental carton label indicates that same thing, I assumed the bullets would be the same also. Apparantly I was wrong. Either the bullets at the Lab are of a different material or they have different dimensions than what is indicated on the carton label.

Ray


#11

Ry
Thanks for the clarification.

Note that the XM178 bullet is made of gilding metal (a soft brass most likely 95% copper/5% zinc) while the bullet from the FA X30-1792 lot is most likely formed from a brass alloy with a lower copper content. This accounts for the difference in color between the brass bullet and those with a guilding metal jacket that can be seen in the photo in the original post. The density of brass varies depending on the copper/zinc ratio - the higher the copper content the greater the density. Assuming that the bullets are the same dimension, those from the FA X30-1792 lot (lower copper/zinc ratio) would weigh less than XM178’s (high copper/zinc ratio). This is consistent with the weights from the Woodin lab. It would be nice if the Woodin lab could confirm that the dimensions of the FA X30-1792 bullet are indeed the same as that found in the T65E4 cartridge?

NATO Dave


#12

Dave

I agree. They are obviously made from two different materials. Enough to account for the weight difference.

As Ole Olsen would say, “Same ting, only different.”

Ray


#13

[quote=“RayMeketa”]I need to clarify my last post.

The bullet weight that I gave, 151.7 grains, is the actual weight of a bullet from an XM178 OFA cartridge, hs FA (+) 62. It is not a bullet from an FA X30-1792. I’ve been advised that the Woodin Lab has a carton of the experimental cartridges, and that three bullets that have been weighed range from 132 to 137 grains.
Ray[/quote]
I can add that my cartridge weighs 362 grains lighter than the M80 (I don’t have a XM178 to compare)


#14

The two examples I have from lot FA X30-1792 each weigh 362gr. Based on a case weight of 183gr (F A 52) and a powder charge of 44gr, the estimated brass bullet weight is 135gr ie similar to that reported by the Woodin lab. The example of the XM178 bullet I have weighs 153gr.

[quote=“Lew”]The 2nd round from the left with what appears to be an orange plastic bullet and an orange plastic primer is a commercial dummy is probably a commercial product made by S. T. Action Pro Inc, Sharpes Florida. I first encountered them in 2001 and they are made in a wide variety of calibers, all apparently using whatever cases are available. Most of their later production of pistol ammunition has been in Starline cases.

The only question I have about this identification is that the S.T. Action Pro 9mm rounds have a depression in the orange primer which is not shown in your drawing.

Very nice cartridges-good post!

Thanks,
Lew[/quote]
I have 308 WIN rounds from the same package with and without the primer depression.

NATO Dave


#15

For reference purposes, the XM178 cartridge that I disassembled weighs:

Case - 185.3
Bullet - 151.7
Powder 46.3 (Spherical)

Total - 383.3

Ray


#16

My thanks to all for shedding light onto the bullet mass question. You helped me a lot.