SLICS 2014 finds in 9mm-Help Needed!


#1

SLICS was excellent as always with some interesting items showing up, including some I need help on.

The first is a dirty old Dutch blank box, one of three below. The other two are blanks supplied the Dutch military by FN and NWM. It is the third box which captured my attention. Who is “MRP” supplying blanks to Holland in 1968???

I have never heard of MRP nor seen the code on a 9mmP that I recall. The boxes are empty but would love to know what kind and headstamped blanks were in the MRP box.

The next questions deal with two items that came to me for SLICS and one I found in the meeting.


Far Left: This at first glance looks like a normal emp load from 1942, without a primer. First, the lack of a primer could be a manufacturing defect, but this is extremely rare in German WWII 9mm. It could be that the primer was removed, and a close look inside the primer pocket shows a thin line around the inside of the pocket so this is possible but there are no marks around the rim of groove where a a primer puller was fitted. The strange part is that there is no powder and no core in the bullet. As it stands it weighs 68gr. any of these three conditions could be a manufacturing error, but not all three on the same item. The bullet has a German ogive and a magnetic jacket so it looks WWII German. Looks like someone put together a bullet jacket and a case. The overall length is 29mm where German loaded rounds of the period were around 29.6mm so it is slightly short.

Has anyone seen anything similar in German WWII items, for example 7.9. It may have been intended to look like a loaded round but be inert for some training or display reason. I have no idea on this item.

Middle: A tinned case with what appears to be a loaded primer by Kynock in 1960. When I first saw it, I thought “Aluminum case” but it weighs far too much to be aluminum and is non-magnetic so I suspect it is tinned brass though I haven’t made that comparison yet. I have Kynoch dummies in 58 and 59 with a similar hst but these have no primers and the case finish is different. I suspect it is some kind of experimental and that is not unreasonable from the source. Tony E or anyone!!! Any idears???

Far Right: A subcaliber of some sort, but I’ve not seen one like this. 27.6mm in length. The rear hole is 7mm and the front is 4.54mm. There is a very slight shoulder about 3mm from the base and another larger shoulder at 8.36mm. I suspect it is German but have nothing but a gut feel which is often wrong.

Has anyone seen this subcaliber? Does anyone know anything about it?

Any assistance or ideas on these four items would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,
Lew

PS: Thanks to Vic E and to all the rest who put on SLICS and the related events like auctions and seminars who make it such a great event.


#2

Lew, MRP is from France:
ETS MESSIER, BIDOS-PAR-OLORON (BASSES-PYRENEES)


#3

Lew - you say you have never seen MRP. I know you have 9 mm with that headstamp. Magtech Recreational Products, the USA Import headstamp on cartridges made by CBC Brazil, and later dropped by CBC as a headstamp for U.S. Commercial sales, it seems, as all current CBC products sold for the last few years at least, perhaps longer, are back to the CBC Product.

EOD - I cannot comment on your ID but I have no record of this firm being association with the production of 9 mm ammunition. Were the box not for blanks (have never seen a 9 mm Blank from MRP/CBC Brazil) I would say that it would be highly unlikely the round is made by that French firm. I know that often blanks are made by firms specializing in that type of ammunition, much like the case of BF in Norway. Since I don’t know what the French firm actually manufactures, I cannot, in truth, say that the answer is wrong. I can only say that I think the Brazilian connection is probably more likely.

Magtech has been involved in the production of ammunition for specific European police contracts. I have a Magtech Box for 9 mm made for the Norwegian Police (expressed in different terms I have not translated on various sides of the box as Tjeneste Ammunition Politiet, Magtech Patroner; Tilhører Politiet; and Norske Politi.


#4

John, looking at the year of 1968 Brazil sounds more unlikely in my view. But I have to admit that this is not my sphere at all (except for reading codes).
MRP itself is known to make ammunition of larger calibers.

I am sure one of our French friends will clear this up.


#5

And now I found also MRP to be “Munitie Renovatie Peleton”, a Dutch arsenal for ammunition refurbishing. So this could have been repacked ammo made by who ever.

Here our Dutch friends may help us out.


#6

Regarding the 9 mm Para with no bullet core, powder or primer, I had lots of 7.9, both ball and blank (PP33) with no powder or primer. Some had primer crimps, while some of the blanks did not, which is not to say they never had a primer in them; if made from NUPE cases, a blank would not likely have primer crimps. If made from NPE reject cases, or broken down lots of defective 7.9 rounds of other loadings, they could have crimps. I had none with no core in the bullet, although I had a WWI 7.9 round with a normal looking primer, a normal “S” bullet, but without a core, and probably no powder in it. If I had tried to pull the bullet, I would have ruined the case because it had the heaviest, widest segmented bullet crimp I have ever seen on a 7.9. The reason I thought it might be something special is because it had no primer crimps, ever, and that is usually a sign, in that error, of something out of the ordinary (also, of course, possibly a defect but as with your round, three different defects? Not likely. Not impossible though, as I have a 9 mm Makarov made by Barnaul in Russia (commercial) that when found in a full box of otherwise normal rounds, it had a primer crushed sideways into the primer pocket (1), no flash holes (2) and the wrong headstamp, being headstamped ICEBERG 9 mm. Bingo - three defects on one cartridge. Before I got it, the primer fell out and was lost, but I know it was there originally, from the first owners.

I have no info on the 9 mm Adaptor cartridge.


#7

To reiterate what EOD said about MRP: wk2ammo.com/showthread.php?7604-105-mm-HE


#8

Unfortunately, the question still remains with doubts as to whether the “MRP” means it is a reprocessing of older ammunition, or whether it was supplied by Magtech, especially since the box label language is English, not Dutch.

Perhaps Harrie or someone from among the Dutch collectors has one of these boxes with ammo in it and can tell us what the headstamp is on the ammunition. If not MRP or CBC, than it is like the MRP on the box label does stand for a reprocessing of some sort, and are initials for Dutch-language words, as defined by EOD.


#9

Yes MRP stands for (Munitie Renovatie Peleton ) from the dutch army, meaning that the cartridges are repacked and do not have a MRP headstamp but FN and NWM headstamps, for example.


#10

[quote=“JohnMoss”]Unfortunately, the question still remains with doubts as to whether the “MRP” means it is a reprocessing of older ammunition, or whether it was supplied by Magtech, especially since the box label language is English, not Dutch.

Perhaps Harrie or someone from among the Dutch collectors has one of these boxes with ammo in it and can tell us what the headstamp is on the ammunition. If not MRP or CBC, than it is like the MRP on the box label does stand for a reprocessing of some sort, and are initials for Dutch-language words, as defined by EOD.[/quote]

The Dutch now use the English language on their ammunition boxes, including metal boxes for belted (linked) MG ammo. However I don’t know why.

gravelbelly


#11

John, Sorry for my post. Of course there is Magtech. I should have said “in 1968”. This is well before Magtech showed up on the scene and, I suspect, before CBC. I first saw a CBC headstamp in 1975 and MRP in the early 1990s.

Thanks for the info on 7.9s. Much appreciated.

A Dutch rework facility makes sense to me. It also explains the lack of any MRP headstamps on Dutch blanks!

Any ideas on the three cartridges?

Cheers,
Lew


#12

Lew - just my old age showing again. Everything seems like yesterday to me. Of course 1968 is too early for the Magtech headstamp. I did not even pay attention to the date, at all. How stupid of me.

I don’t know how early the 9 mm was made by CBC. Of course, in other calibers, we have CBC cartridges from before 1968 - .45 Auto for example. Regardless, aside from the correct answer we have Gyrojet and EOD, it could not have been from Magtech.

I admit that the language use has me confused too. English-language label, but “MRP” an abbreviation for words in Dutch. Well, it probably does not confuse the Dutch, so no matter. Everything confuses me lately.


#13

John, I had an unfair advantage since I found all three boxes on the Dutch tables at SLICS. I also believe the number “17-A461” is the Dutch designation for their blanks.

A lot of the boxes for the Dutch military are in English, including as I remember one by the Czechs for the Dutch in about 1949!!! Probably just my imagination.

Thanks for the help.
Lew

PS: I compared the weight of the tinned/zinc finished Kynoch case and was surprised that it was consistently 3gr-4gr lighter than the contemporary primed brass cases from the period. This wasn’t a very detail look, but British fired empty Kynoch cases from the 1960s seemed to weigh 63gr to 64gr each and this one weighed 60.0gr which was only slightly less than a Kynoch NUPE case and about 5% lighter than the brass fired empties. Still too heavy to be Titanium or Aluminum, but very interesting.

I went on http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/metal-alloys-densities-d_50.html to check what materials would be about 5% lighter than rolled or drawn brass and the best candidate seemed to be stainless steel. Pure zinc was a bit too light. Lots of stainless steel is non-magnetic. I have a hard time imagining anyone making a cartridge case from stainless steel, but I have an FN made 9mmP with a titanium case and Peter Labbett told me about seeing a 30mm Aden case at RG made out of Iridium (no joke-he was dead serious) which is three times as heavy as brass and more expensive than gold!!! Would have loved to see the project plan justifying that experiment!

Again any help appreciated!!!


#14

Another addition. The emp St+ 4 42, empty unprimed case and empty bullet is interesting because lot 4 of 42 is the first lot using the improved case design (St+ instead of St). I wonder is someone made an inert sample cartridge??? Probably just an interesting coincidence.

Cheers,
Lew


#15

Stainless steel cartridge cases see: iaaforum.org/forum3/viewtopi … eel#p92156


#16

bd, Many thanks! Great report.

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2007smallarms/5_8_07/Sadowski_Leng.pdf

Based on what is in the report, I suspect it would be possible to draw a relatively thin Stainless Steel 9mm case. Still does not seem a reasonable thing to do. Will have to measure more cases and may decide to try to scratch the inside of this case to see if it is just plated brass, which seems by far the most likely material.

Cheers,
Lew


#17

Lew, such extreme measures in weight saving should apply to the main combat loads which usually should consist of rifle ammunition.
IMHO (wih the possibility of being incorrect) this would not make much sense and justify the effort when applied to pistol ammunition.


#18

Adapter…probably fo9r the 4mm RWS/Geco Subcalibre cartridge, for use in centerfire Pistols, either in a simple adaptor, or in a Tube-sleeve Barrel unit. This small caliber Inside primed ( looks like a rimfire, but has no rim as such) has a larger base and Bottle neck, with a 4mm projectile ( making the neck about 4,3mm, for a 4,5 diameter chamber mouth.).

Doc AV


#19

Doc, Thanks for the reply. I dug out a 4mm and tried it, The 4mm slid too far into the subcaliber to be correct. The base of the 4mm was 7mm below the base of the subcaliber. In addition, a 4mm ball from a Swiss Lienhard set drops all the way through. The bore is too small for a .22. The bore is slightly too big for an airgun pellet (0.177 I think) and the pellet falls almost entirely through with just the back skirt holding it in place and the rest of the pellet hanging out the end of the subcaliber. It looks like some type of 4.5mm projectile would work, maybe a slightly different airgun type pellet.

A Winchester shotshell primer fits a bit loosely in the back but will not hold in place and falls out when handled. A .22 short is too long to fit in the back. The CF to RF converter plug from a Lother Walther kit is the right diameter to slide in the rear but will only go halfway in.

It looks to me that a slightly different 4.5mm pellet combined with a shotshell primer just a bit larger in diameter than the standard US primer would also work—I guess I need to find a European Shotshell primer or measure one for me. The Winchester shotshell primer I used is 6.21mm in diameter. Something much loser to 7mm is required.

These subcalibers are difficult to understand unless you have the full kit with all the parts. Many are shaped for an adapter barrel so it is difficult to even decide what caliber they are.

That is why I buy the total kit when I can. Still kick myself for missing a Star kit in 9mm Largo just because it was not 9mmP.

I’m always interested in kits and in photos of kits to help identify these things. I even have an MPS (Millard Brothers Ltd, Scotland) in 38 Special and a Walther WWII or earlier Lother Walther for a PP pistol. Interestingly enough the 4.5mm pellets fit nicely in the subcaliber I pictured in this thread.

If anyone has or sees a subcaliber kit with a loadable cartridge lying around lonely looking for a home, please let me know. If the kit is happy where it is, please send me a photo.

Many thanks

Cheers,
Lew

PS: Apparently MPS made their kits in autopistol calibers also. Has anyone seen one???


#20

Remington and Winchester shotshell primers are of different sizes.
A CCI, Remington size 157 body is 5.87mm, a CCI, Winchester 109 is 6.25 mm & a CCI 209 is 6.18 mm. So as none are bigger than the Winchester I guess this wasn’t productive.

Looked through my non-US types & those are all seem to have smaller diameter bodies than the battery-cup types I noted above.