Titanium case material

The reason why titanium was not used. A bit of exterior burn shown in the 47.5mm long 7.62 mm fired pressure test case. Unheadstamped, nickel Boxer primer



Pete, very interesting. Could you elaborate on this one?
Do any reports exist?
I assume it was also covered in HWS (maybe #2)?

1 Like

Volume 3, 1945 was end date for Vol II

Pete, thanks. Do you happen to know the pages where the Titanium case(s) is/are described?

pg 152, bottom left Vol III

Do you have the book?

Bill’s writing on the label.

Not only as case material is titanium always suitable. When SW introduced 329PD revolver years ago with titanium cylinder…that was my dream to have one - 44M which will not weight “one ton”. When testing several loads incl. my own reloads with special NG double based powder which contains 47% of NG (loaded to SAAMI pressures only…not even CIP).
To my big surprice after each shot there was intensive white flame with sparks after each shot (normally the flash is between yellow and red from my SW29/DW. After 2 cylinders fired the front part of cylinder was missing the circles around each chamber - 2mm wide and 0.5mm deep…and the surface was like from welding. Have reported to S&W what happened and the reply was - “never seen this” …gun returned to them with the full refund and from that time only steel cylinder is acceptable for me 🤠.
Since that time i have shot thousands of rounds loaded with this powder and no problems reported.
Probably too high temperature of burning which titanium is not able to handle.


Loose/rough titanium specks/finish can “spark” when they’re pulled along with the projectile/gases and ignited.
This is pretty common in Ti suppressors and muzzle devices for the first shots, especially 3D printed ones (layered injection molding).


Had a note from Frank that it was also used with the FATE1E3 case. See pg 169 upper left in 1956. So a mistake with the date on this T65 case shown above.

Pete, thank you for pointing me to the info given in HWS vol 3!

Is there a difference in geometry between the T65 and the FAT1E3?

A non-pressure test case would probably work just fine.

1 Like

Titanium will ignite not just in air or oxygen, but also in nitrogen (if the temperature reaches the flash point, which is below the melting point for titanium). Since smokeless propellants are nitrogen-based, it may not be surprising if a titanium case (or revolver cylinder) would ignite.

47mm vs 51mm case length
edited to correct case length

Pete, thank you for clarification!
Anybody out there who has both to show next to each other?

EOD and Pete,

The FAT1E3 case is basically the version that was adopted as the 7.62mm NATO.


T65 Case @ 47mm length (Very similar to the .300 Savage)
FAT1 Case @ 49mm (Neck lengthened)
FAT1E1 Case @ 49mm (Rim and Groove modified)
FAT1E2 Case @ 49mm (None known)
FAT1E3 Case @ 51mm (The final version)

I can show examples of all above cases (except for the FAT1E2) in brass and aluminum but I am not fortunate enough to have either of the titanium examples.


Dave, sure it would be great to see them all next to each other. That would make a great comparison.
But not to derail this thread maybe in a new thread then?

Right you are Dave. thanks
I’ll edit my post above


I’ll see if I can post a group shot of the various lengths later in a new thread.


Very neat item you started this thread with. I have to wonder if that significant burn was able to occur due to the stiff case material not obturating and sealing well around the test port. I’m trying to recall if I have seen any fired steel pressure test cases. Might show some scorching for the same reason (though likely not any where near the material consumption that titanium gave up to the fire).