US 7.92 Proof


#1

Just going through the new Chubbuck book on 7.92 Mausers, but did not see a round I recently got at the PA Ctg. Show last week. Pretty sure it is a legit proof loading:
GMCS, nik case, brass primer, ring crimp, knurl on bullet at case mouth.



#2

Jon, nice find! Did you compare the weight of this one to a “regular” load made for China?


#3

Funny you should ask. I just bought myself a small digital scale for my upstairs office desk, the same desk where the proof currently sits! It weighs 389.5 grains / 25.23 grams. Unfortunately my ball round is currently buried down in my basement office. Remember that scene in the 1st Indiana Jones movie, where they put the crated ark in that vast warehouse? Kind of like that situation.
Anyone have a China-contract ball load handy enough to weigh?


#4

HI

A new book? I do not know something ?

Rufus


#5

#6

I’d be surprised if its weight is very far from the standard ball load. Jack


#7

I support Jack’s view. The German 7.9 mm proof cartridge, for example, weighed actually less than the ordinary ball cartridge, because the load of high-pressure propellant was only 2.45 g (37.8 gr) compared to the regular 2.85 g (44 gr) load for brass cases. All other components, apart from the missing crimp groove on the bullet, were the same.


#8

As Wectern made the ball loading in several headstaps & dates I’d be inclined to think they might also have provided proof loads or perhaps it is a standard loading tinned for ID?


#9

“standard loading tinned for ID”

To ID what? Why specially mark a “standard” ball loading?


#10

Jon,
I think it was tinned, to ID it as a Proof round. I think that is what Pete is saying, and I hope he will correct me if I’m wrong. I think earlier rounds were identified by a blackened case for proof, and then later they started plating the proof cases. I know the experts will know, and I hope they will explain it better.
Nice round!
Dan


#11

While I have you all here, I have another possible 7.92 proof loading. GM (non-mag) bullet, black tip, brass case and primer, ring crimp, black annulus, knurl on bullet at case mouth.



#12

John,
This is a proof round made by Dominion for the CIA in the early 1950 or so. Somewhere in my storeroom I have a box of these. It is like the unmarked boxes that the ball rounds come in but with the word “PROOF” stamped in black on the side. The agency inspected and tested the ex-WWII weapons before they put them in inventory ready to be shipped. No proofing was required for the 9mmP weapons or the rifles, but I am told they did proof the Machine Guns. This story is from a very knowledgeable source who was involved in this side of the business.

Cheers,
Lew


#13

Yes the Canadian is a proof, however what I was saying is that if the Western Chinese contract is not a proof, which at that time could have been either a blackened or stanic stained case, depending on the manufacturer, it might have been a standard round.

A “standard” is a component or a completed round which as a lot is set aside to use to measure production against.

Usually the components or the box is marked as such, the English ID such rounds usually with a yellow annulus seal, The Australians sometimes mark the case with a “S”. We usually just label the package.


#14

Ah, I guess I misunderstood. You meant a “Standards Cartridge”, and I was thinking a “standard cartridge”.


#15

Ok, last one for those still playing.
Another 7.92 round with the same “7.92 MM 42” headstamp. No special markings, but the entire cartridge is chromed. No sign that it has been inerted; the primer has a ring crimp and black annulus. It apparently is not a proof. Any ideas on what it might be?


#16

When you say “entire cartridge is chromed” does that mean the bullet, the cartridge case including the case head and primer are chrome plated?

Have compared the weight of a known loaded ball round to the weight of the all chromed round?


#17

Here it would be essential to clarify if it is chromed or nickel plated.
A chrome plating would exclude it from being fired.
A nickel plating would not limit the use.


#18

Appears to be chromed/nickeled from head to toe. Alex, how does one tell the difference between the two coatings? I’ll try to weigh the round tomorrow.


#19

Jon, with a bit of luck one can make out the different color tones.
And usually a chrome plating is somewhat thicker than nickel, means it appears a bit different in sharp edges and in particular in the letters of headstamps.
Difficult to explain when one is not into metals.


#20

I would assume a nickel plating to be much thinner than a chrome plating. It is kind of likely that suface defects like scratches would show even through the plating