CZ82 9x18 w/ luger brass & cast bullet

I find suppliers all have 9X18 brass backordered so I bought 1000 once fired 9 luger that I separated by headstamp & trimmed using the Lee trimmer. The trim was easy enough when I put the shell holder in a cordless hand drill at slow speed, though the case did require flaring to allow the tool to fit. I cast the 95gr Lee mold using wheel weights (actual weight was 104gr) lubed w/ Alox & CCI small Pistol Primers.
I used Makarov website data of 3.5gr W231 powder which was below maximum listed. It was estimated to provide over 950 fps. I chronographed it at 942fps hi & 912fps low. I weighed each load to verify making only a few at a time, but will use my Lee perfect powder measure for production. There was no sign of any pressure problem & the recoil was firm but reasonable. I believe a 4.0 gr load should provide 1000 fps & a good max load for the CZ82 which was designed for a load heavier than the standard Makarov 9X18...(see website below) In all I am very satisfied with the results and next I plan to try AA#7 & HP-38 powders.
The designed load gave over 1200fps using a light 69g bullet that is is unique & not available, but the CZ82 can still do much better than standard 9 mak loads.
I would like to hear from anyone else working on specific loads for the CZ82, trying to duplicate the original 9mm vzor 1982 described at the website
http://www.freeexistence.org/vz82.html, or to identify a powder similar to S&B's MDN-9-82Cv Nitro base flake powder which was used. Please feel free to email me as well.
docjim@classicnet.net
I love CZ's & own 12 total - :lol:CZ75BD, CZ82, CZ52 X3, CZ70, CZ50 X2, CZ27 X2 (1 is Nazi ), CZ45, & a CZ Duo

Welcome to the Guide.

This from The Handloader's Guide to Cartridge Conversions:
"Make from .38ACP or .38Super, turn rim to.396" and back chamfer. Cut to length and FL resize in 9mm Luger die....
...9mm Luger brass can be used, as is, by trimming to length, but you'll find the Luger's bases need to be swaged to .386 dia. or they will not always chamber properly."

Do not expect consistancy from Lee's powder measures. I use and swear by a lot of Lee products, but not their powder measures. Them I swear AT. Adjustable powder measures by any other manufacturer are preferable and there is just no comparison. The only decent measures Lee makes are their dippers, which although accurate are very slow and tedious to use.

IMO, you will be much better off buying and using actual Mak brass and not trying to make do. Unless you are set up to make custom swaging dies and properly heat treating them, you are asking for frustration. Using Mak data will not help as the case volumes are different and the pressure levels and measured velocities will not be the same. Unlike with rifle cases, often you will get no indications of pressure signs in pistol cases until catastrophic failure. Is it worth the risk? Not to me. Trying to identify a foreign commercial non-canister powder is asking for a Darwin Award. Even though your brass sources are backordered, I would counsel patience. (Have you tried Graff's?)

Maybe it's your measure. I have used mine for several years and gotten accurate loads. I always weigh every couple of loads anyway so I know mine works well.. Reportedly PS Grand was still making the proper CZ82 load so a powder must be available. I tried to contact them but their link is dead.. The Polygonal rifling in the CZ makes for much lower pressure so there is no risk in using these loads or the reworked cases. I am comfortable with what I know & what I am doing DOC
BTW Grafs was the first place I tried... along with Natchez Widners, & Midway

I use RCBS and Lyman powder measures currently. Your faith in your Lee will last until you try using it with extruded powders. The fact that you feel you have to check it "every couple of loads" speaks volumes. They are quite consistent with ball and some flake powders, but they are not very versatile. When you're loading several thousand rounds a month of pistol and rifle loads, you come to realize the tool's limitations quickly.

Very rarely do any ammo companies use commercial powders. There are a number of non-canister or surplus powders on the market with availability intermittent depending on the source. They can vary a lot from batch to batch. Just because it is available to them does not mean any of it is available on the surplus or retail market. In any event, I seriously doubt they would tell you what powders(s) they're loading. FWIW, have always liked Unique when loading the Mak and have found it to be both consistent and accurate.

As to the polygonal rifling, when used with jacketed bullets of the correct size, the pressures are often lower when compared to a barrel with conventional rifling, but that is not necessarily true with cast bullets. Alloy, lube, sized diameter, and powder choice can all play a part and some combinations can add up to trouble. For decent cast performance with polygonal rifling, the alloy has to be much harder than I normally like to use for handgun bullets, the sizing is absolutely critical (and varies from pistol to pistol), and I would stay away from White Lightning Lube and BlueDot together. Unless you have access to a way to actually measure chamber pressure with a strain gage, I would not be so sure your pressure levels really are lower. You might or might not notice any difference in the way your pistols function, but you are more likely to notice them with blowback designs than any others.

Adding your reworked brass to the equation, knowing how much 9mm case volumes can vary from different manufacturers and sometimes from lot to lot, and knowing how cases even slightly overlarge in diameter can pressure spike (as well as their potential feeding and extraction difficulties), you may be on much thinner ice than you realize. I am not saying you are, but I am noting that you have introduced a lot more variables to the process at one time than are easily sorted out and in almost thirty-five years of handloading I have come to the point where I believe it is always best to err on the side of caution, especially in a public forum like this one that is read by many novice loaders who have not reached your level of experience. Just because you have not noticed any problems does not necessarily mean everything is fine. Very often pistol brass will not show any visible pressure signs before it fails and micing the case heads is about the only way a handloader can have any indication of what is really going on when working with a bullet and/or a powder for which there is little or no available data. A chrono can help, too, but cannot be relied upon exclusively.

In your situation I would at the very least try to eliminate the variable of the cases by doing some volumetric measurements on a dozen or so to insure they are consistent and compare them to volume measurements of actual Mak cases. That will level the playing field quite a lot. I do a lot of case forming for various wildcat and semi-wildcat cartridges and I have often seen that very small internal volumetric differences can change interior ballistics greatly. The smaller the case, the greater the differences, and the Mak, like the Luger, is a very small case operating at fairly hot pressures.

You could try posting in the classified sections here, over on Cast Boolits, and on a forum like the Reloader Bulletin Board for sources of once-fired brass. http://www.reloadbench.com

Further info;
Looking through my notes the metric data converted to English shows velocity of the designed CZ82 round was 1352 fps & the pressure was over 24,656 psi. None of the loads come close to those figures yet so there is a significant margin for safety. Also 9 mm luger cases are much thicker & designed to deal with pressures well beyond any found using these 9X18 loads converted to a trimmed luger case. They have been used for decades without problem. The case readily expands when fireformed, filling the breech & the base is not an issue.
The CZ82 is NOT a Makarov.. It was designed for a totally different set of conditions The 9X18 makarov ammunition just happens to fit safely in to the breech sort of like shooting 38 special in a 357 magnum - I am 'wildcatting' a duplicate to the designed load - DOC

9mm luger is a better choice to alter to 9 Makarov. the 38 auto case is .406" diam at the base, 9 mm luger is .394" diam & 9mak is .390". Case length of 38 Auto is also much greater.
The 9mm Luger is closer to design size of the 9X18 and capable of dealing with the pressures involved, thus a better choice to trim to size for making a 9X18 reload cartridge.. The Handloader's Guide to Cartridge Conversions may state 38 auto as an option but I find my choice to be far more appropriate..
I appreciate your concern & would not recommend inexperienced persons from dabbling in wildcatting (for lack of a better word) but my post provides an accurate and safe way to load for the CZ82 pistol... DOC

I've used the luger cases, trimmed with a Lee 9mm guide that i trimmed to lengthIn a P63. But i've wondered how my 82 would work with them

I TOO WILL BE WILDCATTING THE LUGER 9MM CASES TO THE 9MM MAKAROV I JUST CAST SOME MAK BULLETS IN THE LEE DIE ON TURKEYDAY .. I THINK IT WAS @ 100 gr. bullets I AM GOING TO USE THEM IN MY EAST GERMAN MAK . BUT I WILL USE ONLY LIKE CASES, IN OTHER WORDS WINCHESTER 9MM CASES ONLY, PER LOADS DEVELOPED .... AND INTEND ON PAINTING THE ENDS RED TO IDENTIFY , AND WILL KEEP MY TRUE MAK CASES SEPERATE AS THESE WILL SHOOT A LITTLE DIFFERENT DUE TO SMALL CASE CAPACITY, HOPE THESE WILL NOT HANG UP ON THE FEED RAMP, AS I HAVENT SHOT ANY LEAD OUT OF MY GUN YET .. THEY ARE @ 20 BHN SO SHOULD BE HARD ENOUGH