Has anyone seen one of these before? Its a 37mm US WW1 Sub-Calibre round case. I cant give dimensions sadly as my collection is packed away at this time as we are moving house soon. This case has a small screw in type primer which is missing and the calibre marked on base in inches and Sub-Calibre. I know its deffo American and WW1. It has an unusual rounded belt around its base. Does anyone know what this was used for. Its not really in my area of collecting so does anyone have any swaps 13mm calibre rounds or cases up to 30mm-modern or WW2? Regards all, Tim.
British Ordnance Collectors Network
Join over 14,000 collectors of inert military ordnance. Get expert identification help for shells, fuzes, grenades, and more — plus access our classifieds marketplace and decades of archived knowledge. Free to register, takes seconds.
WW1 37mm Sub-Calibre Brass Case.
- Thread starter Jagd301
- Start date
H
Hoeksel
Guest
Completely new to me! Interesting, hopefully a member can identify this one.
The long case version of the 1.457-inch subcaliber round was used with seacoast guns of 6-inch caliber or greater. I have a picture here of the long case version and the very short case version that I have never seen a reference to as to what weapon it was a subcaliber for. The long case is about 144mm long, the short aboutr 73mm. The projectile is two-piece with an interal base fuze. My long case was originally headstamped 37MM MARK IIIA2 and then overstamped. I have a reference to the round in TM 4-205 Coast Artillery Ammunition dated Feb 1940, so they stuck aro9und a long time. Maybe someone else can shed more light on them and identify the short case version.
Attachments
The short case is for howitzers -
Your case is not over stamped, these were all marked this way in 1939 ,
F.A.E.D.B. is the Frankford Arsenal Engineering Development Board, this case continues the subcal mark from the first cases.(In 1940 some were marked M4 AUTO GUN instead of Subcal, later 1940 cases are marked MKlll and there after) The earliest I have seen are dated 1911, but they might go back to 1908 ? These Frankford Arsenal cases with script seem to have been made up until 1917. All the 1918 cases I have seen are made by P.E.&M.Co. I have not seen an interwar dated case yet. The 1918 P.E.&.M.Co. were still in use in WW2, I have one loaded for the Airacobra and have them primed in 1941 for subcal use. There are two kinds of these long 1.7 Pdr. projectiles. The Model 1908 1 Pdr. (Maximum Capacity) was also standard with these and stayed in service with several variations into WW2 as the M94, these were used by the Coastal Artillery. I haven't yet found official information regarding the introduction of these long 1.7 Pdrs, or when they were discontinued and the same for the introduction of the 37x145 case. Previous to this the Navy length 37x136 case was in service and likely the two overlapped for some time.
I notice I haven't posted my U.S. Army Subcal assortment. Will get to it.
I will start with the first two kinds. The first is the Navy 1 pdr. adopted by the Army for Subcal use. It was superseded around 1906 by the new and improved Maximum Capacity 1 Pdr.
--Am still searching for one of those hard to find short Subcal cases :tinysmile_cry_t4:
Your case is not over stamped, these were all marked this way in 1939 ,
F.A.E.D.B. is the Frankford Arsenal Engineering Development Board, this case continues the subcal mark from the first cases.(In 1940 some were marked M4 AUTO GUN instead of Subcal, later 1940 cases are marked MKlll and there after) The earliest I have seen are dated 1911, but they might go back to 1908 ? These Frankford Arsenal cases with script seem to have been made up until 1917. All the 1918 cases I have seen are made by P.E.&M.Co. I have not seen an interwar dated case yet. The 1918 P.E.&.M.Co. were still in use in WW2, I have one loaded for the Airacobra and have them primed in 1941 for subcal use. There are two kinds of these long 1.7 Pdr. projectiles. The Model 1908 1 Pdr. (Maximum Capacity) was also standard with these and stayed in service with several variations into WW2 as the M94, these were used by the Coastal Artillery. I haven't yet found official information regarding the introduction of these long 1.7 Pdrs, or when they were discontinued and the same for the introduction of the 37x145 case. Previous to this the Navy length 37x136 case was in service and likely the two overlapped for some time.
I notice I haven't posted my U.S. Army Subcal assortment. Will get to it.
I will start with the first two kinds. The first is the Navy 1 pdr. adopted by the Army for Subcal use. It was superseded around 1906 by the new and improved Maximum Capacity 1 Pdr.
--Am still searching for one of those hard to find short Subcal cases :tinysmile_cry_t4:
Attachments
Last edited:
Thought I would throw another case type in this thread. I do not know anything about this case. It is close to the 79mm long short 1.457 inch subcal (on the left), but not the same. On the right is a standard WWI German 37x101mm case. The center case is 69mm long and it has no headstamp.
Attachments
Another 37x145 case with a problem !
This one has been cut back to 37x136 ? This could be done and it would work.
But is it official which I doubt ~ ?
There is an odd mark on the base along with the other hand stamped reload marks, a small circle with a line through it ? What does that mean -
I have no idea~
This one has been cut back to 37x136 ? This could be done and it would work.
But is it official which I doubt ~ ?
There is an odd mark on the base along with the other hand stamped reload marks, a small circle with a line through it ? What does that mean -
I have no idea~
Attachments
Chris 42 RQ
Well-Known Member
Real oddball
Jagd301 you are going to have to lok that out and read the headstamp to us as I notice your case appears to rimmed and belted the same as an ADEN/DEFA etc very unusual for an old case-please let us have more details as soon as you can.
Thanks for showing us.
Jagd301 you are going to have to lok that out and read the headstamp to us as I notice your case appears to rimmed and belted the same as an ADEN/DEFA etc very unusual for an old case-please let us have more details as soon as you can.
Thanks for showing us.
Is there any chance that there was a gap in the chamber and the "belt" is the result of a fired case being forced outward? I can't see the benefit of a belt on a rimmed case, especially so far from the base. Can't even picture how it would properly chamber since there is a gap behind the belt and the rim that is of a lesser diameter.
I don't think it wouls ever rechamber again
and I doubt they would resize it either. I don't know how this could happen if the breech wasn't closed it would have blown the thing apart. I can only think the internal tube some how was loose and moved when it was fired away from the breech but just a bit after the moment of firing and the pressure had dropped.
and I doubt they would resize it either. I don't know how this could happen if the breech wasn't closed it would have blown the thing apart. I can only think the internal tube some how was loose and moved when it was fired away from the breech but just a bit after the moment of firing and the pressure had dropped.
highlandotter
HONOURED MEMBER RIP
Short case used in Howitzers: 3.8", 4.7" and 6" howitzers and 3" mountain gun.The subcal guns came with reloading kits to reload in the field.The short cases were often unmarked.
The headstamping on this unusual 37mm case is as follows: 1.457 In Subcal gun, FA 1915, L3063. A kind of 'fork' shaped symbol also appears with the headstamping. The primer hole has no threads in it either. The band around the case appears even with no cracks or gaps around it. Its certainly very unusual as the belt is rounded and i thought maybe it was caused by some kind of deformity on firing but surely this would not be possible? Ive never seen another like this one anywhere.
Chris 42 RQ
Well-Known Member
The plot thickens !
Any chance you could take a detailed picture of the side at the bottom showing the finer detail of the rim and belt and perhaps one of the headstamp also please.
A very interesting case Jagd301.
Thank you for showing us.
Thanks Jagd301 for the reply, the mystery deepens as they say?
Any chance you could take a detailed picture of the side at the bottom showing the finer detail of the rim and belt and perhaps one of the headstamp also please.
A very interesting case Jagd301.
Thank you for showing us.
Sure Chris i will get some more detailed pics taken over weekend and then post them up! Cheers.
Chris 42 RQ
Well-Known Member
Chris 42 RQ
Well-Known Member
Hi Jagd301 very interesting !
Observations are;-
Belt appears not to be machined as part of the case and it is rounded and very uniform leading me to suspect as others here have done that it is in fact a "Bulge" caused by incorrect seating of the case or being fired in an innapropriate weapon whereby the case is "blown out" to suit the chamber it is in.
You should be able to tell whether or not I am right by a careful internal inspection with a torch.
Clean the inside of the case and get a torch beam shone into the base of the case and I reckon you will find the case is actually a much bigger diameter at the base than it should be (hope that makes sense?).
Please let me know your results !
Thank you for taking the pictures and sharing them all with us.
Observations are;-
Belt appears not to be machined as part of the case and it is rounded and very uniform leading me to suspect as others here have done that it is in fact a "Bulge" caused by incorrect seating of the case or being fired in an innapropriate weapon whereby the case is "blown out" to suit the chamber it is in.
You should be able to tell whether or not I am right by a careful internal inspection with a torch.
Clean the inside of the case and get a torch beam shone into the base of the case and I reckon you will find the case is actually a much bigger diameter at the base than it should be (hope that makes sense?).
Please let me know your results !
Thank you for taking the pictures and sharing them all with us.
Looking down into the case the base diameter appears smaller than the open end, its really difficult to see the inner base details but appears where the belt is there is a groove if this makes sense. Ive tried taking pic but its beyond my cameras ability to get decent shot. Very frustrating this one!
Chris 42 RQ
Well-Known Member
Then Jagd I think you have cracked it as there should be no groove inside the case, it should open out and remain constant following the outer contours of the case and thickening only slightly nearer the base of the case.
If you have found a larger diameter near the bottom then this really proves the case has been fired in an innapropriate weapon that it was not designed to be used in.
So the bottom line is that the propellant pressure has reformed the case to make fit the item it was fired in-still a very neat item though.
Sadly before my camera days I had a 50 cal fired in a Boyes .55 AT rifle and that case had undergone the same as yours and it acquired a nice rounded belt where it should not have had one.
Many thanks for prompting my interest on this item.
I hope you are happy with the explanation ?
I agree with you 100% there Chris. This case must have been fired in a weapon that was not entirely suited to it. Very interesting and when examined this has to be the only plausible explanation for the belt on an otherwise unbelted case type. Thanks very much for the input and it seems we have at last concluded the puzzle. Regards, Tim
It was likely fired in the correct device ~
How ever there were problems with these inserts and they were replaced by the exterior mounted 1916 Gun version and discontinued except for Coastal Artillery. Your casing might be an example of one of these problems, perhaps an improperly positioned tube or a loose one.
How ever there were problems with these inserts and they were replaced by the exterior mounted 1916 Gun version and discontinued except for Coastal Artillery. Your casing might be an example of one of these problems, perhaps an improperly positioned tube or a loose one.
Attachments
Last edited: