Is there a difference between 9mm NATO and 9mm Luger other than NATO has 10% more pressure.

Not sure where you are getting a 10% increase w/ 9mm Nato. The original European tests show that the 9x19 Luger and 9mm Nato were equal. The service pressure Pmax of the 9 mm NATO is rated at 252 MPa (36,550 psi) where C.I.P. rates the 9 mm Luger PTmax somewhat lower at 235 MPa (34,083 psi). The 315.0 MPa (45,687 psi) proofing test pressure used in the 9 mm NATO proof test however equals the proofing test pressure used in the 9 mm Luger C.I.P. proof test. There is no real difference.

Actually if you want to get down to it. NATO is loaded lower then Luger as the Real lugers took a good amount of thump to cycle the action. enough to blow up other pistols of the day. But since the luger is not in common manufacture anymore all 9mm ammo is basicaly the same other then +P and +P+
But for all intents and purposes it all the same.
9X19mm
9mm NATO
9mm Luger
9mm parabelum
And just plain old 9mm

I think I might guess what may be being suggested.

9mm NATO was mainly used in sub-machine guns and as almost an aside pistols. Thus compared to US loaded 9mm in the 1960s and 1970s it did have a reputation for being loaded "hotter".

Indeed it was this difference between "US" specification 9mm Luger and "European" specification 9mm Parabellum that supposedly did for the Smith & Wesson 9mm Light Rifle in 1940.

The designers at S & W not making the thing strong enoughy to cope with the more powerful "European" specification ammunition that we British were going to feed it on.

Now as to whether this difference exists today vis-a-vis 9mm NATO and 9mmm Parabellum loaded IN EUROPE I don't know.

But in the minds of some it certainly does exist between 9mm NATO and 9mm Luger (as it is called there) loaded in US.

Whether it is still correct that 9mm Luger loaded IN US to American specifications is "softer" than 9mm Parabellum loaded IN EUROPE...I don't know.

But dimension wise of course they are all the same. Just for some reason the name 9mm Luger seems in use in the USA and 9mm Parabellum in use in Europe.

Now, would I feed a pistol on a steady diet of 9mm NATO...probably not. But it is probably just a mindset thing! Oh and of course the asphalt seal between the bullet and case mouth!

I am loking at getting a 9mm upper for my Ar pistol and they all say 9mm NATO. Thank you for your responses.

No difference between 9mm NATO and 9mm Luger bullets. The NATO is military brass which may be a bit thicker with crimped primer compared to commercial brass. I avoid military brass.

Good idea to get the 9mm upper.

quote:

I am loking at getting a 9mm upper for my Ar pistol and they all say 9mm NATO.

OK. As far as you are concerned the differences that might worry you are is the cartridge dimensionally the same?

Yes. Absolutely. There is absolutely NO DIFFERENCE at all in dimensions. They are the exact same cartridge. Think of a barrel stamped 5.56mm NATO and .223 Remington or for that matter .280 Remington and 7mm Remington Express.

The markings are just that markings and a different "name" for exactly the same cartridge.

Well In comparison a .223 is not a 5.56 NATO
the 5.56 NATO Chamber is different and sometime will not chamber .223 so they are not the same.
As for the 280 7mm that is correct it was marketing.

quote:

Well In comparison a .223 is not a 5.56 NATO. The 5.56 NATO Chamber is different and sometimes will not chamber .223, so they are not the same.

The 5.56mm NATO and .223Rem differ in two ways. One: The brass for the military round is a bit heavier in the web area and the primers are crimped. Two: The leade or freebore portion is longer than in a .223Rem to allow for easier breeching and extraction in machineguns if the bullets are a bit too far out or the cases are a bit too long. It's all about making the chamber a bit loose so the ammo is going to feed and extract when lives depend on it. A man behind a varmint rifle does not have these concerns. Just my opinion. I could be wrong...

There is a chamber known as a Wylde chamber than is the best compromise between the two...

http://answers.yahoo.com/quest...0070826234121AAjbZSN

Thank You all very much for your help.

At one stage were stopped from using 9mm Nato in our issue Browning Hi-Powers...Apparently the 9mm Nato was loaded some what hotter and did cause problems in the Brownings...

quote:

Originally posted by homebrewer:

quote:

Well In comparison a .223 is not a 5.56 NATO. The 5.56 NATO Chamber is different and sometimes will not chamber .223, so they are not the same.

The 5.56mm NATO and .223Rem differ in two ways. One: The brass for the military round is a bit heavier in the web area and the primers are crimped. Two: The leade or freebore portion is longer than in a .223Rem to allow for easier breeching and extraction in machineguns if the bullets are a bit too far out or the cases are a bit too long. It's all about making the chamber a bit loose so the ammo is going to feed and extract when lives depend on it. A man behind a varmint rifle does not have these concerns. Just my opinion. I could be wrong...

There is a chamber known as a Wylde chamber than is the best compromise between the two...

http://answers.yahoo.com/quest...0070826234121AAjbZSN

You are correct sir