This article was first published online 8-4-2013
The 9X23 Winchester


Brad Miller, Ph.D.

Part 1

The 9X23 Winchester cartridge is a powerhouse round that few have heard of. Too bad. It delivers 357 Magnum performance in a semi-automatic pistol.

The 9X23 Winchester is, in simplistic terms, a stretched out 9mm Luger (9X19) (Figure 1). Both are tapered cartridges. The neck, head and rim dimensions are nearly identical. The 9X23 is 4mm longer, but more importantly, the 9X23 operates at much higher pressure. The Winchester brass has an extra-thick case wall that allows this cartridge to run at high pressure without concern of a case blowout in the unsupported region of a conventional, non-ramped barrel. The 9X23 is also a longer cartridge overall, and requires a full-sized frame whereas the 9mm Luger can be housed in small frame pistols.

The 9X23’s Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI) maximum average pressure limit is 55,000 psi, the same as a 223 Remington rifle round! Compare that to the 9mm Luger’s 35,000 psi and its +P limit of 38,500 psi. The 9X23’s older cousin, the 38 Super +P, whose case is the same length of 0.900" (Figure 2), has a SAAMI pressure limit of 36,500 psi.

The 9X23 has a SAAMI maximum cartridge overall length (COL) of 1.300” compared to the 38 Super’s 1.280”. The 1.300” length is a bit long to fit in some magazines that house the 38 Super. I tried some 1.300” length 9X23 rounds with round nose bullets in two Chip McCormick 1911 38 Super magazines. They fit, but not when the bullet was loaded just 0.005” longer (1.305”). That’s not much margin for error. The 1.300” round would not fit in a Para Ordnance 38 Super double column magazine. The Winchester factory rounds with flat nose bullets measure at 1.230 – 1.245”, which is typical for this bullet design in the 38 Super as well. In practical terms, it’s wise to load them similar to the 38 Super’s COL to fit in similar magazines.

Factory Ammunition

Winchester offers two factory loads, a 124 grain SP bullet at 1460 fps, and a 125 grain Silver Tip HP at 1450 fps. These loads yield 587 and 583 foot pounds of muzzle energy, respectively. This equals most current 357 Magnum factory 125 grain loads from a 4” barreled revolver. COR-BON offers three loads in the 9X23 Winchester, a traditional 125 grain JHP at 1450 fps, a 100 grain Pow’RBall at 1600 fps, and a 125 grain Barnes XPB copper HP at 1350 fps. RBCD loads a 50 grain Total Fragmenting SP bullet at 2625 fps. That’s it. If you want something different, you have to load your own.

Three factory rounds were tested, the two Winchester loads and the COR-BON 100 grain Pow’RBall (Figure 3), in a Caspian pistol with a 5” Nowlin 9X23 barrel. Both Winchester loads lived up to their published velocities; the 124 grain SP round exceeded it (Table 1). The COR-BON load was a little short. Only two rounds of Pow’RBall were test fired. The cases showed excess bulging and no more of these rounds were fired due to safety concerns.

The COR-BON ammunition was loaded in Starline 9X23 Comp cases (1), Starline’s version of the 9X23 Winchester. These cases bulged excessively in the unsupported region of the Nowlin barrel. The test gun has a conventional feed ramp and the Nowlin barrel’s chamber leaves a portion of the case unsupported (far left in Figure 4). High pressure can make the brass expand too far and bulge in the unsupported region, depending on the pressure and the strength of the brass. If the pressure is too great, the case can rupture exposing the shooter (and gun) to case fragments and a blast of hot, high pressure gas, a very dangerous situation. Starline brass is discussed in more detail later.

Three barrels illustrate differences in chamber support. The red bar indicates how much of the case ahead of the extractor groove is not supported.

Handloading the 9X23

All of the limited selection of factory 9X23 ammunition represents full-power loads. But handloads can bring out the full potential of this cartridge, from plinking to nuclear. Hodgdon and Vihtavuori offer load data. The current Hodgdon data is limited to one powder (Winchester 231) with limited performance (maximum of 1300 fps with a 125 grain JHP). However, Winchester’s old 15th Edition Reloader’s Manual also has data for Winchester Action Pistol (WAP) gunpowder. WAP was discontinued, but revived as Ramshot Silhouette. The Vihtavuori data is more expansive (three gunpowders, four bullets), but published velocities fall short of Winchester’s factory loads.

Published data for both Winchester powders and Vihtavuori 3N37 was tested in Winchester 9X23 brass with the maximum charge weights given for these gunpowders. Winchester lists the pressures for both the 231 and WAP loads as 46,000 psi. The 231 and 3N37 came up short velocity-wise to their published values, but Silhouette did not disappoint (Table 2).

Hornady makes dies for the 9X23, but not everyone does and those companies usually recommend using 9mm Luger dies, which is what I do. Only the sizing die is different, and it’s not very different because the dimensions are so similar.

Starline brass

The Winchester brass is king. It’s thick wall handles the pressure with ease in an unsupported chamber. Starline’s 9X23 Comp brass is not as thick-walled as the Winchester brass (Figure 5A). This raises the question of whether the Starline brass will hold up to the same pressure as the Winchester brass in an unsupported chamber. It does not. When loaded with the same high pressure charge of Silhouette, the Starline brass showed excess bulging in the unsupported region resulting in a large imprint of the feed ramp in the brass (2). The Winchester brass did not bulge excessively (Figure 5B) or had at most a “microscopic” feed ramp imprint that could be seen under high magnification. Thus there is a risk of case blowout with the Starline cases at 9X23-like pressure in an unsupported chamber. It must be downloaded to ensure safety. (Note: this applies to the specific brass in my possession. A different lot of Starline 9X23 Comp might manage high pressure better. Or worse. Testing is required.) Brass with the imprint should be discarded because it is likely weakened there and could fail if reloaded and exposed to high pressure again.

A. Sectioned brass. The black arrows show the approximate location of the edge of the feed ramp and where cases were measured for wall thickness (Part 2,Table 5). B. Winchester and Starline cases loaded with the same charge of Silhouette. The red arrow shows the imprint of the feed ramp.

Case Capacity

The Winchester brass’ thicker wall means it has less case capacity than the Starline brass (Figure 6A). Less room means more pressure with the same gunpowder charge. This difference was apparent in two ways, velocity and pressure signs in the primers. The Winchester brass showed higher velocity (Table 3) with the same gunpowder charge and more primer flow (Figure 6B).

A. The same charge weight of gunpowder in both cases shows that the Starline 9X23 Comp brass is filled to the brim, but the Winchester brass is overflowing. B. Primer flow (cratering) is greater in the Winchester brass. Both are Federal small rifle primers (No. 205). Same cases as in Figure 5B.

Maximizing performance in Starline brass; Lower pressure gunpowder?

Silhouette can duplicate the factory Winchester loading, but it produces a lot of pressure in the process, and the Starline 9X23 Comp brass bulges dangerously at this pressure in an unsupported chamber. I tried different load weights of Silhouette to determine the charge weight at which it would not excessively bulge the Starline 9X23 brass. It had to be downloaded to 6.6 grains to be safe in my barrel which generated only 1168 fps. That falls well short of the 9X23‘s hallmark performance.

Will a different gunpowder provide better performance in the Starline brass? A general rule of thumb is that slower burning gunpowders will produce more velocity than faster burning gunpowders at the same pressure (3). Silhouette is considered a medium burning rate gunpowder. I tested other gunpowders to see if they would produce higher velocities in the Starline cases without producing the excess bulge.

Table 4 shows the gunpowders’ highest charge weights and velocities achieved without producing excess bulging as indicated by the feed ramp imprint. Vihtavuori 3N38 showed the highest velocity at 1304 fps which is 136 fps more than that achieved with Silhouette. The Starline 9X23 brass has limits in an unsupported chamber but selecting a different (usually slower) gunpowder can improve velocity while still maintaining a margin a safety.

Keep in mind that if your 9X23 chamber offers full case support, then the Starline 9X23 brass will work fine for high pressure loads. Just make sure it is full case support.

Heavy Bullets

Another difference between these two brass is how they fit heavier bullets. The Winchester’s thicker case walls extend quite a distance up the side (Figure 5A). This poses no problems for bullets up to 125 grains, but heavier bullets extend deeper in the case body. The Winchester brass’ thick walls bulge slightly with square-based 147 grain bullets (Figure 7), whereas the Starline’s case walls are designed to accommodate them. The bulge was about .005” wider than the non-bulged case at that location. The round still fit in the Nowlin chamber, but it did not readily slide in when the chamber was a little dirty, indicating that it was a close fit. A boat-tailed 147 grain bullet produced no measurable bulge in the Winchester brass.

Two 147 grain bullets are shown, a Remington FMJ FP (Rem.) with a square base and a Hornady XTP (Horn.) with a boat tail. The Remington slightly bulged the Winchester cases, as shown by the arrows and a distinct change in the shadow. The boat tailed bullet produced no bulge. Bullets were seated to 1.245” COL.

Load data

Load data for the 9X23 Winchester is limited. Some user-supplied load data can be found at Dane Burns’ website Use it with caution. This applies to my data as well. Savvy reloaders will also look at 38 Super and 38 Super Lapua data. This data is ideal for 38 Super brass, but don’t forget that the Winchester 9X23 brass has less internal volume, which means higher pressure for the same powder charge, so load development based on 38 Super data requires adjustment and must be reduced if used in Winchester 9X23 cases. In all circumstances, start at the low end and work up watching for pressure signs.

The Other 9X23s

The 9X23 Winchester should not be confused with other 9X23 cartridges such as the 9mm Largo, (aka 9X23 Largo, 9mm Bayard Long, 9mm Bergmann-Bayard) and 9mm Steyr (aka 9X23mm Steyr) (Figure 8). The Largo is also a tapered case but is slightly longer (0.910”), and it has a longer maximum COL as well (1.320”). The Steyr is a straight-walled round, like the 38 Super, with same-length brass but a longer maximum 1.300” COL.


The 9X23 Winchester is a very powerful cartridge with impressive ballistics due to its high operating pressure. The Winchester factory ammunition provides high performance and durable brass for use in unsupported chambers. But ammunition choice is very limited, making handloading an appealing option.

Starline’s 9X23 Comp brass proved to be much less durable in the unsupported chamber, showing excess, dangerous bulging at caliber-typical pressure. Judicious handloading was required for this brass to be safe. Gunpowder selection could enhance ballistic performance with the Starline brass, but it could not match the full potential of original Winchester brass with the gunpowders tested.

The Starline 9X23 Comp brass should be better designed to handle high pressure since the original purpose of the Winchester round was to allow high performance in an unsupported chamber. The fact that they are being used by COR-BON for their self-defense product line illustrates an expectation that this ammunition will be used in production (non-competition) pistols, many of which lack full case support - such as my Nowlin barrel. The high risk of case failure, especially in a self-defense round, is unacceptable. COR-BON should either limit their 9X23 high pressure ammunition to original Winchester cases or download the Starline brass for this reason.

Part 2

38 Super Ammunition?

This section will be controversial to some people. I tested 38 Super ammunition and brass in the 9X23 barrel. Technically, it is the wrong ammunition for this barrel. The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI) strictly advises against using ammunition other than what the gun (barrel) is specifically chambered to use, and they specifically identify this combination. I agree with that advice. I’m not endorsing this practice. This was simply an experiment, and I describe the results of that experiment. I’m not the first person to try this combination. Anyone electing to use 38 Super ammunition in a 9X23 barrel does so at their own risk.

Some 9X23 barrels will chamber 38 Super rounds. The 9X23 Winchester and 38 Super cases are the same length (.900”), and the other cartridge dimensions are very similar, just a few thousandths of an inch different, as are their chamber dimensions (Figure 9). The difference is that the 38 Super is straight-walled and semi-rimmed, whereas the 9X23 is tapered and rimless. The 38 Super’s semi-rim is wider (0.406”) than the 9X23 rim (0.394”), but in practice the 38 Super’s semi-rim measures around 0.400”. The 9X23 chamber is narrower at the front end and wider at the rear. In fact, the 9X23‘s front chamber specification is narrower than the 38 Super case mouth specification. But in practice 38 Super ammunition tends to measure smaller than its maximum SAAMI specifications, and in spite of the dimensional differences, 38 Super ammunition fit in my Nowlin 9X23 barrel without issues and headspaced properly on the case mouth.

Drawings and dimensions are based on SAAMI drawings and dimensions. The red text illustrates dimensions that are different relevant to their potential interchangeability.

Shooting 38 Super brass in a 9X23 chamber might allow them to expand a little more than they would in a 38 Super chamber. SAAMI drawings show that the 9X23 chamber is 0.0034” wider measured at a point 0.200” forward of the breech face (Figure 9) than a 38 Super chamber. It is unlikely that the 0.0034” additional expansion of a 38 Super case would dramatically increase the chance of case failure, though that can’t be ruled out. But the biggest danger is excess bulging or case failure in the unsupported region.

Is 38 Super ammunition safe to shoot in the unsupported Nowlin barrel? My Nowlin barrel offers less case support than my Colt 38 Super barrel (Figure 4). Some factory 38 Super ammunition displayed dangerous bulging in the Colt barrel (see Table 2 on the Factory page), though ammunition from the major manufacturers (Federal, Remington, Winchester) was perfectly safe. Also, some 38 Super brass (e.g. Remington, Winchester) have relatively thin walls (see examples on the Brass page), so case rupture is a legitimate concern if used in the Nowlin barrel.

Three factory 38 Super rounds were tested in the Nowlin barrel: Winchester and Remington 130 grain FMJ, and COR-BON 125 grain DPX HP. The Winchester and Remington ammunition showed no sign of excess bulging in the unsupported region. However, COR-BON’s 38 Super round did show excess bulging, indicating that it was not safe in this chamber. I found evidence of excess pressure from this same round in the Colt 38 Super barrel, too (link).

Based on this result I suggest extreme caution if thinking about shooting factory 38 Super ammunition in an unsupported 9X23 chamber. Depending on the dimensions of the 9X23 chamber, it might not offer the same support as a typical unsupported 38 Super chamber, just like my example. In this instance, not all factory 38 Super ammunition would be safe because of the risk of case failure.

38 Super Brass

Handloaders might find 9X23 brass difficult to come by since only Winchester and Starline make cases for this caliber. Thirty-eight Super cases are more widely available. There are also rimless versions of the 38 Super, and they will easily fit in a 9X23 chamber. These include 38 Super Comp (Starline), 38 TJ (TJ = Todd Jarrett, made by Starline, and in the past, Hornady), 38 Super Lapua and Armscor 38 Super rimless. The rimless brass have a narrower rim (0.380 - 0.386”) than the 9X23 (0.394”) and might require tuning the extractor and/or ejector for reliable operation.

The advantage to handloading 38 Super cases is that you have control over how hot they are loaded so you can maintain a margin of safety. What follows is a series of tests designed to determine the safety of various 38 Super brass at 9X23-like pressures in my unsupported 9X23 barrel. The cases were different with respect to case wall thickness and strength, and 9X23-like pressures were too much for several of them.

Case Wall Thickness

How well does case wall thickness correlate with it’s ability to withstand high pressure? The Winchester 9X23 brass, with it’s extra thick wall, tolerates the high pressure very well in an unsupported chamber. But its case wall is substantially thicker than any 38 Super brass. What about the thinner-walled 38 Super cases?

I examined six different brass: Remington 38 Super +P, Starline 38 Super +P nickel plated, Starline 38 Super Comp, Starline 38 TJ, Lapua 38 Super and Hornady 9mm Steyr (4). The 9mm Steyr is another straight-walled case (diameter 0.380”) with the same length and a minimal rim, only 0.001” according to several sources, very much like rimless 38 Super.

I measured case wall thickness of brass that had been sectioned longitudinally like the examples in Figure 5A. The forward edge of the feed ramp imprint on bulged cases measured 0.270” up from the base. I measured case wall thickness at that position (Table 5). The Winchester 9X23 brass was the thickest measuring 0.047” and the Remington 38 Super +P was the thinnest at 0.024”. The Starline 9X23 Comp measured 0.034”.

For “bulge” testing I loaded virgin cases with Silhouette to duplicate the 9X23 factory velocity and a Hornady 124 grain FMJ FP bullet at 1.245” COL. The results are summarized in Table 5.

The Starline 9X23 Comp, Lapua 38 Super, Starline 38 TJ and Remington 38 Super +P cases had dangerous bulging (Figure 10). One Remington case blew-out in the unsupported region. The Starline 38 Super +P nickel plated brass fared better but consistently had a small feed ramp impression.

Examples of the degree of bugling. The Winchester 9X23 case shown here has a “microscopic” imprint of the feed ramp (white arrows). It is difficult to see here but is evident upon magnification. The red arrow marks a large imprint, the yellow arrow marks a small imprint.

The Starline 38 Super Comp and Hornady 9mm Steyr cases fared best. They showed either no feed ramp imprint or only a small imprint. However, they were not quite as durable, on average, as original Winchester 9X23 cases since their feed ramp imprint was more frequent and larger than seen with the Winchester cases.

I conducted further tests with the 38 Super Comp and 9mm Steyr cases. Both of these brass fared well with high velocity/pressure loads and could duplicate factory loads in the 1450 fps range with 3N38 and Accurate #7 without excess bulging, or at most the occasional small feed ramp imprint. Thus, of the brass tested, these were the most durable next to the original Winchester 9X23. Given that some did have a small feed ramp imprint, it would be wise to load them down a little for safety.

I also compared the maximum charge weight of Silhouette that Remington 38 Super +P brass would handle without bulging, just as I did with the Starline 9X23 Comp brass (Table 4). Interestingly, their maximum charge weight was the same, at 6.6 grains with a 124 grain bullet. Thus the Starline 9X23 brass was no stronger than the Remington brass even though it was .010” thicker (Table 5).

These tests revealed that case wall thickness did not correlate well with its pressure performance. The Starline 38 Super Comp and Hornady 9mm Steyr that showed little excess bulging were slightly thinner (0.030”) than the Starline 9X23 Comp (0.034”) that showed dangerous bulging.

This is important to bear in mind because brass thickness is only one variable in its ability to withstand pressure. Brass can differ in it’s strength, according to Starline’s website, by changing its grain structure and heat treatment. Therefore, estimating how much pressure a case can withstand based solely on wall thickness might under- or over-estimate it’s capability.

I only measured one case for each example, and there could be variation from one to another. Also, case wall thickness might not be symmetrical depending on the precision and alignment of the dies used to form the brass, so some brass might be noticeably thinner on one side than the other. I measured both sides of my samples, and they were within 0.001” of each other, but this might vary. Brass strength (and case wall thickness) might vary from one lot to another. My results might be different if I had tested different lot numbers of the same headstamp.

There was considerable variation in Starline’s product line, with the 9X23 Comp and 38 TJ showing a large excess bulge, the 38 Super +P nickel plated a small but consistent excess bulge, and the 38 Super Comp brass showing no, or only a small, excess bulge with the same powder charge. This suggests that either the expectations differ for their product lines, or simply that durability varies with different production runs.

9X23 test pistol. Ready for duty!

My tests certainly push these brass to the extreme, because the 9X23-like pressures are the highest of any semi-automatic pistol cartridge. Many competition pistols used in practical shooting sports that require high velocity performance are wisely built with fully supported chambers to ensure safe operation at the pressure required to achieve the designated power levels. Many of these brass are used almost exclusively by the competition crowd, and probably are seldom used in barrels without good case support. Also, the 38 Super and 9mm Steyr operating pressures are well below the 9X23’s range and are not usually exposed to this type of pressure in the first place. Thus it should come as no surprise that these brass don’t handle 9X23-like pressure as well as the original Winchester case because they were never designed to.

These results emphasize the considerable variation in how brass will respond to high pressure. Thus, using brass other than the original Winchester 9X23 cases for high pressure loads in an unsupported chamber requires testing in your barrel. Always start with reduced loads and work your way up. As soon as you see evidence of excess bulging, you’ve gone too far.

Consider even a small feed ramp imprint an indication that the powder charge is too high. I advise this because of variation I saw in the size of the bulge. Not every brass of the same headstamp responded the same to a given powder charge, though most were consistent. For example, the Lapua 38 Super brass showed a wide range of response to the same powder charge. Some showed only a small bulge, while others had a huge bulge and were probably near failure.

If you have the option, use a slower gunpowder for your high-velocity loads to give yourself an extra margin of safety. Silhouette produces high pressure at these velocities, so I lean toward using 3N38 for high velocity loads in an unsupported chamber because it produces less bulging. For example, it replicated 9X23 factory velocities in my samples of Starline 38 Super Comp, Starline 38 Super +P nickel plated and Hornady 9mm Steyr brass without excess bulging in my barrel.

Always error on the side of safety during load development, and give yourself a wide margin for error just to be safe. Case rupture is very, very dangerous. When in doubt, use only Winchester 9X23 cases for high pressure loads in an unsupported chamber, and reserve the other brands of brass only for reduced pressure loads. Remember, brass should be discarded if the imprint is present as it is likely weakened there and might fail if reloaded and exposed to high pressure again.

One last issue is that excessively expanded 38 Super brass might not resize well, or would end up with bulge/resize artifact that would weaken the case (see Figure 4B here). This was not a problem with my 38 Super cases that did not show excess bulging. They resized down to 0.383-0.384” (Dillon 38 Super size die), the same as they resize when fired in my 38 Super chambers. But not everyone that has fired 38 Super brass in a 9X23 chamber has had that same positive experience and report sizing artifacts. This is something you’ll need to watch for. It likely depends on chamber dimensions, pressures, brass selection and brass life.


Factory 38 Super ammunition might not be safe in a 9X23 barrel if it does not offer full case support, because some factory 38 Super ammunition was not safe in the test barrel.

Thirty-eight Super brass, including the rimless versions, vary in their ability to withstand high 9X23-like pressure in an unsupported chamber and most require reduced charges. Careful testing can determine their upper limit; excess bulging with the appearance of a feed ramp imprint.

By the way, I don’t recommend that you shoot 9X23 ammunition in a 38 Super chamber. 9X23 rounds will fit in some 38 Super chambers, but not all because the 38 Super chamber is a little narrow at the rear where the 9X23 is wider. Even minor expansion might make it stick in the 38 Super chamber. Also, the throat dimensions for a 38 Super chamber are rumored to be different and result in more pressure than a 9X23 chamber. This will only increase the chance that the 9X23 case will expand and stick. I’ve tried this and had a 9X23 case get stuck. It was very difficult to remove, and required a squib rod and a BIG hammer.


The author is not responsible for mishaps of any kind, which might occur from the use of factory or handloaded ammunition. It is the user’s responsibility to follow safe shooting guidelines and to develop safe handloads.

Footnote 1. Dane Burns had noted in a forum thread he experienced consistent case blowouts with COR-BON ammunition loaded in Starline 9X23 Comp cases ( He also noted that as of 9-18-2009 all COR-BON 9X23 ammunition would be produced with Winchester brass. But this does not seem to be the current state. As per my email correspondence with COR-BON on 7-9-2013, they load their 9X23 ammunition exclusively in Starline brass unless they can find some NOS (?New Old Stock?) Winchester brass. My sample of COR-BON 9X23 ammunition was several years old - unknown date of manufacture.

Footnote 2. Measurements showed that the feed ramp imprint appeared when the case wall at that location had expanded to 0.390” or greater for this barrel. Cases that were expanded to 0.387-0.389” showed no evidence of the feed ramp imprint. One of the Starline 9X23 Comp cases tested with a high pressure charge of Silhouette had expanded to .4005” in the unsupported region. Yikes!

Footnote 3. I have no way to measure pressure. There is an assumption that the brass’ expansion is correlated with chamber pressure levels, but it might also be correlated with the shape of the pressure curve, which differs between fast and slow burning gunpowders. In either case, this test will compare case expansion with different gunpowders. Note: different burn rate charts place gunpowders in different positions. See the Gunpowder page (link) for an example.

Footnote 4. The Hornady 9mm Steyr cases have a case thickness similar to the Starline brass. I don’t know what the case wall thickness/durability is for “typical” 9mm Steyr brass since I’m not very familiar with this cartridge and only had this one brand example, so my results apply ONLY to the Hornady brass.


ANSI/SAAMI booklet Z299.3-1993. American National Standard. Voluntary Industry Performance Standards for Pressure and Velocity of Centerfire Pistol and Revolver Ammunition for the Use of Commercial Manufacturers. 1993. Sporting Arms & Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute, Inc., Wilton, Conn. USA.

Barnes, F.C. 2006.  Cartridges Of The World, 11th Edition, Edited by S. Skinner, Gun Digest Books, Iola, WI.

Brown, E. (1998) 9x23 in “Condition White”, American Handgunner, September/October, pp. 55-56.


8-10-2013. Added Part 2.

11-21-2013. Added photograph of the test pistol.

All images are the intellectual property of Brad Miller, Ph.D. © August 2013.

Any violation of the rights afforded by copyright protection is subject to criminal and civil prosecution.

Questions, comments, suggestions, hate mail? Feel free to email me. However, the probability of getting a response is low simply because I don't have the time to respond to all emails. It's nothing personal, really. Nevertheless, I do appreciate your thoughts. If you see an obvious error then please put the word ERROR in the title of your email. Thanks, and happy shooting.
Copyright 2006-2013 38