Food for thought: is the luger really a "weak" design?

[DonVoigt]

Originally Posted by 4 Scale

Off topic but to address Kurusu's comment - I just purchased a "defaced" Portuguese Army M2 (M2 crest scrubbed off). Kenyon in "Lugers at Random" notes the crest was removed from some Army M2s but does not address why. In reading the history of the Portuguese Revolution, it seems there was a determined effort to replace old symbols (flag, anthem, official bust) with new ones. Until I find more or better data, I will suspect the removal of the crest was related to this effort.

The lesson I will take from Thor's picture of that Swiss is, next range trip I will do a tape test on all my shooters to verify the toggle strike on the frame is not excessive. Tape test = place a piece of tape at the strike point and inspect.

On the tape test,
can you not "tell" by just looking at the back of the receiver?
Excessive wear would be apparent, as metal wear or depression.

I've seen a lot of marks, most seem just to have removed the bluing. A few may show a hint of wear. Weapons "re-built" once or twice that I have seen show no significant wear in the metal at
that location.

Do report on the results of your testing- with pictures.
Perhaps even in a separate, instructional thread for those who have no idea what a tape test is.

This potential strike/wear area is related to our previous observation about metallurgy ; an example of where a too hard frame(brittle) would crack if impacted multiple times, instead they are softer(malleable or ductile) so they do not crack-but may show some wear. Harder would eliminate any wear(not to the bluing), but also make the rear of the receiver more likely to crack. Again JMO.