Some Comments & Questions on Ammo
 

About 10 days ago, I took my 1940 Mauser P.08 "shooter"to the range for the first time in 50 years! The reason for the lengthy pause is a lengthy tale in itself, which I won't go imto here. The P.08 (along with others) had been stored in a gun case, under conditions of controlled temperature and humidity, had been field stripped and inspected frequently and was in perfect condition. I took along 2 cartons of new Remington-UMC 124 grain FMJ cartridges, plus some old Winchester rounds - and I mean OLD! The first two full magazines functioned through the gun perfectly - I even managed to hit the target with every round, but not necessarily where I aimed! Bifocals don't help! From then on, I experienced some 'stove-piping' with the cartridges nicked and scratched in the process. I put these aside for further inspection. I also had some failures to eject, the cases getting a little squished in the process. I ended the shooting session with a full 8-round magazine of the old Winchester stuff, which worked perfectly. All in all, after 58 firing attempts, I had 4 'stove-pipes' and 6 failures to eject fully; all from the UMC ammo. This amounts to a 17% failure rate, which sounds like a lot, but I nevertheless had a 'blast' (no pun intended), and received admiring glances from other shooters (youngsters) who had never seen a Luger! Part of this was due to the handsome look imparted by a new set of plain walnut Nill grips I had recently received. Examining the UMC rounds afterward, I noted the bullets were seated deeper in the case than the older Winchester cartridges. Consulting a reference, MILITARY SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION OF THE WORLD 1945-1980 by P. Labbett, it mentioned the overall length of the 9 mm Parabellum cartridge to be 29.6 mm (standard). The UMC rounds were almost 2 mm shorter and I believe that may have been responsible for the 'stove-piping.' The cartridges were being stripped from the magazine, but were not 'ramping-up' properly and entering the chamber. What do you think? The old Winchester rounds were right on the money at 29.6 mm long. The failures to eject properly may have been random occurences due to the widely held belief that US 9 mm rounds develop pressures on the low side; the European stuff a little hotter. These are the comments. The questions: what kind of shelf life do modern smokeless powder pistol cartridges possess, given proper storage conditions? Over time, the powder may degrade, especially if moisture gets into it, but I feel confident that they can be safely fired. If anything, I would think performance would be lousy, with pressures on the low side. In 1947, I shot some German mlitary ammo that was manufactured in 1917 - 30 years old. In this recent instance - 50+ years old. I would welcome some comments and perhaps further discussion. By the way, my 75th. birthday is coming up this coming week and I'm going to celebrate with another shooting session (with another brand of 9 mm, this time), 50 or 100 rounds with a Mauser Hsc and maybe 50 or so .45 ACP, with a WWII vintage Model 1911! It looks like the bug has bitten me again, and I think my wife is pissed!

Jim,

Congratulations on your new found (re found?) interest. I have shot '39 .45 ACP ammo and mid '40s 30-06 not too long ago. These old shells worked fine. I have never shot old 9 mm.

I shoot several 1911s (not 1911-A1s) made before 1927, an '03 Springfield, a 1940's M1, and a 1936 Luger. These old guns still have original springs and most action parts (not necessarily sights). They work perfectly. (I do have a lot of newer stuff also--I've got the fever and not just for Lugers.)

Get some Walmart 9 mm and you'll be back in business. Have fun and good shooting.

I have a theory when it comes to shooting Lugers with which you may or may not agree. I believe that most reliable performance can only be attained with ammo loaded to original specifications using a truncated bullet matching the shape of the originals. The second part of my theory is that the 17% failure rate which Jim experienced is not far from the normal expected performance of the Luger pistol. I submit that except for exceptional circumstances the Germans experienced at least a 10% failure rate in the use of the Luger in combat conditions. So those of us who expect 100% performance on a consistent basis are just engaging in wishful thinking.

I can't imagine the Germans would accept a 10 % failure rate--I don't accept it. My Luger has 0 % failure rate for the first 50 rounds, if clean, and maybe 1-2 % failure rate for the next 200 rounds.

I agree with AGE. A 10% failure to function rate is absolutely unacceptable in a combat pistol. The 1911 .45 digested 6,000 rounds without a SINGLE stoppage during the Army's endurance testing. The pistol was fired in a series of 100 rounds and then given 5 minutes to cool. It was cleaned and lubed every 1,000 rounds. When the pistol became too hot to hold, it was dunked into a pail of water to cool it. ("John M. Browning, American Gunmaker" pages 196 & 197)

While a more finicky gun, the Luger would never have been accepted into German military service with a 10% failure rate... or any other nation's armed forces for that matter.

I don't understand how you can compare the 1911 to the Luger when it comes to reliability. The German engineering mind could not accept the idea of the loose tolerances which John Browning designed into the 1911. They were far more concerned with precise machining and fitting of parts. I will admit that when I used truncated bullets such as the Germans used in my reloads there was a marked improvement in my Luger performance.

[quote]Originally posted by Aaron:
<strong>I don't understand how you can compare the 1911 to the Luger when it comes to reliability. The German engineering mind could not accept the idea of the loose tolerances which John Browning designed into the 1911. They were far more concerned with precise machining and fitting of parts.</strong><hr></blockquote>

My comparison was intended to be between combat pistols and the 1911 is one I have some statistics on.

Perhaps it was a poor illustration for my point which was that the US Army would never have adopted a pistol that failed to function every 10th round. Neither would the German Imperial Army.

Here is, I think, a better comparison; the 1907 test results of the US Army using a .45 Colt (1905 model?) and a .45 Luger. In 959 rounds the Colt failed to function properly 27 times for all reasons. That's a failure rate of 2.8%. The Luger failed 31 times in 1022 rounds or 3.0% of the time. Neither pistol was accepted for military service following the tests.

The bottom line is simply this: IMO, the military services of the world would not adopt a pistol that failed every 10th round on average which would almost be once each magazine for the Luger.

Doubs,
And those failure rates include adverse conditions such as rust, mud, etc. The close tolerances of the Luger, contribute to its failure rate.

[quote]Originally posted by wes:
<strong>Doubs, And those failure rates include adverse conditions such as rust, mud, etc. The close tolerances of the Luger, contribute to its failure rate.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Absolutely, Wes. The precision of the Luger's mechanism tends to work against it when subjected to dust and dirt. Still, when all is considered, I believe the .45 Luger aquited itself very well in the tests of 1907. The data I quoted came from Datig's book "The Luger Pistol", 1962 printing.

Doubs,
Extremely well.

[quote]Originally posted by Aaron:
<strong>The second part of my theory is that the 17% failure rate which Jim experienced is not far from the normal expected performance of the Luger pistol.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Aaron,

I have to say that my Luger shooting experience is considerably at odds with both Jim's experience and your theory.

After many shooting tests I have fixed on the cheap WalMart Winchester ammunition to shoot in my Lugers. In the 1500 or so rounds I have shot since then I have had maybe half-a-dozen fail to chamber or eject properly, something less than half a percent failure rate.

In the experience of many of us here it is faulty magazines which cause most of the problems in operating a Luger. That being said, however, Jim's discovery that the UMC ammunition was seated too deeply certainly sounds like the primary problem here. I experienced this same problem with some gun show reloads which were not crimped adequately and allowed the bullets to push back into the cartridge, they would not feed for beans. Of course, there is a potential for dangerous overpressure here, as well.

Jim,

Run, do not walk, to WalMart and buy some of their bulk-pack 9mm Winchester. If you have a gun shop nearby which might have a Mec-Gar magazine, you might pick that up too (or more than one [img]biggrin.gif[/img] ). When you shoot, be sure to do so with a firm hand--allowing your wrist to slack and the Luger to fly up under recoil will transfer too much of the recoil energy to your hand, and not permit the gun's action to work properly. I'm willing to bet that these measures will reduce your failure rate to near zero.

Happy birthday, and good shooting <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />

--Dwight

Being that the trials in 1907 were among if not the first ever using semiauto pistols in new calibers, how do we know what acceptable was to the the testors? They didn't have the data to compare. Just curious as to what standards they might have used.
[img]smile.gif[/img]

RK

[quote]Originally posted by Roadkill:
<strong>Being that the trials in 1907 were among if not the first ever using semiauto pistols in new calibers, how do we know what acceptable was to the the testors? They didn't have the data to compare. Just curious as to what standards they might have used.
[img]smile.gif[/img]
RK</strong><hr></blockquote>

RK, the various tests used for both the 1900 .30 Caliber Lugers and the 1907 .45 Luger are in Datig's book "The Luger Pistol". There is simply too much for me to type but the 1907 tests included:

velocity @ 25 ft; accuracy & penetration @ 75 ft; rapidity with accuracy shooting at a 6x2 ft target at 100 ft; rapidity at will without regard for "hits"; endurance during the firing of 500 rounds with a cooling period after each 50 rounds; decreased charges; excessive charges; pierced primers; dust test whereby a blast of fine sand will be blown onto the pistol in a specially prepared box for 1 minute after which the pistol may be wiped off, shook or jarred using the bare hand only; rust test with the pistol completely degreased by boiling in a solution of soda and then placed in a solution of sal-ammoniac for 5 minutes and then hung indoors for 22 hours. The pistol will then be fired 5 shots. Supplimentary tests authorized for pistols successfully completing the tests as seen fit by the board.

There's much more to the report and procedures but the above will give you a general idea of the tests used.

Hi Aaron,

A Luger, in sound mechanical condition and with proper ammunition, is every bit as reliable as the 1911A1. If you are experiencing failures to feed or eject with a Luger there is a problem that needs to be found and corrected.

Warm regards,

Kyrie

I agree with Kyrie and Dwight. I shoot NOTHING but Win 115 gr hp"s in my Lugers seated to 1.150 oal, which is the same as Winchester factory ammo.I have new mag springs and use tetra gun grease on the sliding parts. I can"t remember the last time I had a malfunction.
Lonnie

Happy Birthday!!!! A '70s Mauser Parabellum w/ 6" bbl is my *shooter*. I use the late style Mec-Gar magazines & feed it Wally-World Winchester bulk pack ammo. I use a 2-hand hold & the gun has never malfunctioned & is extremely accurate to say the least.

To all who responded to my original windy comments and question submission: thanks for your contributions - I enjoyed the discussion and certainly derived some benefit from it. I did proceed to my local Walmart, and - would you believe it? - no 9 mm on the shelf nor could they find any! I did pick up some Winchester 124 gr. Nato stuff at my local gun shop, which I checked for overall length. This time, the length was right on and perhaps the 'stove-piping' will cease. As to the faulty ejection - we will see what happens. Perhaps later this week. There is another Walmart in nearby Maryland, which I may try later for the cheaper ammo, but they have a sales tax on everything, which may negate any saving. I would like to hear more re the use of old ammo. Since it is not dated like most other consumables today, it's difficult to determine when a particular batch was manufactured. And is it really all that important if the cartridges are clean, no corrosion or showing obvious damage?

I'm shooting 1950s era 30.06 in my US military guns, Lake City, never a problem, 1930 era Turkish 8mm in my 98&98K, very accurate,1960 era Finnish 9mm in my Luger & P38, no problems, and 1950s era .303 in the British guns. Long as its clean it works well. Just have to repeatedly clean the guns afterward.

RK

I will agree with Kyrie. If your Luger and your ammo are right, they will be perfectly reliable. In some tests results I have seen, the Luger actually turned in a better score for reliabiltiy than the 1911.

The one big weakness is the Luger will not tolerate very much mud under the sideplate, but this does not seem to me like a serious problem in the present day context. I doubt if anybody on this forum is in the habit of dragging a Luger through the mud.

The single most reliable firearm I ever owned was a 7.65 mm Luger. I never had a single malfunction with it for the many years I owned it. I ran cast and swaged semi wadcutters and full wadcutters through it as well as hardball.

This particular pistol was the famous Jackrabbit Stopper. It's mechanical reliability was easy to explain, it's reliability as a jackrabbit stopper was harder to explain.

I have a Glock and a Winchester 1894 that did not match the Jackrabbit Stopper for reliability, although in both jams the factory loaded cartridge was probably oversized.

If your Luger is not reliable switch magazines. If that doesn't fix it switch ammo. After this, suspect a non-original recoil spring that is out of spec. If the first three don't fix it, you've got something wrong with your Luger.

[quote]Originally posted by jim haycraft:
<strong>I would like to hear more re the use of old ammo. Since it is not dated like most other consumables today, it's difficult to determine when a particular batch was manufactured. And is it really all that important if the cartridges are clean, no corrosion or showing obvious damage?</strong><hr></blockquote>

I've shot 53-year-old 9mm Largo in my Astra, goes bang just like its supposed to. Your biggest problem with older ammunition will be that it may have corrosive primers. This means you will need to clean your Luger immediately upon arriving home from the range (if you don't deal with it actually -at- the range). There have been several threads here about this cleaning which should be easy to find.

--Dwight

I have some l943 Luger ammo that functions perfect in my Lugers. However; I have quit shooting it because of it being a collector item.
Lonnie

Thank you, gentlemen; useful comment and good advice!

Hearing that a Luger is as reliable as the .45 1911 Government Model made me laugh. How many of us would bet our lives on that claim? I own both and I know that I woudn't. I KNOW which one is more reliable. The .45 is a hog while many Lugers have a finicky appetite. I think that's established beyond doubt. That's not even talking about mud or dirt....

You can't go by those 1907 tests. That the older 1905 .45 Colt which was soon obsolete. It's the 1911 Model that the comparison should be made with. Granted, it's a newer design than the Luger and lots of progress had been made in semi-auto pistol design.

You really do have to find the right mag and ammo combo for many Lugers. And don't think the Winchester ammo is a cure-all either. My Luger hates it, but functions nicely with other brands.

max2cam

Hold on there! Many shooters try to go 'cheap'. So they buy inferior bullets or reload on the cheap.
Put regular gas in a Rolls Royce and then say that a Chevy is definitely better?

A pistol that will handle hardball, semi-wadcutters, and full wadcutters with perfect reliability for ten years and a lot of shooting is not "finicky".

Put a really tired 70 year old spring in the magazine, drop it on its head a few times, put a mismatched recoil spring in the frame, and cut back the powder charge until it won't shove the slaide all the way back and the 1911 will suddenly get "finicky" too.

The 1911 is like a Harley, no matter how many times it stops, it's still the most reliable pistol around.

A very happy 75th birthday to you Jim!

To John: Thank you sir, for your birthday greetings and on a personal note - my prayers for you and your family at a time of need.

" More things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of."

(Alfred Tennyson)

Somebody around here needs a reality check -- maybe me.

But if the Luger were so gosh-darned reliable as some guys are saying, you would think they would still be a top choice in the world of semi-auto pistols with lots of custom combat specials being made for top buck.

But somehow I see lots of .45 Govt. Model clones and customs on the market, but very few Lugers clones and customs.

This strikes me as strange as the Luger is a beautifully handling and accurate pistol. But if it can stand up to the .45 and other semi autos in reliability, where is its following except among collectors and a few excentric shooters like myself?

[quote] if the Luger were so gosh-darned reliable <hr></blockquote>

Where is the Dussenburg? Locomobile? Auburn? They were a darn sight better than a Ford or Chevy.

Perhaps you're talking elegance and I'm talking reliability. Two totally different things.

I couldn't agree more that the Luger is elegant. But I have never heard yet of having to match the right ammo to the right magazine in a .45. That seems to be very common advice in a Luger.

The reason you don't have to match the right factory ammo to a 1911 is none of the manufacturers make the wrong ammo. On the other hand, they very definitely do make the wrong ammo for the Luger. Not only in terms of powder charge and velocity, but also in terms of bullet design and for all I know the OAL. No pistol can be expected to function with ammo that does not meet the specs for that pistol. The Fiocchi 7.65 load is far too weak to operate a Luger reliably with the standard 7.65 recoil spring. Cut the powder charge in half and the standard issue 1911 won't be so reliable either.

As for the 1911 magazine, put in a weak spring and bash it with a ball peen hammer a few times before you decide whether or not you need to change it. The original vintage Luger magazines are all over 55 years old now. The majority are pushing 75 years or more. They have been exposed to every sort of abuse during that time.

The vintage Luger went out of production because it took a lot of machine time to mnufacture it, not because it didn't work. Many countries adopted it. You can be shure most of them torture tested it first.

In general, the "goodness" of a product does not correlate to how well it sells. Marketing and many other influences enter the picture. Show me the best selling product in any line and I'll show you the one that isn't the best at what it does. Pennzoil is probably the best selling motor oil on the market, but it's also about the poorest brand name oil. They spend a lot on advertising. The biggest difference between a $10 and a $20 dollar bottle of whiskey is $8 worth of advertising. The primary reason the US didn't adopt the Luger was the, "It wasn't invented here." syndrome. The Beretta wasn't either but look at the politics and bruhaha that went into adopting it and the controversy afterwards.

The 1911 has enjoyed many years and many dollars worth of developement work to make a target gun out of it or a carry piece. No one has spent 5% of that on developing the Luger. In spite of which it does hold at least one world target championship. One of the big reasons no one tried to develope the Luger for target work is that in this country we shoot bull's eye and that game is stacked in favor of the 45.

I still say if your Luger and your ammo is right it will go bang. Period. The 1911 won't go bang if it ain't right. When I want malfunctions I refer to an AMT 380 I had. At least one to every magazine full or triple your money back. No matter what magazine or what ammo. Still I bet somebody out there has one that works.

[quote]But I have never heard yet of having to match the right ammo to the right magazine in a .45. <hr></blockquote>

Again we are back to putting regular or 'drip' gasoline in a Rolls Royce. How do you expect it to run?

I donâ??t know what octane fuel a Rolls Royce requires -- regular or premium -- but I do know something about engines. If you put higher octane gas into an engine that doesnâ??t need it you are wasting your money as there is no benefit.

Nor do I have any experience with Rolls Royce autos, but I do have experience with English sports cars and esp. English motorcycles back in the 1960s and 1970s. You could put the worldâ??s highest octane gas in them and they would still break down, leak, and the electrics would die. Surely weâ??ve all heard the phrase: â??Lucas, Prince of Darkness.â?�

Being an English automobile, I imagine the Rolls Royce is just as troublesome. Comparing the Luger to an English car is no compliment in my opinion, but actually a slur. If you want to talk about a great vehicle, that would be my BMW motorcycle: wonderful engineering, top-quality manufacturing, and 100% reliability on regular gas.

As for modern 9mm ammo not always being ideal for the Luger, who would deny that? But if there is ONE absolute correct and reliable loading for the Luger, I have yet to hear of it or find it. Rather, I hear about lots of testing with each Luger seeming to have a mind of its own as to what brand or loading of ammo each individual gun will function reliably on.

I then read in an old Guns & Ammo magazine an article by a Luger expert that I'm supposed to cut off some of my recoil spring to make my Luger function properly. On the other hand, I'm told if I use too hot 9mm, I'll wreck my gun that way too.

As to Luger mags all being 55-75 years old, that is not true for mine. I have a nice DDR mag and a new repro mag. PMP ammo works very well with the DDR mag, but not in the new repro mag. Russian ammo works very well in the new repro mag, but not in the DDR mag. Winchester (the great favorite of many) doesnâ??t work well in either mag. Maybe mine is the only one, but itâ??s a finicky eater. My WWII issue .45 is not.

If the Luger had been the best pistol available at the time, the U.S. military would surely have adopted it. That is proven by the fact they adopted (stole) the M93-M98 Mauser designs to make the M1903 Springfield -- although in many ways they botched the job.

As to the Luger being as reliable as the .45 Govt. Model, hereâ??s what John Walter says in The Luger Story, p. 60: â??Colt-Brownings were usually less accurate than the Lugers, but were more reliable and undoubtedly stronger. One gun fired 6000 rounds without misfires or parts breakages, a performance no Luger would ever match.â?�

We can presume that when these early military tests were made, the Lugers had the RIGHT ammo, NEW magazines, and perfectly functioning guns. What was true then is true now: the Luger is a nice-looking, excellent handling, fun shooter. But perhaps it is a bit over-engineered and reliability suffers to some degree as a result when compared to the .45 Govt. Model (and to BMW motorcycles).

Arguments can be made for the case of a Jeep being superior to a Lincoln Continental, also. That is why there are Jeep buyers. They agree with an argument which supports their desire.

If I knew the URL of the .45 1911 Government Model community, I would post it for you so that you could spend this holiday weekend lolling about discussing the great advantages of this piece of iron with others of like persuasion and be as happy as a pig in the mud.

Too bad that you have to spend time on a forum devoted to a piece of crap pistol, the Luger.

(The Colt .45 must have been a piece of crap, also, for it is no longer manufactured. That is nice that everything that is no longer manufactured is a piece of crap. Makes the world easier to understand.)

Am I to take it that if we do not all click heels and proclaim the Luger to be superior to all other pistols in every respect that we somehow fail a loyalty test?

And that we must proclaim this supposed Luger superiority in spite of considerable evidence to the contrary some of it gained first hand?

I paid more for my Luger than most of my other guns -- and that for a less than perfect speciman. I have wanted a Luger all my life and it's my favorite gun -- although it is just a shooter and most collectors would sneer at it,

But just by looking at it I can see that it's more of a engineering and machinist's work of art than it is a sidearm suitable for trench warfare or modern combat. It has delicate parts. It is very precisely fitted. God forbid you get dirt or sand into the action. The same is generally not true of the .45 Govt. Model.

I think these are generally accepted observations....

Wes,

The .45 Colt, both the single action revolver and the 1911 automatic, are still being made by Colt and a host of copycats. Great guns.

The Luger is sure neeeeat and great fun on the range, but not the best for serious social occasions. That said, I wouldn't want to look at the wrong end of one in a fight--but I wouldn't want to take mine to a fight either (given a choice).

Colt is now only a commemorative producing firm. Any Colt .45's that it makes are in the same class as the Army 1860's.

Until Clinton stopped importation of arms from China, Norinco was making an excellent copy of the Government 1911A1. The 1911A1 model is being made in the Philippines and Brazil today and it has to be the most copied handgun ever made with the possible exception of the Colt black powder pistols. It can be loose as a goose for combat or as tuned as the best thoroughbred for target or competition shooting. A very good friend of mine used to turn out "working" .45's for police officers..... as reliable as the sun coming up and as accurate as a target pistol.

I love the Luger. The balance and feel of the Luger is simply perfection and with a six inch slender barrel it just plain oozes sex appeal. In .30 caliber it can be very reliable and accurate.

BUT, when I think my life may be on the line, I'll have my 1927 Argentine Colt in hand. My heart is with the Luger but my head tells me that the 1911 is a better pistol for serious business.

A Luger, any origonal Luger, is an antique. An origonal 1911 or 1911A1 is an antique. Treat them as such. Unless its a 1911 type modern gun which is not an antique, most professionals whose life may depend on it carry neither. Both had their time, both have their history, and neither are in use by any modern military or police force. Both my 1911A1 and Luger function quite well for punching holes in targets at closer and closer distances.

<img src="graemlins/xyxwave.gif" border="0" alt="[bigbye]" />

RK

Sorry, Roadkill, I got carried away replying to comments that I consider "Luger bashing". My wife may be on the homely side, but I'll be dipped if I will be told as much.