The "new" Luger?
 

The Luger seems to have the potential for fine accuracy, hampered by the small sights and heavy trigger. At the range, 5-shot groups over sandbags at 25 yards were consistently around 4". Several groups had three shots in 1" or less, but I couldn't get five shots to hang together.
If accuracy potential is good, reliability proved abysmal. I used only full metal jacket roundnose ammunition; cleaned and lubed the gun before shooting; tried different magazines; and still only once in a hundred shots was able to fire a full magazine without a malfunction. Usually no more than two or three consecutive shots could be fired without a stoppage. On one occasion I must have had the thumb of the support hand on the takedown lever. Evidently during the firing cycle I rotated the lever down. The side plate flew off and the barrel/breech assembly slid forward. It could be argued this was shooter error; still, it's the first time I've had a gun disassemble during firing.
--Dave Anderson, The "new" Luger?, American Handgunner, March-April, 2008

Michael. What was he fireing? The new Krieghoff?

I have ripped off three 32 round drums as fast as they would fire in my 1917 parts Artillery with no problems whatsoever....

I am curious what type of Luger this fellow had...a 1918 by the way.

"Autopistol fans will immediately note a resemblance to the old reliable Ruger .22 pistol. The similarity in names has caused some to suspect "Luger" is actually a play on the name of famous designer Bill Ruger. However I'm assured that Georg Luger is in fact a real person."

If the above is an example of this boneheads knowledge of the history of the first succesful military autoloading pistol and it's designer Herr Luger I am blown away! But wait..there's more!

"It's almost as though the designer had never handled a tuned 1911 to feel what a good single action autopistol trigger should be."

Is this guy for real? What Planet did he come from? I guess the younger generation couldn't care less about weapons history...Sad really.




Jerry Burney

My experience with the LP08 has been much more reassuring than the a passel of P08 pistols had led me to expect. If memory serves, the article quoted above refers to an Imperial DWM military issue. It made no mention of the age or the condition of the springs, which I would replace before shooting as a matter of course.

It would have been nice if the author, mr. Dave Anderson, had done his homework and got himself a nice, reliable luger for the tests. Or is this the april fool's day edition?

He probably shot with a worn gun, with worn magazines and the wrong ammo. I agree that the knowledge he spreads in his article is questionable at best.

My 1937 S/42 has had no stoppages with S&B ammo for over 5000 rounds.
My 1917 Artillery shoots within the black at 50 meters without problems, with excellent reliability (apart from the sight spring).

I even fired a 1913 1906 model for over a year without as much as a glitch. In fact the only problems I had were with a worn out VoPo with soft springs (which was cured after spring replacement) and the 1970s Mauser, which is a bit picky about it's ammunition.

Another "Expert" gun writer.

I knew a guy for years who was in the true sense of the word, a "Gun Addict". He was also a border-line "Black Helicopter" type.

He was always preparing for internal upheaval, or expecting (hoping for) the Cubans, Lithuanians, Canadians, Shriners or somebody to invade the U.S.

When I showed him one of my newly aquired LP08s. He held it up looked down the sights, hefted it, and upon handing it back to me said, "Nice pistol, but it wouldn't work for me in a tactical situation."

I later out shot his hi-cap 9mm with it. His Tupperwear special jammed twice in 50 rounds, the LP08 never fouled once.

Gentlemen,
I believe this must have been tongue in cheek article. It has been many years since I've read an American Handgunner magazine, but if memory serves me right Mr Anderson was a knowledgeable author at least on current arms and general firearms information. He was not a youngster and I find it inconceivable that he would not be more familiar with the Luger's impressive history.

Rich, I am not familiar with the artical or the publication and I appreciate your analysis of Mr. Anderson. I have to believe if it were written with some humor involved he should put a smiley face somewhere. It seems to be written in ernest with an amazing amount of ignorance of the subject he is attempting to write about.
I had assumed this was a young fellow as his historical knowledge seems to be as thin as butter spread on a boarding house biscuit.
Perhaps old age has caught up with him?
Jerry Burney

Michael included the direct link to the article, but here it is as a URL http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...24232265/print

I particularly liked this part:


â??On the plus side, the level of workmanship is very good. Metal checkering in places (the magazine button, for example) isn't up to current production standards, and a few machine tool marks are visible.â?�

Funny article indeed.

I thought by reading the entire article that I would find they were talking about the "new" krieghoff, but no mention on the on-line article about it?

so, a bit puzzeling overall.

ed

I was too until a read article title; The "new" Luger

The article at least confirms what I always suspected: That bum Georg Luger lifted on the back of Mr. Ruger and used Ruger's good name to help sell his product. The P08 is nothing more than a Ruger 22 rip off.

Ehm.....Well.....:roflmao: :roflmao:

The author of that article OBVIOUSLY needs to get back on his medication...

Not a single clear thought in the whole article that made sense.

Ed, Mr. Anderson says at the end of the artical it is a 1918 loaned by a Friend.

Sig..
â??On the plus side, the level of workmanship is very good. Metal checkering in places (the magazine button, for example) isn't up to current production standards, and a few machine tool marks are visible.â?�

Maybe Herr Anderson thought it was really a new model just made! A few machine marks!!!

Gerben, He has Herr Luger & Mr. Ruger backwards in time!
Like John says..he either needs his meds or was drunk when he wrote this claptrap.
Then you have to wonder if the editor of this handgun rag was asleep at the switch.
Jerry Burney

One has to remember they are in the bussiness of selling magazines, most of which the pages arent worth putting in the bottom of a bird cage!

I don't know shich Anderson this is. There was an author who used to write under "Dave Anderson" and then another by the same name apparently came along and wrote under that name too. The first suffered a stroke and later wrote under "David Anderson", possibly with an initial. That was quite a few years ago and I haven't kept up since.

I assume this was the second guy.

Folks, it's a joke. Don't let's get our panties in a bunch.

That said, my guess is that the 90-year springs were a bit tired, which biased the test results.

Also, it's unnerving to read a gun writer oblivious of the distinction between a frame and a receiver.

Folks, it's a joke. Don't let's get our panties in a bunch.

Michael, Perhaps you can explain?

Jerry Burney

I understood the article as a make-believe evaluation of a nonagenarian P08 as if it were a brand new design.

Well, That's one take on it. I guess the guy was shooting make believe ammo and having make believe stoppages. A poor attempt at humor for Lugernuts. Ya know...that's something not often seen in proffesional gun periodicals...humerous articles about pistol evaluations.
It was funny alright but I still think the guy is a moron. Does he have any other articals you know of? Sort of the same funny stuff about the 1911A1 or maybe a Sig. or a Glock? Maybe he could do a series on German pistols from 1898 down to 1945! Call it the idiots guide to German Pistols with historical highlites!
HAHA! This IS getting funny!
Cheers, Jerry