Quality & Durability of Mitchell Luger
 

Does anybody have an opinion on the quality and durability of the Mitchell lugers? I want a luger for a shooter and a friend of mine suggested I investigate the Mitchell luger.

Hi Jeff,

My advice would be save your money. Mitchell's are of questionable quality, and are reportedly unreliable.

Fine an original of "shooter" quality with mis-matched parts or that has been refinished, or one of the Finnish Lugers. Often you can find them for under $1000 and sometimes in the $500-$600 range.

Welcome to the forum...

Ron

They can be very bad in functioning. I purchased one and even after polishing, re chambering and trying several brands and weights of ammunition could never get a full box of ammunition through it. I ended up selling it and getting a nice Mauser that not only functioned perfectly, shot nice tight groups too.

To this day I am not sure what the problem was, they appeared very tight, but maybe that was where the problem lay, stainless sliding on stainless is just not the same as other metals, binding can occur with even small amounts of dirt/debris.

Ron's advice is good!

Those guns are sure pretty though, they make nice presentation cases and gifts to non shooteres

Vern

The Interarms (which are actually Mauser made 1970's pistols) are really nice ones too.

I screwed up at the gun auction, there was an Interarms, in the box and it only went for $550; I was distracted or would have bid on it....


ed

I have never owned one, but I have helped the local gunsmith work on a couple. Both were made with very soft SS and the frame ramps that break the toggle action started to bow out causing the gun to jam after only a few 100 rounds.
The parts are not the same as a PO8 even though they look interchangable.

Save your money and buy a real Luger

Jim

I think Steve Richards should chime in with his opinion on this thread since I am pretty sure he owns at least two of these... Steve, are you listening?

Four Mitchells have periodically passed through my hands unintentially through multiple trade deals. None of them functioned even passably and I couldn't wait to get rid of them. They sold for about $400 each, one with three spare mags!

Rick

Not sure if you are asking about why I re chambered that gun I owned? I found that the chamber was overly tight, using a new reamer I was surprised at how much metal was removed-- this fixed perhaps 80% to 90% of the problems I was having.

I always thought this was a factory fluke and that I had gotten hold of a gun toward the end of tool life, it wasn't until I came to this forum that I realized so many other people also were having trouble.

Vern

There was a Swedish guy who used to post on here who had rather strong feelings about the Mitchell Lugers. As I recall, he called them "pure rubbish" and a "piece of American crap."

My Mitchell has given me no problems thus far. On the other hand, I haven't run all that many rounds through it as of yet.

TAC... a 383 Magnum is an older type of Chrysler Corp V-8 engine...

It seems with the Mitchell Lugers some are bad while some are good. The people with bad ones speak up first and often. On the other hand, those with a good Mitchell hardly talk about it, they just shoot it.
I have a 1992 stainless Mitchell Luger which I have fired many times, using 115 fmj Winchester from WalMart, and have had no problems with it. This I believe makes my pistol one of the lucky (fortunate) ones with no problems.
I understand the Mitchell were made from castings of the 1942 Mauser and has some of its faults. But I am not sure about that as the 1942 Mausers seem to be a great Luger.

Hello Tac,
I haven't been on the forum in a while and just saw your question. A 383 magnum is one of the motors used in the Dodge Charger and other Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth cars from the "muscle car" era.

I do own two of the stainless guns. One in 9mm with a 6" barrel and one in .30cal with a 4.75 inch barrel.

At first I had some trouble with the 9mm but I sent the top back and Mr. Romo replaced a couple of parts and it has functioned very well since then. They are test fired with 115gr S&B ammo so that is what I shoot when I have a choice. One of the ranges here requires use of their house ammo and it woks very well but is very dirty. My hands come out black after only a few rounds but the gun works without a hitch. The Clackamas county Sherrifs Dept range also require their ammo to be used and it will not function in my gun.

The .30cal will work flawlessly with some reloads that I bought from somebody who is no longer in business but will not work with Fiochi. I cannot get the .30cal Hornady bullets to slide up the magazine in the reloads that I tried. The soft lead tips seem to grab the magazine. Some experimenting with length is probably called for.

I like mine and plan to keep and shoot both.

Steve

Steve

The early reports of the Mitchell Luger ( 1991-1992) were consistently none complimentary, it would be interesting to find out if production methods improved as they were produced. If they did, then the later guns might represent a good value in todays market.

It would be interesting to survey the serial numbers of those guns in members hands that function with few problems.

Vern

Both of mine were made after Mr. Romo no longer dealt through Mitchel. The 9mm is marked AIMCO with a year 2000 stamp. Serial # 69064. The .30 is marke OFM Cor. with an OFM crest similar to the DWM scroll crest and is # CR8135. It is the newer of the two.

As I mentioned, both are sensitive to the ammo used but will function reliably with what they like.

I know of a NIB stainless Luger for $895. Now you guys have me thinking about it again.