Hi Jerry!
[quote]Originally posted by Jerry Harris:
<strong>
(snippage)
I have looked at both many times, and am (and was) well aware that they each employ the depressed-center toggle lock, as did Maxim in the "Devil's Paintbrush" that inspired Borchardt.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes sir, I assume you were and if I seemed to imply otherwise I apologize.
[quote]Originally posted by Jerry Harris:
<strong>
Now, if you will look again at a cross-section of the Borchardt (for example in John Walter's "Luger Story," 2001 edition,p.28) it will be evident that the toggle-operating lever, roller and curved cam occupy a major portion of the rearward-bulging spring housing which Luger was striving to eliminate. So I think it is fair and reasonable to say that his idea for completely eliminating these parts and using the existing frame ramps to trip the toggle was a nontrivial, in fact vital, step in transforming the capable Borchardt into the inspired Parabellum, the timeless design that has attracted more than 400 appreciative members to this forum.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
While I quite agree with some of what you write here, I do have to cordially demure on at least one point. I agree that the change from the internal cam method of â??breaking the kneeâ?? of the toggle to the use of the inclined ramps on the frame are different methods. Iâ??m also in agreement that this change was a required one due to a preceding change (specifically the elimination rear mainspring and its housing). And I agree that the change was vital to getting a pistol that worked. And I quite agree on the attractiveness of the resulting pistol - else Iâ??d not be here :-)
OTOH, and the place where I cordially disagree is on whether the change was trivial. Purely IMO, it was a trivial change, and the change itself was necessitated by another change. In essence, it was not a change to improve the Borchardt, but a change required to make the â??Improved Borchardtâ?? work at all
[quote]Originally posted by Jerry Harris:
<strong>
(snippage)
But from the firearms engineering point of view, Luger did a superb job of turning a promising curiosity into a commercial and artistic masterpiece.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Here I regret to say I must mostly disagree. From a firearms engineering point of view, both the Borchardt and the Parabellum are sound, working designs. From an esthetic point of view, I regard both pistols as artistic masterpieces, but here we are getting into beauty and that always resides in the eye of the beholder :-) However, in any commercial sense I completely agree that the Parabellum is clearly the better pistol, as demonstrated by sales!
[quote]Originally posted by Jerry Harris:
<strong>
So I must join Doubs in respectfully disagreeing with you on what design issues were truly significant.
I also join the other members in thanking you for a wonderful historical post and stimulating follow-up comments.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Cordial disagreement is always welcome, and I truly appreciate your views. I especially want to thank you for your investment in time and effort in your very nicely crafted reply (as I get older I increasing appreciate the value of time!). And I thank you for your very kind words - you have warmed my heart, even in disagreement. Thatâ??s a rare ability my friend.
Warm regards,
Kyrie
|