LugerForum Discussion Forums - View Single Post - Food for thought: is the luger really a "weak" design?

mrerick · 06-17-2017, 11:48 AM

So... it appears that the evidence discussed in this thread is anecdotal. The 19 results from surveying collectors is probably not statistically significant.

There have been more scientific studies of the Luger design, which is - after all - 115 years after the start of commercial production at this point.

The formal studies that took place involved destructive testing of a number of pistols as well as long term abusive firing of thousands of rounds. There was, of course, politics and market influence involve with the selection of candidates for those military evaluation tests. Even with that consideration, the tests were more comprehensive than anything we have from other sources.

The complete report on the 1907 US Pistol Trials can be downloaded from:

http://www.forgottenweapons.com/wp-c...stoltrials.pdf

This is but one of the comprehensive trials that the Luger was subjected to. Other governments selected the Luger as a service pistol. Switzerland... Germany... But, this is what the US military said at the time:

"The Luger automatic pistol, a lthough it possesses manifest advantage in many particular . . is not recommended for a service test because its certainty of action, even with Luger ammunition. is not considered satisfactory. because the final seating of the cartridge is not by positive spring action . and because the powder stated by Mr. Luger to be necessary for its satisfactory use is not now obtainable in this country."

In essence, they found the design sensitive and unreliable in their testing. They were also concerned about cross-border sources for ammunition components. In effect, a political influence.

The study details the things that broke in their destructive testing.

There were US tests and trials in 1899, 1900, and 1907. During this period, the army "preferred" John Browning's designs, but continued to test other designs. The 1907 field trial was the most extensive, but the 1,000 Lugers were purchased by the US government for trials starting in 1902.

The three .45acp Lugers were procured fo rthe 1907 field trials. Luger subsequently rejected an order for 200 more pistols in 1908, even though it was already considered the third best of everything tested. DWM must have seen the handwriting on the wall - their Luger was not the "preferred" design.

Colt and Savage delivered pistols for the final testing, and (of course) Colt / Browning was selected.

So, considering everything else that was in the marketplace at the time it was designed, I don't think that the Luger was a "weak" design. In fact, it was probably one of the strongest designs that existed in that era. It was not the preferred design for the US Military for a number of reasons, but it was stronger than almost everything else on the market, performed better and was a formidable design. It was also refined, relatively unique, and a vast improvement over the revolver being issued at the time.

Today, after more than 115 years, there have been simpler, more reliable, stronger and longer lasting designs that can fire the 9mm Parabellum and 7.65 Parabellum cartridges. Of course, many things embodying technology have also improved over time - and most at accelerating rates.

Is the Luger Parabellum pistol an old design? Yes - one of the earliest successful semi-automatic pistols. It has been superseded by better and stronger designs - In particular the Pettier SIG P-210 which is a remarkable achievement.

But is the Luger Parabellum pistol a "weak" design? No... I don't think so.

06-17-2017, 11:48 AM	#34
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,919 Thanks: 1,377 Thanked 3,135 Times in 1,518 Posts	So... it appears that the evidence discussed in this thread is anecdotal. The 19 results from surveying collectors is probably not statistically significant. There have been more scientific studies of the Luger design, which is - after all - 115 years after the start of commercial production at this point. The formal studies that took place involved destructive testing of a number of pistols as well as long term abusive firing of thousands of rounds. There was, of course, politics and market influence involve with the selection of candidates for those military evaluation tests. Even with that consideration, the tests were more comprehensive than anything we have from other sources. The complete report on the 1907 US Pistol Trials can be downloaded from: http://www.forgottenweapons.com/wp-c...stoltrials.pdf This is but one of the comprehensive trials that the Luger was subjected to. Other governments selected the Luger as a service pistol. Switzerland... Germany... But, this is what the US military said at the time: "The Luger automatic pistol, a lthough it possesses manifest advantage in many particular . . is not recommended for a service test because its certainty of action, even with Luger ammunition. is not considered satisfactory. because the final seating of the cartridge is not by positive spring action . and because the powder stated by Mr. Luger to be necessary for its satisfactory use is not now obtainable in this country." In essence, they found the design sensitive and unreliable in their testing. They were also concerned about cross-border sources for ammunition components. In effect, a political influence. The study details the things that broke in their destructive testing. There were US tests and trials in 1899, 1900, and 1907. During this period, the army "preferred" John Browning's designs, but continued to test other designs. The 1907 field trial was the most extensive, but the 1,000 Lugers were purchased by the US government for trials starting in 1902. The three .45acp Lugers were procured fo rthe 1907 field trials. Luger subsequently rejected an order for 200 more pistols in 1908, even though it was already considered the third best of everything tested. DWM must have seen the handwriting on the wall - their Luger was not the "preferred" design. Colt and Savage delivered pistols for the final testing, and (of course) Colt / Browning was selected. So, considering everything else that was in the marketplace at the time it was designed, I don't think that the Luger was a "weak" design. In fact, it was probably one of the strongest designs that existed in that era. It was not the preferred design for the US Military for a number of reasons, but it was stronger than almost everything else on the market, performed better and was a formidable design. It was also refined, relatively unique, and a vast improvement over the revolver being issued at the time. Today, after more than 115 years, there have been simpler, more reliable, stronger and longer lasting designs that can fire the 9mm Parabellum and 7.65 Parabellum cartridges. Of course, many things embodying technology have also improved over time - and most at accelerating rates. Is the Luger Parabellum pistol an old design? Yes - one of the earliest successful semi-automatic pistols. It has been superseded by better and stronger designs - In particular the Pettier SIG P-210 which is a remarkable achievement. But is the Luger Parabellum pistol a "weak" design? No... I don't think so. __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.