LugerForum Discussion Forums - View Single Post

Sieger · 07-23-2003, 09:32 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by unspellable:
Sieger,

I had the 9 mm truncated cone lead bullet loads put up some time ago, before I really got into the what's, why's, and how's of loading for the Luger. They didn't work well so set them aside and haven't paid any attention to them since. I'll drag a few out and see what the OAL is. However, I think the bullet profile is more likely to be the culprit than the OAL. As I say, the profile does not match the original DWM load. They did feed OK in a Ruger P89.

I have acquired a revolver chambered for the 9 mm Parabellum that I can burn non-feeding rounds in. Now if only I had a revolver chambered for the 7.65 mm Parabellum to use up all that underloaded factrory ammo. I acquired a Ruger P89 in 7.65 mm Parabellum with a reduced recoil spring but it will not reliably feed Winchester of Fiocchi ammo. Did OK with a box of Peters, although ejection was not very enthusiastic.<hr /></blockquote>Dear Unspellable:

Some years ago, I owned a nice commercial Luger, in 7.65, made in the 1920s. It really was a beautiful pistol, with exceptionally high quality of fit and finish.

I, too, experience the underloaded commercial ammo problem.

Do you know just why they underload the 7.65, as this is practically the only pistol ever manufactured to use it?!?

Bob

07-23-2003, 09:32 PM	#12
Sieger User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: New York, NY Posts: 1,575 Thanks: 2,124 Thanked 400 Times in 249 Posts	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by unspellable: <strong>Sieger, I had the 9 mm truncated cone lead bullet loads put up some time ago, before I really got into the what's, why's, and how's of loading for the Luger. They didn't work well so set them aside and haven't paid any attention to them since. I'll drag a few out and see what the OAL is. However, I think the bullet profile is more likely to be the culprit than the OAL. As I say, the profile does not match the original DWM load. They did feed OK in a Ruger P89. I have acquired a revolver chambered for the 9 mm Parabellum that I can burn non-feeding rounds in. Now if only I had a revolver chambered for the 7.65 mm Parabellum to use up all that underloaded factrory ammo. I acquired a Ruger P89 in 7.65 mm Parabellum with a reduced recoil spring but it will not reliably feed Winchester of Fiocchi ammo. Did OK with a box of Peters, although ejection was not very enthusiastic.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Dear Unspellable: Some years ago, I owned a nice commercial Luger, in 7.65, made in the 1920s. It really was a beautiful pistol, with exceptionally high quality of fit and finish. I, too, experience the underloaded commercial ammo problem. Do you know just why they underload the 7.65, as this is practically the only pistol ever manufactured to use it?!? Bob