View Single Post
Unread 04-12-2009, 05:23 PM   #8
Vlim
Moderator
Lifetime
LugerForum Patron
 
Vlim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 5,015
Thanks: 1,014
Thanked 3,809 Times in 1,171 Posts
Default

Hi,

Yes, I am well aware that the 06/29 was the result of trying to streamline the production, thus reducing te production costs.

But this does not explain why a part of the design was changed, that could not have had much impact on the cost price. Changing the opening curve has no effect on the price, machining is just as expensive, and the change effectively meant that the frame of the 06/29 could not be used 1 on 1 as a spare for the earlier designs, which makes no sense either.

Until a better explanation turns up, I suspect that somewhere along the line, one of the subcontractors (SIG), made a costly mistake during the development of the new frame, resulting in several adjustments to the design and the inability to use the frame design for earliers pistols and 9mm versions. Of course, if it was a design mistake, you'd expect them to cover it up pretty well

Since Mauser 'fixed' the Swiss design issue, I still regard the postwar Mauser Parabellum as the 'ultimate cost effective Parabellum pistol'. I think that, like the myth of German Engineering, Swiss Precision is just that, a myth
Vlim is offline   Reply With Quote