Artillery Barrel Specs???

John Sabato · 03-10-2009, 10:24 AM

I think your ingenuity and problem solving skills will be rewarded with shots on the paper... Best of luck to you... and will be waiting for a range report.

Great article... and BTW, this forum is not only for collectors... it is for shooters, historians, and people that just appreciate great engineering... both of the Luger, and yours!

sheepherder · 03-15-2009, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Sabato

Great article...

...But wait!...There's more!!!...

I decided to make a 2nd rear sight base, somewhat lower than the first...I knew I could gain .071" by milling off the lower sight blade lip, and get another .030" by lowering the sight leaf axis...So I made up a new base...

1st pic, from upper right clockwise...

- Milling a 3/8" trough in the 5/8" x 1/2" blank

- Milling the T-slot, using a 1/8" x 1/2" Woodruff keyseat cutter

- Milling the side reliefs for the rear sight leaf

- Cutting the front dovetail

- Cutting the rear dovetail

- Milling the bottom lip off the sight blade

- Cutting a ramp for the slide (big pic)

There were a bunch of other things done in between operations...Drilling the axle hole; chamfering edges with a 45Ã?Âº cutter; cutting & chamfering the "artillery receiver notch"; shortening the leaf spring...

The 2nd pic is a comparison of the 1st rear sight base with the 2nd...It doesn't really *look* all that different...but I'm hoping the line of sight will be closer to what it should be...

Hawkeye 5 · 05-14-2009, 12:36 PM

Great Job Traxx, I mean Postino.

have you shot it yet?
Hawkeye

sheepherder · 05-14-2009, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawkeye 5

Great Job Traxx, I mean Postino.

have you shot it yet?
Hawkeye

Only one "x" in Trax, Hawk...

No, all my 9mm is reloaded "hot" for my S&W 659 longslide...I need to get some 124gr FMJ and reload some for this & my S/42...

PhilOhio · 05-15-2009, 12:32 PM

Postino,

Fantastic job, all the way around. One thing I noticed is that you ramped the barrel almost exactly as I would do, the maximum amount without leaving any of the thinner part of the case web unsupported, and also the correct angle...at least what I would consider correct.

Last week I was comparing my newly acquired 1937 S/42 and my 1917 DWM Artillery. I was surprised to see that, although most values appeared identical, there was a big difference between the two feed ramps. The 1917 was ramped about like you have done, but the S/42 had very little ramping. I would consider it inadequate. But still, it feeds even my lead RN bullets flawlessly, even though they are over .050" below max OAL length. Why that works so well, I have no clue.

But I still think all handgun barrels should be ramped as you have done.

sheepherder · 05-15-2009, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilOhio

But I still think all handgun barrels should be ramped as you have done.

PhilOhio -

I tried to get the barrel ramp angle as close to the frame ramp angle as possible. It's not as unsupported as it looks; it is almost exactly the same as my Lahti barrel/frame ramp, and much less than my .45 Colt auto. I've had good results with matching the barrel/frame ramps on those pistols, over the years, with no problems (knock on wood)...In any event, I don't plan on shooting any Luger with a full load; I'll load 10% less than whatever Speer recommends.

I just measured (as best I could) my barrel ramp vs my commercial & S/42 Lugers. Mine is ~.012" deeper than those two, it just looks deeper in the pics.

03-10-2009, 10:24 AM	#1
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,155 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,308 Times in 1,098 Posts	I think your ingenuity and problem solving skills will be rewarded with shots on the paper... Best of luck to you... and will be waiting for a range report. Great article... and BTW, this forum is not only for collectors... it is for shooters, historians, and people that just appreciate great engineering... both of the Luger, and yours! __________________ regards, -John S "...We hold these truths to be self-evident that ALL men are created EQUAL *and are endowed by their Creator* with certain UNALIENABLE* rights, and among these are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness..."*

05-14-2009, 12:36 PM	#3
Hawkeye 5 New User Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Great Job Traxx, I mean Postino. have you shot it yet? Hawkeye

05-15-2009, 12:32 PM	#5
PhilOhio User Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Ohio Posts: 145 Thanks: 5 Thanked 17 Times in 14 Posts	Postino, Fantastic job, all the way around. One thing I noticed is that you ramped the barrel almost exactly as I would do, the maximum amount without leaving any of the thinner part of the case web unsupported, and also the correct angle...at least what I would consider correct. Last week I was comparing my newly acquired 1937 S/42 and my 1917 DWM Artillery. I was surprised to see that, although most values appeared identical, there was a big difference between the two feed ramps. The 1917 was ramped about like you have done, but the S/42 had very little ramping. I would consider it inadequate. But still, it feeds even my lead RN bullets flawlessly, even though they are over .050" below max OAL length. Why that works so well, I have no clue. But I still think all handgun barrels should be ramped as you have done.