LugerForum Discussion Forums my profile | register | faq | search
upload photo | donate | calendar

Go Back   LugerForum Discussion Forums > General Discussion Forums > General Discussions

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Unread 10-28-2003, 10:03 AM   #10
John Sabato
Lifer
Lifetime Forum
Patron
 
John Sabato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: The Capital of the Free World
Posts: 10,156
Thanks: 3,003
Thanked 2,308 Times in 1,098 Posts
Post

Okay, let me toss my own in this hat...

I have 'smithed' a lot of handguns in my time (56 years as of last Thursday) ...and I believe that they didn't use the C96 one piece barrel/receiver design because they determined that it was too expensive to produce even then...

...and the threaded barrel methodology was the design of the era... and for that matter, remains so even today on MOST firearms except for auto handguns where the metallurgy and computer assisted design and engineering has developed to the point where they can tell just how much pressure and lockup is required for the bullet to make it out of the barrel before disengaging and starting the reload cycle...

You can all rave about your plastic based GLOCKS and other plastic handguns, they are remarkable in some respects, but in reality aren't they just the result of doing it the cheapest way? Otherwise why didn't they make it totally out of metal?

I don't think that pinning the barrel would have given the long life that the threaded barrel has given this design... a pinned barrel works well on the rimfires because of the lack of pressure, but eventually the pin used to hold the barrel on a high-power cartridge would either become brittle from being constantly workhardened or would start elongating the hole or groove through which it passed...

I wish I had the expertise to calculate the G-forces that the whole Luger pistol experiences in the firing cycle, but I don't... but I would wager that the forces that exist between the breechface and the barrel at the time of firing, shove that whole upper assembly back, snap open that toggle and then slam shut on the next round are SUBSTANTIAL... I wouldn't trust a pinned barrel for a hi-powered round like the 9mm P with just any design...

If it were such a good idea, wouldn't Walther have just upped the size a tad on the PP type design and used the 9mm P cartridge to meet wartime production and help standardize the ammo? Why bother with the P-38? My guess would be they tried it and the guns disintegrated...

IMHO The pinned barrel meets its practical limit in the .32 & .380 ACP, or 9mm Makarov rounds... The Astra designed series (400-600) of pistols while serviceable, are CLUBS compared to the precise engineering used in a Luger... over engineered? Naw! Designed to specifications is more like it... and have you ever seen a Luger that didn't shoot well? ...not many.

...but of course I am a wee bit biased...
__________________
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..."
John Sabato is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1998 - 2025, Lugerforum.com