Erma P.08 mag's! I need some info.......

G.T. · 01-15-2003, 09:32 PM

For you shooter guys! The Erma marked P.08 mags that I have are noticeably loose in the grip frame of my Mauser shooter.... have any of you guys had any trouble with feed or function using Erma mags??? I measured a couple, and they are .005 to .010 undersize (front to back) when compared to an original sheetmetal type mag... till...later....GT <img border="0" alt="[jumper]" title="" src="graemlins/jumper.gif" />

Hugh · 01-16-2003, 02:03 AM

<img border="0" alt="[byebye]" title="" src="graemlins/wave.gif" />
GT,

I have two and they feed ok, but one has a flatter button on it that doesn't engage the hold open.

Lugerdoc · 01-16-2003, 08:28 AM

GT, I haven't done the measurements, but the Mec-Gar mags also seem to be a "thinnner" fit in many PO8s, than the originals. Tom H.

G.T. · 01-17-2003, 12:20 AM

Hi Thomas! I think that all of the current mag. manufactures are pretty much terrified of making anything close to the original spec...... cost goes way up when that last few thousands of tolerance is held! Any original P.08 (sheet metal) mag. will grow along both dimensions (W & L) if used with any regularity! They didn't have very much clearance to begin with, but they were certainly designed to drop free.... does anyone have an original "stark" (strong) marked mag.??? It would be interesting to know the sheetmetal thickness of the mag. tube... or if they preformed some type of heat treat??? till...later...GT

ViggoG · 01-17-2003, 02:43 AM

Hi Guys,
FYI. I have just measured the thickness and width of two Mec-Gar mags and the old folded steel aluminum bottom Mag that came to me with My 1906AE
(I know that its not correct but thats all that came in the gun about 53 years ago)

All dimensions are within .005" in either direction on all three.

1.100" nominal width +000" to -003" in width.
0.448" nominal thickness +000" to -005 in thick.

GT The old unmarked folded steel aluminum base magazine is made of .018" stock.

Hope this may be of assistance for comparison of Mec-Gar mags with older mags.
ViggoG

G.T. · 01-17-2003, 09:17 PM

Hi Viggo! Yes, the Meggar mags are pretty close, at least when compared to the other aftermarket mags... but the Erma mag is .010" under the 1.100" dimension in width (outside dimension, front to back spine)... I wondered if this smaller dimension was more sensitive to bullets that are the correct overall length?? Perhaps feeding problems might result from this?? I don't believe the loose fit in the gun would have any affect on the function, might even help!Thanks Viggo, for the feedback! til...later...GT

01-15-2003, 09:32 PM	#1
G.T. Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Chandler Arizona Posts: 3,527 Thanks: 1,323 Thanked 3,710 Times in 1,014 Posts	Erma P.08 mag's! I need some info....... For you shooter guys! The Erma marked P.08 mags that I have are noticeably loose in the grip frame of my Mauser shooter.... have any of you guys had any trouble with feed or function using Erma mags??? I measured a couple, and they are .005 to .010 undersize (front to back) when compared to an original sheetmetal type mag... till...later....GT <img border="0" alt="[jumper]" title="" src="graemlins/jumper.gif" />

01-16-2003, 02:03 AM	#2
Hugh RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Southeast Texas Swamp Posts: 2,460 Thanks: 2 Thanked 166 Times in 65 Posts	<img border="0" alt="[byebye]" title="" src="graemlins/wave.gif" /> GT, I have two and they feed ok, but one has a flatter button on it that doesn't engage the hold open. __________________ *TRUMP FOR PREZ IN '20!*

01-16-2003, 08:28 AM	#3
Lugerdoc Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: POB 398 St.Charles,MO. 63302 Posts: 5,089 Thanks: 6 Thanked 737 Times in 484 Posts	GT, I haven't done the measurements, but the Mec-Gar mags also seem to be a "thinnner" fit in many PO8s, than the originals. Tom H. __________________ Tom Heller POB 398 ST.Charles, MO. 63302 Tel 636-447-3006 lugerdoc@charter.net

01-17-2003, 12:20 AM	#4
G.T. Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Chandler Arizona Posts: 3,527 Thanks: 1,323 Thanked 3,710 Times in 1,014 Posts	Hi Thomas! I think that all of the current mag. manufactures are pretty much terrified of making anything close to the original spec...... cost goes way up when that last few thousands of tolerance is held! Any original P.08 (sheet metal) mag. will grow along both dimensions (W & L) if used with any regularity! They didn't have very much clearance to begin with, but they were certainly designed to drop free.... does anyone have an original "stark" (strong) marked mag.??? It would be interesting to know the sheetmetal thickness of the mag. tube... or if they preformed some type of heat treat??? till...later...GT

01-17-2003, 02:43 AM	#5
ViggoG RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: South Side Virginia Posts: 534 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Hi Guys, FYI. I have just measured the thickness and width of two Mec-Gar mags and the old folded steel aluminum bottom Mag that came to me with My 1906AE (I know that its not correct but thats all that came in the gun about 53 years ago) All dimensions are within .005" in either direction on all three. 1.100" nominal width +000" to -003" in width. 0.448" nominal thickness +000" to -005 in thick. GT The old unmarked folded steel aluminum base magazine is made of .018" stock. Hope this may be of assistance for comparison of Mec-Gar mags with older mags. ViggoG

01-17-2003, 09:17 PM	#6
G.T. Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Chandler Arizona Posts: 3,527 Thanks: 1,323 Thanked 3,710 Times in 1,014 Posts	Hi Viggo! Yes, the Meggar mags are pretty close, at least when compared to the other aftermarket mags... but the Erma mag is .010" under the 1.100" dimension in width (outside dimension, front to back spine)... I wondered if this smaller dimension was more sensitive to bullets that are the correct overall length?? Perhaps feeding problems might result from this?? I don't believe the loose fit in the gun would have any affect on the function, might even help!Thanks Viggo, for the feedback! til...later...GT