Some Comments & Questions on Ammo

[jim haycraft]

About 10 days ago, I took my 1940 Mauser P.08 "shooter"to the range for the first time in 50 years! The reason for the lengthy pause is a lengthy tale in itself, which I won't go imto here. The P.08 (along with others) had been stored in a gun case, under conditions of controlled temperature and humidity, had been field stripped and inspected frequently and was in perfect condition. I took along 2 cartons of new Remington-UMC 124 grain FMJ cartridges, plus some old Winchester rounds - and I mean OLD! The first two full magazines functioned through the gun perfectly - I even managed to hit the target with every round, but not necessarily where I aimed! Bifocals don't help! From then on, I experienced some 'stove-piping' with the cartridges nicked and scratched in the process. I put these aside for further inspection. I also had some failures to eject, the cases getting a little squished in the process. I ended the shooting session with a full 8-round magazine of the old Winchester stuff, which worked perfectly. All in all, after 58 firing attempts, I had 4 'stove-pipes' and 6 failures to eject fully; all from the UMC ammo. This amounts to a 17% failure rate, which sounds like a lot, but I nevertheless had a 'blast' (no pun intended), and received admiring glances from other shooters (youngsters) who had never seen a Luger! Part of this was due to the handsome look imparted by a new set of plain walnut Nill grips I had recently received. Examining the UMC rounds afterward, I noted the bullets were seated deeper in the case than the older Winchester cartridges. Consulting a reference, MILITARY SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION OF THE WORLD 1945-1980 by P. Labbett, it mentioned the overall length of the 9 mm Parabellum cartridge to be 29.6 mm (standard). The UMC rounds were almost 2 mm shorter and I believe that may have been responsible for the 'stove-piping.' The cartridges were being stripped from the magazine, but were not 'ramping-up' properly and entering the chamber. What do you think? The old Winchester rounds were right on the money at 29.6 mm long. The failures to eject properly may have been random occurences due to the widely held belief that US 9 mm rounds develop pressures on the low side; the European stuff a little hotter. These are the comments. The questions: what kind of shelf life do modern smokeless powder pistol cartridges possess, given proper storage conditions? Over time, the powder may degrade, especially if moisture gets into it, but I feel confident that they can be safely fired. If anything, I would think performance would be lousy, with pressures on the low side. In 1947, I shot some German mlitary ammo that was manufactured in 1917 - 30 years old. In this recent instance - 50+ years old. I would welcome some comments and perhaps further discussion. By the way, my 75th. birthday is coming up this coming week and I'm going to celebrate with another shooting session (with another brand of 9 mm, this time), 50 or 100 rounds with a Mauser Hsc and maybe 50 or so .45 ACP, with a WWII vintage Model 1911! It looks like the bug has bitten me again, and I think my wife is pissed!

[AGE]

Jim,

Congratulations on your new found (re found?) interest. I have shot '39 .45 ACP ammo and mid '40s 30-06 not too long ago. These old shells worked fine. I have never shot old 9 mm.

I shoot several 1911s (not 1911-A1s) made before 1927, an '03 Springfield, a 1940's M1, and a 1936 Luger. These old guns still have original springs and most action parts (not necessarily sights). They work perfectly. (I do have a lot of newer stuff also--I've got the fever and not just for Lugers.)

Get some Walmart 9 mm and you'll be back in business. Have fun and good shooting.

[Aaron]

I have a theory when it comes to shooting Lugers with which you may or may not agree. I believe that most reliable performance can only be attained with ammo loaded to original specifications using a truncated bullet matching the shape of the originals. The second part of my theory is that the 17% failure rate which Jim experienced is not far from the normal expected performance of the Luger pistol. I submit that except for exceptional circumstances the Germans experienced at least a 10% failure rate in the use of the Luger in combat conditions. So those of us who expect 100% performance on a consistent basis are just engaging in wishful thinking.

[AGE]

I can't imagine the Germans would accept a 10 % failure rate--I don't accept it. My Luger has 0 % failure rate for the first 50 rounds, if clean, and maybe 1-2 % failure rate for the next 200 rounds.

[Doubs]

I agree with AGE. A 10% failure to function rate is absolutely unacceptable in a combat pistol. The 1911 .45 digested 6,000 rounds without a SINGLE stoppage during the Army's endurance testing. The pistol was fired in a series of 100 rounds and then given 5 minutes to cool. It was cleaned and lubed every 1,000 rounds. When the pistol became too hot to hold, it was dunked into a pail of water to cool it. ("John M. Browning, American Gunmaker" pages 196 & 197)

While a more finicky gun, the Luger would never have been accepted into German military service with a 10% failure rate... or any other nation's armed forces for that matter.

[Aaron]

I don't understand how you can compare the 1911 to the Luger when it comes to reliability. The German engineering mind could not accept the idea of the loose tolerances which John Browning designed into the 1911. They were far more concerned with precise machining and fitting of parts. I will admit that when I used truncated bullets such as the Germans used in my reloads there was a marked improvement in my Luger performance.

[Doubs]

[quote]Originally posted by Aaron:
<strong>I don't understand how you can compare the 1911 to the Luger when it comes to reliability. The German engineering mind could not accept the idea of the loose tolerances which John Browning designed into the 1911. They were far more concerned with precise machining and fitting of parts.</strong><hr></blockquote>

My comparison was intended to be between combat pistols and the 1911 is one I have some statistics on.

Perhaps it was a poor illustration for my point which was that the US Army would never have adopted a pistol that failed to function every 10th round. Neither would the German Imperial Army.

Here is, I think, a better comparison; the 1907 test results of the US Army using a .45 Colt (1905 model?) and a .45 Luger. In 959 rounds the Colt failed to function properly 27 times for all reasons. That's a failure rate of 2.8%. The Luger failed 31 times in 1022 rounds or 3.0% of the time. Neither pistol was accepted for military service following the tests.

The bottom line is simply this: IMO, the military services of the world would not adopt a pistol that failed every 10th round on average which would almost be once each magazine for the Luger.

[wterrell]

Doubs,
And those failure rates include adverse conditions such as rust, mud, etc. The close tolerances of the Luger, contribute to its failure rate.

[Doubs]

[quote]Originally posted by wes:
<strong>Doubs, And those failure rates include adverse conditions such as rust, mud, etc. The close tolerances of the Luger, contribute to its failure rate.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Absolutely, Wes. The precision of the Luger's mechanism tends to work against it when subjected to dust and dirt. Still, when all is considered, I believe the .45 Luger aquited itself very well in the tests of 1907. The data I quoted came from Datig's book "The Luger Pistol", 1962 printing.

[wterrell]

Doubs,
Extremely well.

[Dwight Gruber]

[quote]Originally posted by Aaron:
<strong>The second part of my theory is that the 17% failure rate which Jim experienced is not far from the normal expected performance of the Luger pistol.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Aaron,

I have to say that my Luger shooting experience is considerably at odds with both Jim's experience and your theory.

After many shooting tests I have fixed on the cheap WalMart Winchester ammunition to shoot in my Lugers. In the 1500 or so rounds I have shot since then I have had maybe half-a-dozen fail to chamber or eject properly, something less than half a percent failure rate.

In the experience of many of us here it is faulty magazines which cause most of the problems in operating a Luger. That being said, however, Jim's discovery that the UMC ammunition was seated too deeply certainly sounds like the primary problem here. I experienced this same problem with some gun show reloads which were not crimped adequately and allowed the bullets to push back into the cartridge, they would not feed for beans. Of course, there is a potential for dangerous overpressure here, as well.

Jim,

Run, do not walk, to WalMart and buy some of their bulk-pack 9mm Winchester. If you have a gun shop nearby which might have a Mec-Gar magazine, you might pick that up too (or more than one [img]biggrin.gif[/img] ). When you shoot, be sure to do so with a firm hand--allowing your wrist to slack and the Luger to fly up under recoil will transfer too much of the recoil energy to your hand, and not permit the gun's action to work properly. I'm willing to bet that these measures will reduce your failure rate to near zero.

Happy birthday, and good shooting <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />

--Dwight

[Roadkill]

Being that the trials in 1907 were among if not the first ever using semiauto pistols in new calibers, how do we know what acceptable was to the the testors? They didn't have the data to compare. Just curious as to what standards they might have used.
[img]smile.gif[/img]

RK

[Doubs]

[quote]Originally posted by Roadkill:
<strong>Being that the trials in 1907 were among if not the first ever using semiauto pistols in new calibers, how do we know what acceptable was to the the testors? They didn't have the data to compare. Just curious as to what standards they might have used.
[img]smile.gif[/img]
RK</strong><hr></blockquote>

RK, the various tests used for both the 1900 .30 Caliber Lugers and the 1907 .45 Luger are in Datig's book "The Luger Pistol". There is simply too much for me to type but the 1907 tests included:

velocity @ 25 ft; accuracy & penetration @ 75 ft; rapidity with accuracy shooting at a 6x2 ft target at 100 ft; rapidity at will without regard for "hits"; endurance during the firing of 500 rounds with a cooling period after each 50 rounds; decreased charges; excessive charges; pierced primers; dust test whereby a blast of fine sand will be blown onto the pistol in a specially prepared box for 1 minute after which the pistol may be wiped off, shook or jarred using the bare hand only; rust test with the pistol completely degreased by boiling in a solution of soda and then placed in a solution of sal-ammoniac for 5 minutes and then hung indoors for 22 hours. The pistol will then be fired 5 shots. Supplimentary tests authorized for pistols successfully completing the tests as seen fit by the board.

There's much more to the report and procedures but the above will give you a general idea of the tests used.

[Kyrie]

Hi Aaron,

A Luger, in sound mechanical condition and with proper ammunition, is every bit as reliable as the 1911A1. If you are experiencing failures to feed or eject with a Luger there is a problem that needs to be found and corrected.

Warm regards,

Kyrie

[Lonnie Zimmerman]

I agree with Kyrie and Dwight. I shoot NOTHING but Win 115 gr hp"s in my Lugers seated to 1.150 oal, which is the same as Winchester factory ammo.I have new mag springs and use tetra gun grease on the sliding parts. I can"t remember the last time I had a malfunction.
Lonnie

[stymie]

Happy Birthday!!!! A '70s Mauser Parabellum w/ 6" bbl is my *shooter*. I use the late style Mec-Gar magazines & feed it Wally-World Winchester bulk pack ammo. I use a 2-hand hold & the gun has never malfunctioned & is extremely accurate to say the least.

[jim haycraft]

To all who responded to my original windy comments and question submission: thanks for your contributions - I enjoyed the discussion and certainly derived some benefit from it. I did proceed to my local Walmart, and - would you believe it? - no 9 mm on the shelf nor could they find any! I did pick up some Winchester 124 gr. Nato stuff at my local gun shop, which I checked for overall length. This time, the length was right on and perhaps the 'stove-piping' will cease. As to the faulty ejection - we will see what happens. Perhaps later this week. There is another Walmart in nearby Maryland, which I may try later for the cheaper ammo, but they have a sales tax on everything, which may negate any saving. I would like to hear more re the use of old ammo. Since it is not dated like most other consumables today, it's difficult to determine when a particular batch was manufactured. And is it really all that important if the cartridges are clean, no corrosion or showing obvious damage?

[Roadkill]

I'm shooting 1950s era 30.06 in my US military guns, Lake City, never a problem, 1930 era Turkish 8mm in my 98&98K, very accurate,1960 era Finnish 9mm in my Luger & P38, no problems, and 1950s era .303 in the British guns. Long as its clean it works well. Just have to repeatedly clean the guns afterward.

RK

[unspellable]

I will agree with Kyrie. If your Luger and your ammo are right, they will be perfectly reliable. In some tests results I have seen, the Luger actually turned in a better score for reliabiltiy than the 1911.

The one big weakness is the Luger will not tolerate very much mud under the sideplate, but this does not seem to me like a serious problem in the present day context. I doubt if anybody on this forum is in the habit of dragging a Luger through the mud.

The single most reliable firearm I ever owned was a 7.65 mm Luger. I never had a single malfunction with it for the many years I owned it. I ran cast and swaged semi wadcutters and full wadcutters through it as well as hardball.

This particular pistol was the famous Jackrabbit Stopper. It's mechanical reliability was easy to explain, it's reliability as a jackrabbit stopper was harder to explain.

I have a Glock and a Winchester 1894 that did not match the Jackrabbit Stopper for reliability, although in both jams the factory loaded cartridge was probably oversized.

If your Luger is not reliable switch magazines. If that doesn't fix it switch ammo. After this, suspect a non-original recoil spring that is out of spec. If the first three don't fix it, you've got something wrong with your Luger.

[Dwight Gruber]

[quote]Originally posted by jim haycraft:
<strong>I would like to hear more re the use of old ammo. Since it is not dated like most other consumables today, it's difficult to determine when a particular batch was manufactured. And is it really all that important if the cartridges are clean, no corrosion or showing obvious damage?</strong><hr></blockquote>

I've shot 53-year-old 9mm Largo in my Astra, goes bang just like its supposed to. Your biggest problem with older ammunition will be that it may have corrosive primers. This means you will need to clean your Luger immediately upon arriving home from the range (if you don't deal with it actually -at- the range). There have been several threads here about this cleaning which should be easy to find.

--Dwight