Luger's Unsafe to Shoot?

[Josafoot]

Some experienced shooters, whose opinions I deeply value, told me that the Luger is an unsafe firearm. Here were their reasons:

1. The system is senstive (finicky was their choice word) and is prone to misfires and jamming.
2. The pistol is 60-110 years old and may not be mechanically sound.
3. There is no identification as to whether the firearm has a round chambered and ready to fire.
4. The firearm is prone to going off when holstered. Citing Band of Brothers (This is the one I REALLY want an answer to).

I am not sure how accurate these opinions are but I am willing to examine them. I am new to the luger game and was hoping for some insight from more experienced members here.

My thoughts on their points are as follows:
Finicky System: This seems to be a point of contention. While British Commonwealth report the pistol to be sensitive to dirt and failing under stress, I have yet to find any German reports of such issues. I imagine that the various springs for working the toggle arm, magazine and action need to be calibrated to maintain a certain degree of timing.

[B]Old Firearm [\B]: There is not a whole lot to argue there. Yes it is an older firearm and may have been compromised due to time; however, this seems like something each pistol needs to be examined rather than branding the entire design as unsafe.

[B]Round Chambered[\B]: This also seems like something that the basic firearm principle of "treat as loaded" really helps with. I also don't understand how this is different than most other modern pistols. With the 1911, the hammer has to be back for it to fire. Modern pistols like Glocks seem to be plagued with the same issue as mentioned above.

[B] Unsafe to holster[\B]: This one really baffles me because I can't seem to find a straight answer on this. There seems to be the idea that a luger is prone to being "triggered" while holstered. The idea is that the luger has an external sear bar and is prone to being pushed while in a holster. They sight an episode of Band of Brothers as an example of this. I am fairly certain that the incident inf Band of Brothers was not with a luger; rahter, it was with a FN 1900.

Thanks for any help on this

[kurusu]

Ok, I'll bite.

1 the system is as finicky as any other semi auto pistol. When properly mantained and in good condition it does not misfire, in fact it has a very positive strike on the primer, and it does not jam more than any reliable semi auto. It's true that all of it's parts have to be adjusted to the individual pistol, a mixed parts gun will most certainly have issues if those parts were not fitted by someone who knows what he's doing.

2 yes, it may not be mechanically sound. There are gunsmiths for some reason, right?

3 that one is a joke. The Luger has a loaded chamber indicator (except for the very early variation) and that is a thing most pistols don't have. And if it has a round chambered it's ready to fire.

4 not unsafe to holster it has a very good manual safety. Some of them even have a grip safety. Of course there are people that can manage to shoot themselves with a banana.

Using an Hollywood movie to prove a gun related point is moronic, to say the least.

Hope you're satisfied with the answers.

[rhuff]

I have to agree with Kurusu on every point. I have owned, and fired Lugers for a lot of years, and because of that, can only say that your "experts" are wrong.....except to the "old part", which is true. There are a ton of old guns out and about that are fired on a regular basis without problems. Some folks have strong feelings, and opinions, about guns they have NEVER owned or fired because they heard or read it somewhere......maybe even the internet.

It is your decision on how you evaluate this information, but this info comes from personal experience and not hear-say info.

[Major Tom]

OK, I'll bite too. It is true that a luger with a round chambered can be fired by pushing in the sear bar. No matter if the manual safety is on or not. The upper receiver, called a cannon, will fire a round even when dismounted from the lower frame. In the movie, it was a captured luger.

[ithacaartist]

Alex,

Some comments... I think the majority of the meat of these concerns is urban legend, born of lack of knowledge of the gun, which is the norm outside of those who actually study, understand, and use the pistol. The forums are major islands of information and collective experience that is not usually available to the uninterested/inexperienced/ignorant.

1) I don't think the Parabellum has cornered the market on finicky. The parts for the firing and safety systems of the ol' reliable 1911 aren't "plug-and-play", either, and require careful fitting. With springs refreshed, a hundred year old matching gun will probably do fine, barring other actual damage or excessive wear. The Luger's design suggests that it will wear less than a 1911. Susceptibility to mud and sand was tested by the Army's trials before the 19111 was adopted and it didn't reveal a significant problem. The action is resistant to infiltration of debris when closed, and any pistol will screw up if dumped into the mud with its action open. The army's beef with what was tested centered around the caliber, due to concerns about "stopping-power." Using the correct ammo, which required sourcing powder from foreign manufacture, was also problematic.

2) This is true of any old gun. State of the art metallurgy was used all along, and changes/improvements followed as they became available. The last built were likely the best in this respect.

3) Well, if you ignore the "loaded chamber indicator" function of the extractor--don't look at it or feel for it... So, this is nonsense.

4) The Luger's safety system is very effective, and it's quite safe to carry it loaded and cocked with the safety applied. An exception would be something like a first issue, un-altered Navy. Early grip safety pistols' safety levers worked in reverse of what is found on the P.08, and could be nudged off safe when inserted into a holster. But with the grip safety, you could probably haul the gun out of the holster by its trigger and still be OK until squeezing the grip.

[ithacaartist]

Originally Posted by Major Tom

OK, I'll bite too. It is true that a luger with a round chambered can be fired by pushing in the sear bar. No matter if the manual safety is on or not. The upper receiver, called a cannon, will fire a round even when dismounted from the lower frame. In the movie, it was a captured luger.

I disagree about the first part. With the safety bar in blocking position, a sear that's not worn out does not move enough to allow the firing pin's release.

Dismounting the cannon from the frame eliminates the influence of the safety and allows the sear bar to move when pushed as described. (Dangerous, perhaps...but it looks like fun, too!) Field stripping a loaded gun seems to have been something the police did, thus the sear safety.

[kurusu]

Originally Posted by Major Tom

OK, I'll bite too. It is true that a luger with a round chambered can be fired by pushing in the sear bar. No matter if the manual safety is on or not. The upper receiver, called a cannon, will fire a round even when dismounted from the lower frame. In the movie, it was a captured luger.

You cannot do that with an assembled Luger.

With a loaded upper part it is true. But either it can be handy, if you do it on purpose (perfectly safe by the way). Or if done unintentionally one has to be a total klutz to disassemble a loaded pistol that has a loaded chamber indicator to begin with.

[Josafoot]

Originally Posted by ithacaartist

Alex,

Some comments... I think the majority of the meat of these concerns is urban legend, born of lack of knowledge of the gun, which is the norm outside of those who actually study, understand, and use the pistol. The forums are major islands of information and collective experience that is not usually available to the uninterested/inexperienced/ignorant.

1) I don't think the Parabellum has cornered the market on finicky. The parts for the firing and safety systems of the ol' reliable 1911 aren't "plug-and-play, either, and require careful fitting. With springs refreshed, a hundred year old matching gun will probably do fine, barring other actual damage or excessive wear. The Luger's design suggests that it will wear less than a 1911. Susceptibility to mud and sand was tested by the Army's trials before the 19111 was adopted and it didn't reveal a significant problem. The action is resistant to infiltration of debris when closed, and any pistol will screw up if dumped into the mud with its action open. The army's beef with what was tested centered around the caliber, due to concerns about "stopping-power." Using the correct ammo, which required sourcing powder from foreign manufacture, was also problematic.

As expected lots of very well informed posts and replies. Thanks. I valued each post and they were inline with my thoughts. The quoted post has some information I found very interesting.

First, I agree that my "experts" are not as experienced with the luger. Mine may have been the first they have handled in person. I do not hold this against them as they were very clear that they are NOT luger experts and had only read about these things.

A personal hobby of mine is to disprove the idea that the Luger was an unreliable firearm due to its "over-complex" design. As I mentioned in the original post, most of the accounts for Lugers failing (WWI) seemed to be coming from the Commonwealth nations. I have yet to see a report that the Germans complained about the firearm's reliability being an issue. I truly believe this is British propaganda and well executed. I never thought about looking at the US Army's trials for more evidence.

Honestly, I did some research on the firearm before purchasing. Not enough apparently because I picked up a Commercial .30 when I wanted a 9mm. Got to say, I could not be any happier with the .30 cal. It is an excellent pistol to shoot, stays on target, works flawlessly and knocks over the steel targets just fine. Ammo is a bit hard to find in California and getting harder.

[Josafoot]

Originally Posted by kurusu

You cannot do that with an assembled Luger.

This was the question I have not been able to find a clear answer to. So the external sear cannot be triggered while the firearm is assembled?

Or is it the external sear can not be triggered while the firearm is assembled AND the safety is engaged?

If the safety is disengaged and the firearm is assembled, can the sear be triggered?

[kurusu]

Originally Posted by Josafoot

This was the question I have not been able to find a clear answer to. So the external sear cannot be triggered while the firearm is assembled?

Or is it the external sear can not be triggered while the firearm is assembled AND the safety is engaged?

If the safety is disengaged and the firearm is assembled, can the sear be triggered?

The sear can't be triggered directly if the firearm is assembled. Safety or no safety.

[Dwight Gruber]

Originally Posted by Josafoot

This was the question I have not been able to find a clear answer to. So the external sear cannot be triggered while the firearm is assembled?

The external sear cannot be triggered by hand while the pistol is fully assembled.

Originally Posted by Josafoot

If the safety is disengaged and the firearm is assembled, can the sear be triggered?

Only by the trigger.

--Dwight

[Josafoot]

Originally Posted by kurusu

The sear can't be triggered directly if the firearm is assembled. Safety or no safety.

Thanks!

Originally Posted by Dwight Gruber

The external sear cannot be triggered by hand while the pistol is fully assembled.



Only by the trigger.

--Dwight

I was hoping that I implied that the trigger triggering the sear is not what I meant, but still gave me a good chuckle.

[Dwight Gruber]

Originally Posted by Major Tom

OK, I'll bite too. It is true that a luger with a round chambered can be fired by pushing in the sear bar. No matter if the manual safety is on or not.

As long as the receiver is in place in the frame, and the trigger plate is in place, this is categorically not true.

Originally Posted by Major Tom

The upper receiver, called a cannon...

The upper receiver is called the barrelled receiver extension. It is only referred to as a "cannon", erroneously, by some correspondents on this Forum.

--Dwight

[Dwight Gruber]

Originally Posted by Josafoot

Some experienced shooters, whose opinions I deeply value, told me that the Luger is an unsafe firearm. Here were their reasons:

1.The system is senstive (finicky was their choice word) and is prone to misfires and jamming.

I am one of the members on these Forums who have shot--literally--thousands of rounds through my Lugers without "misfires or jamming". The pistol as designed, in new condition and using ammunition it was designed for, is as reliable as any other high-quality modern auto-loader--more reliable than its contemporaries--and much more reliable than some cheaply made, cheaply priced pistols you can buy.

Modern ammunition is no longer manufactured to DWM's 9x19mm specifications. The SAAMI specification for the 9x19 maximum overall length is the same as DWM's original specification for minimum OAL. Much of the currently available ammunition is simply too short to chamber properly.

The ammunition for which the Parabellum was designed used slower-burning powder than is in common use today. Modern powder burns too fast to properly match the pistol's timing.

Original folded-steel magazine feed lips have become worn or weakened in use over time and will no longer feed adequately. Newly-made (or original mandrel-formed) magazines do not exhibit this problem.

The Luger is sensitive to proper shooting technique: it must be held firmly when shot. "Limp-wristing" transfers energy which the pistol requires to operate, into the shooter's wrist. Just like many other auto-loaders.

Regarding the dust and dirt issue, in the U.S. Army's 1907 tests the Luger was one of only two pistols found to be reliable enough to compete with the Colt in that regard. 'Nuff said.

Originally Posted by Josafoot

2. The pistol is 60-110 years old and may not be mechanically sound.

Some parts in any given example may no longer be metallurgically sound.

Dwight

[Edward Tinker]

As an aside, I am almost positive that the luger that went off in Band of Brothers was because he pulled the trigger and shot himself. He was playing around and never checked to see if it was loaded....

In the book it was - he was playing around with it and it went off... if i remember right

[Josafoot]

Originally Posted by Edward Tinker

As an aside, I am almost positive that the luger that went off in Band of Brothers was because he pulled the trigger and shot himself. He was playing around and never checked to see if it was loaded....

In the book it was - he was playing around with it and it went off... if i remember right

From what I can recall in my initial research. The Band of Brothers incident was not a luger and was most likely a FN 1900 which apparently does not have a safety.

Originally Posted by Dwight Gruber

Modern ammunition is no longer manufactured to DWM's 9x19mm specifications. The SAAMI specification for the 9x19 maximum overall length is the same as DWM's original specification for minimum OAL. Much of the currently available ammunition is simply too short to chamber properly.

The ammunition for which the Parabellum was designed used slower-burning powder than is in common use today. Modern powder burns too fast to properly match the pistol's timing.

Original folded-steel magazine feed lips have become worn or weakened in use over time and will no longer feed adequately. Newly-made (or original mandrel-formed) magazines do not exhibit this problem.

The Luger is sensitive to proper shooting technique: it must be held firmly when shot. "Limp-wristing" transfers energy which the pistol requires to operate, into the shooter's wrist. Just like many other auto-loaders.

Dwight

One the ammo, What I noticed was that the .30 cal luger worked flawlessly. I am convinced it is because this round was not used for many other pistols and was therefore never adjusted to meet new requirements.

What is mandrel formed? I will google it as well.

I noticed that shooing the luger was much more like shooting a Single Action Revolver. It is not lost on me that both the luger and C96 seem to cling to those methods. Being that I qualified with a Ruger Black Hawk, the luger felt right at home. My friend, who is a Police Officer, was having a hard time keeping the barrel down; he has this issue when he uses my Blackhawk.

[Dwight Gruber]

Originally Luger magazines were stamped from two sheets of thin steel, bent to shape, and fold-and-crimped together. The feed lips thus formed lost strength over the long term. In 1938 the Haenel-Schmeisser Co. patented a method whereby a steel mandrel shaped as the inside of the magazine was made; a sheet of steel was formed around this, the ends butted together at the spine and welded. The outside configuration was machined. These eventually went into service as the standard Luger magazine, and continued in production in East Germany until the mid-1950s. They are excellent shooting magazines.

Magazines of this pattern are often, erroneously, referred to as extruded.

You are correct about the .30 Luger (7,65mm) functioning, it is the cartridge for which the Luger was actually designed--they were developed together.

--Dwight

[mrerick]

So, as a very early (and the first militarily successful) semi-automatic pistol design, the Luger is certainly not as advanced as some later designs.

Since there is no firing pin block system, it would be possible to dislodge the sear bar from the firing pin striker if the Luger is dropped on a hard surface at the appropriate angle as long as the safety is disengaged.

For this reason, I would not select a Luger as a concealed carry firearm today. There are better designs. The Luger is not a defective design by any means. It was the result of quite a bit of refinement at the time is was engineered.

A hundred years of new ideas by thousands of experienced designers have been commercialized since the Luger was made.

What other product has stood up as well in this time period? How many 1900 vintage adding machines do you still see in use? Many Stanley Steemers on the road? You get the picture...

[kurusu]

Originally Posted by Josafoot

From what I can recall in my initial research. The Band of Brothers incident was not a luger and was most likely a FN 1900 which apparently does not have a safety.

Sorry. Wrong!

[kurusu]

Originally Posted by mrerick

So, as a very early (and the first militarily successful) semi-automatic pistol design, the Luger is certainly not as advanced as some later designs.

Since there is no firing pin block system, it would be possible to dislodge the sear bar from the firing pin striker if the Luger is dropped on a hard surface at the appropriate angle as long as the safety is disengaged.

For this reason, I would not select a Luger as a concealed carry firearm today. There are better designs. The Luger is not a defective design by any means. It was the result of quite a bit of refinement at the time is was engineered.

A hundred years of new ideas by thousands of experienced designers have been commercialized since the Luger was made.

What other product has stood up as well in this time period? How many 1900 vintage adding machines do you still see in use? Many Stanley Steemers on the road? You get the picture...

Well Marc,

Luckily for you this not a 1911 forum. Those without the much hated 80 series firing pin safety can go off if droped at the righ angle even with the safety engaged. And there's a large number of people carrying them as CCW.