stainless receiver

Rick W. · 01-12-2004, 04:50 PM

i

riffraff · 01-12-2004, 05:13 PM

Hello Rick,

I am NO expert and it is hard to tell from the pictures but my guess is "manufacturing defect". Thank You for sharing your misfortune with us and reminding us all to check it out before we buy. What do you much more knowledgeable people think? I realize that better pictures are really needed, maybe Rick can post more/enlarged if asked. Mike

John Sabato · 01-12-2004, 05:23 PM

Hey Rick... I agree that this appears to me to be a manufacturing defect... and I am sorry about your misfortune on the purchase... your comment on what Orimar said about a replacement part is the very first time I have ever heard anything less than first class service from them for a gun that they have produced...

Since the early Stainless guns were very close to the original specs, wouldn't an original barrel extension (upper receiver) do as a replacement? If you could get it to function, you could have the upper plated with one of those finishes that looks like stainless and of course it would just be a shooter... but it is better than just a bunch of parts in a cigar box...

Whatyathink?

ViggoG · 01-13-2004, 01:21 AM

You Folks have hit the nail on the head.
GL did not put a hole in this location for the simple reason that it was already the weakest portion of the Yoke.
Instead he went to a bit of trouble to circumvent this problem.
There are no short cuts allowed at this point on the yoke.
Putting a pivot pin hole in this position just added another insult to the design.
( Elongation is visible in the shape of the pivot pin hole. )
Also I feel that some one who liked to fire "Hot Loads" over a period of time added to the problem.
I rebuke that person for passing a weakened and damaged weapon off on an unsuspecting purchaser.
I feel that he was unscrupulous in failing to take his lumps and passing a lighted Bomb off on the next guy just for a few bucks. Shame! Shame!
ViggoG

Lugerdoc · 01-13-2004, 10:15 AM

Rick, Probably your best solution to this problem, is to make a hybred shooter using your frame and a standard PO8 upper assy. TH

Johnny C. Kitchens · 01-14-2004, 11:16 PM

Kind of makes it worthwhile to find a stainless parts gun to make up a shooter with parts from another gun. Looks great!!! Let us know how well it shoots...

Johnny C. Kitchens · 01-15-2004, 08:59 PM

I agree. I've noticed there is a difference between the Mitchell Lugers and the ones that followed. I have an article where they mixed the parts from an early Mitchell and a DWM. They said there might be future for Mitchell to make replacement parts for older Lugers. They must have decided that wasn't a good idea and changed the design of some of the more important parts to keep it from happening. Lawsuit worry??? Just a thought...

01-12-2004, 04:50 PM	#1
Rick W. User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 339 Thanks: 81 Thanked 359 Times in 198 Posts	stainless receiver i

01-12-2004, 05:13 PM	#2
riffraff User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: central Arkansas Posts: 28 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Hello Rick, I am NO expert and it is hard to tell from the pictures but my guess is "manufacturing defect". Thank You for sharing your misfortune with us and reminding us all to check it out before we buy. What do you much more knowledgeable people think? I realize that better pictures are really needed, maybe Rick can post more/enlarged if asked. Mike __________________ Time Warp

01-12-2004, 05:23 PM	#3
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,150 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,304 Times in 1,096 Posts	Hey Rick... I agree that this appears to me to be a manufacturing defect... and I am sorry about your misfortune on the purchase... your comment on what Orimar said about a replacement part is the very first time I have ever heard anything less than first class service from them for a gun that they have produced... Since the early Stainless guns were very close to the original specs, wouldn't an original barrel extension (upper receiver) do as a replacement? If you could get it to function, you could have the upper plated with one of those finishes that looks like stainless and of course it would just be a shooter... but it is better than just a bunch of parts in a cigar box... Whatyathink? __________________ 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..."*

01-13-2004, 10:15 AM	#5
Lugerdoc Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: POB 398 St.Charles,MO. 63302 Posts: 5,089 Thanks: 6 Thanked 736 Times in 483 Posts	Rick, Probably your best solution to this problem, is to make a hybred shooter using your frame and a standard PO8 upper assy. TH __________________ Tom Heller POB 398 ST.Charles, MO. 63302 Tel 636-447-3006 lugerdoc@charter.net

01-14-2004, 11:16 PM	#6
Johnny C. Kitchens User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Arlington, Texas Posts: 518 Thanks: 0 Thanked 20 Times in 8 Posts	Kind of makes it worthwhile to find a stainless parts gun to make up a shooter with parts from another gun. Looks great!!! Let us know how well it shoots... __________________ Johnny C. Kitchens

01-13-2004, 01:21 AM	#4
ViggoG RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: South Side Virginia Posts: 534 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	You Folks have hit the nail on the head. GL did not put a hole in this location for the simple reason that it was already the weakest portion of the Yoke. Instead he went to a bit of trouble to circumvent this problem. There are no short cuts allowed at this point on the yoke. Putting a pivot pin hole in this position just added another insult to the design. ( Elongation is visible in the shape of the pivot pin hole. ) Also I feel that some one who liked to fire "Hot Loads" over a period of time added to the problem. I rebuke that person for passing a weakened and damaged weapon off on an unsuspecting purchaser. I feel that he was unscrupulous in failing to take his lumps and passing a lighted Bomb off on the next guy just for a few bucks. Shame! Shame! ViggoG

01-15-2004, 08:59 PM	#7
Johnny C. Kitchens User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Arlington, Texas Posts: 518 Thanks: 0 Thanked 20 Times in 8 Posts	I agree. I've noticed there is a difference between the Mitchell Lugers and the ones that followed. I have an article where they mixed the parts from an early Mitchell and a DWM. They said there might be future for Mitchell to make replacement parts for older Lugers. They must have decided that wasn't a good idea and changed the design of some of the more important parts to keep it from happening. Lawsuit worry??? Just a thought... __________________ Johnny C. Kitchens