Stoeger Luger .22lr pistol. Worth buying?

I do not know the stroger, but I do the erma. For the erma I recommend it only for collectors and not for practical use.

Heard they could be somewhat troublesome in the reliability department. Spare magazines and parts might also be difficult to get.

Mine works well but mags are hard to one by, and it can be ammo picky.

bikerdoc said:

Mine works well but mags are hard to one by, and it can be ammo picky.

Click to expand...

What ammo works best for you please.

To me, I'm not really a fan at .22 duplicates of weapons. If I want that weapon, I want a "real" one. When I shoot a .22 I want something that was designed to be a .22 from the ground up (eg, Buckmark, Ruger Mk, S&W Victory, Colt Woodsman, etc). This is the same thing that's kept me from buying the .22LR version of the Stg 44 even though I'll likely never be able to own a real one (or even a semi-auto reproduction of one).

With that in mind I'd probably pass and either spend the money on a Buckmark or save it to apply later to an honest to goodness 9mm Luger P08.

At under $200 with a good magazine or two it would be ok In perfect shape. They are made of Zamak castings, the look kewl and may function for informal plinking.

My grandfather bought one of these Stoeger "Lugers" back around 1972 or so. I shot many rounds through it and while there is a cool factor (especially for a kid that grew up watching COMBAT! and Rat Patrol) it's not a great pistol.

Buy it for the cool factor, but don't expect it to be as durable as a Ruger, Colt or Browning.

Stoeger Luger. My advice:

Don't buy it unless you can test fire it first.

Stoeger Luger in the $200 range is a good buy. Stoeger is the legal owner of the "Luger" name and importer for such. In the 1970's they began making a .22 caliber version complete with the toggle action, just like the original P08's. Frames were made of aluminum, not zamak, and came in 4.5 and 5.5" barrels, you could also order a target model with adjustable rear sights. The two I have are very reliable. Magazines hold 12 rounds and cycle any ammo reliably.

About the same time the Stoeger came out another company called "Erma" began offering one as well, only these had steel frames, offered longer barrels and had bad feeding issues. (Don't confuse the two) Unfortunately the Erma's feeding problems seemed to get lumped onto the Stoeger model unfairly (because both used toggle actions). Erma's were a little smaller and heavier (steel frame) but problematic.

Well, two things there. The Ermas most definitely used Zamac, not steel, for the grip frame. Also, neither of these rimfire "Lugers" use a true short-recoil action wherein the barrel and bolt recoil together until the bolt hits the ramp and continues cycling independent of the barrel and upper receiver. A true Luger action requires the mechanical advantage of the toggle to be directed downward until it hits the ramp.

The rimfire clones are a kind of toggle-delayed blowback action and have a fixed barrel.

I always thought the Erma-Werke .22 Lugers were more true to the original Luger toggle action, Stoegers were a stamped metal blow back/toggle design.

Interesting side note is that Erma-Werke (located Dachau) began making .22 conversion kits back in 1933 for Lugers, highly collectible today if you can find one. They later went bankrupt in 1997.

Rembrandt said:

I always thought the Erma-Werke .22 Lugers were more true to the original Luger toggle action, Stoegers were a stamped metal blow back/toggle design.

Interesting side note is that Erma-Werke (located Dachau) began making .22 conversion kits back in 1933 for Lugers, highly collectible today if you can find one. They later went bankrupt in 1997.

Click to expand...

The Erma bolt proper is very similiar to that of a true Luger, but the barrel is still fixed. The Ermas look a bit more like the real deal, but they are hardly reliable. Sounds to me like the Stoegers are probably better shooters.

If someone wants the ergonomics and general look of a Luger in a reliable .22 package, their best bet is probably a Ruger Mk1 or 2- though it was supposedly actually styled after a Baby Nambu- lol.

Buddy of mine had a Stoeger, ohmaybe 45 years ago. He pinged 5 gallon paint cans at 100 yards with it all afternoon. I'd say it was accurate! And never hiccuped either. Don't ask what he fed it with, I don't remember.

What most have said: only for collecting or if you can inspect and preferably fire it first.

I dunno if QC or the soft materials, but lots of them are just unworkable, so I've seen the same one up for consignment from three people in a row at a gun shop for example. But, that was the early 90s. They must be getting rare now.

Also, every time I see one I giggle because the friend, counter guy — later a cop and now someone moderately well known in the industry — tried to get I and my friends to buy the lemon one he had in his shop, every time we visited. Once something about it came up and he was going to demonstrate how it wasn't plastic like a Glock or...whatever the setup was, but made of... [magnet he pulled out to demo it, falls off the side] "A metal-like substance."

yes Ermas were Zamak framed, I had a .380 and a .22 one in mid 70s . I supressed the .22 in 1975 or so before I knew it was not legal, It broke the frame with in a year running around a ranch in a Toyota Landcruiser jeep . The .380 made it to the early 80s when I dumped it after a few hundred rounds of mostly feeding got worse. Cute little guns ! I shot a friends Stoger .22 but is seemed cheap and his was a jammo matic,

Test first for Jam-O-Matic.

Parts for all those Luger 22s are tough to get...

I like them..

I have had a stoeger luger 22lr for a few years now. My grandson and I have put 500 rounds through it . It is an earlier model since the receiver is aluminum. I am thinking about getting another one , newer model. The metal receiver. Does anyone have either one or have any idea if there is any difference in the two designs?

NIGHTLORD40K said:

The rimfire clones are a kind of toggle-delayed blowback action and have a fixed barrel.

Click to expand...

So do real lugers. The Luger, like the C-96 are in a rather odd class of automatic pistols. They do not have a traditional "slide" and they have fixed barrels that are housed in a barrel extension. The entire barrel and barrel extension recoil backwards together until the unlocking point us reached.

tark said:

So do real lugers. The Luger, like the C-96 are in a rather odd class of automatic pistols. They do not have a traditional "slide" and they have fixed barrels that are housed in a barrel extension. The entire barrel and barrel extension recoil backwards together until the unlocking point us reached.

Click to expand...

Still think it falls into the category of "short-recoil" action since the bolt and barrel are locked and move together some distance. In a true blow-back the bolt is free to move independent of the barrel as soon as its mass is overcome. In the .22 Lugers add some leverage resistance as the toggle absorbs some energy, but at no point are the barrel and bolt face locked together.

You could argue it either way, sure.

Ian V. Hogg defines the Luger as a "short-recoil locked breech action" in Military Small Arms of the World.

There’s one in a local pawn shop on consignment for $300 without a magazine. The funny thing is, it’s the same one that has showed up in the three local pawn shops over the past few years. I know a couple of guys that have owned it. Both said it had feeding issues.

1) Make a nice metal tag that says "Luger".
2) Buy a Ruger Standard Model 22lr.
3) Screw the Luger tag onto some nice aftermarket grips and install them.
4) 99% of people will be fooled, the other 1% will get a good laugh, and you'll have a great-shooting pistol.