Luger P08 pistol

[unspellable]

I have not tried sizing down 0.312 jacketed bullets, although I may try it one of these days. Word is that spring back can cause the jacket to separate. The original bore is over sized with respect to the original bullet, (or vice versa) we have no info as of yet as to why, although it appears to have been a practice in some other European arms. (And oddly enough has connections with the 32 Winchester Special's allegedly poor accuracy with a worn bore, another urban myth.)

I don't remember if I slugged my Ruger bore, but I'd not be surprised to find it at 0.308. It uses the same slide and magazine as the 9 mm version but has a different guide rod and recoil spring. The Ruger factory people supplied me gratis with an extra guide rod and three extra springs for experimental purposes. Nice of them but a bit out of character for Ruger. They probably "forgot" to tell the legal department. At one time I thought about rebarreling a S&W 39 for the 7.65.

I've recently moved to another state and am living an apartment while the wife and dog are back home getting the house fixed up for sale. Everything is in hurriedly packed and stacked boxes. You were correct on the 1906 date, I had a mental hiccup. There were three series of trials in 901, 1903, & 1907. I've found reference to the 45 Luger beating the Colt in the 1907 endurance trails, and reference to 9 mm velocities in the 1050 fps range in the 1903 trials. I'm still digging for reliability from the 1903 trials. The biggest edge the colt had was in post rust test functioning. The 1901 trials seem to have been purely a field rail with no controlled testing done.

 

[Jim K]

There are some interesting points about the 9mm Parabellum cartridge. When DWM first had the pistol tested by the German army, it was in 7.65 caliber. The German army wanted a larger bullet and specifically suggested 9mm. But just straightening the 7.65 case resulted in a mouth diameter slightly over 9mm (if the army wanted 9mm, it would get 9mm, not 9.2mm), plus there was the problem of case support and headspace. Luger first tried to use a necked up 7.65 case with a very small shoulder*, but that did not provide enough support. So he decided to support the case on its mouth, not a new idea but one that had not been extensively used. The result was the tapered case.

Back home, Browning started his auto pistol experiments with revolver cartridges, but soon ran into feeding problems from a box magazine. He couldn't think of any other way to support the round other than a rim, so he kept reducing the rim to the point where it would feed reliably, give good support and, if cartridge overall length was kept in specs, would not rim lock. The result was the whole series of semi-rimmed Browning cartridges.

Browning may have hit on the idea of case mouth support on his own, but it seems more likely that at some point around 1903/1904 he saw or heard about a 9mm Luger round and the light went on. The result was that subsequent Browning rounds (.380 ACP and .45 ACP) are supported on the case mouth.

*Case support with small shoulder cartridges has always been a problem with rounds like the .35 Remington and .35 Whelan. H&H finally gave up trying to use a shoulder for support with its .375 H&H Magnum and went to a belt for headspace, not for case strength as most folks assume.

Jim

 

[Alpacca 45]

Drawings reproduced at the back of Martens, B & de Vries, G: "The Dutch Luger" show dimensions for the necked chamber for 9mm, together with dimensions for the recoil spring and the cartridge and bullet. There is also discussion of the evolution of the coil recoil spring and its replacing the leaf spring of the "old Luger".

I need to check the reference, but one theory for the supposed "unreliability" was conscripts mixing up side plates, as at least some side plate assemblies required either selective assembly or else hand adjustment during manufacture and swapping could result in failures to fire.

I have to say that for a 100 odd year old design, with some made under the most appalling hardship, and with unknown levels of mistreatment since, I have not had first or secondhand experience of an "unreliable" luger.

I did hear of one "going full auto" and resulting in a bent toggle, supposedly after firing Mkiiz submachinegun loading. I never saw the result, and gather that the firer later ended up in a secure mental hospital...

Are you sure the threads were BS?

The BA (British Association) threads were bought as a fine thread system from a Swiss instrument manufacturer and are based on metric measurements , although different to the later "metric" threads. They were used when the Whitworth threads would be considered too coarse. When expressed in inches the BA thread formula will always contain either 127 or 25.4 as the conversion factor from millimetres to inches.

BS (Whitworth) threads were not unknown on the continent of Europe, for example the bolts into the aluminium alloy castings of Hitler's VW Beetle.

Unspellable, I'll send you a PM over the next couple of days.

 

[doubs43]

I have not tried sizing down 0.312 jacketed bullets, although I may try it one of these days. Word is that spring back can cause the jacket to separate.

Separation hasn't been a problem but then both of the bullet designs I use are solid base and separation wouldn't happen at least until the bullet struck it's target. My father once had a post-WW1 rework of an Erfurt Luger that had it's 9mm barrel replaced with a .30 caliber. (It's now in my collection.) All parts except the barrel are matching. Anyway, I loaded some lead-nose HP bullets for him and one day a large groundhog came toward my father and brother as they relaxed in the backyard. It was acting funny so my father handed my brother the Erfurt and told him to shoot the groundhog. The first bullet was a solid and passed through without effect. The next bullet was one of the HP's and it nearly tore the animal in half, stopping it on the spot. Very effective. My father had owned several .30 Lugers since the 1920's and stated that with a good HP or softnose bullet, it was "wicked". I tend to agree.

With regard to semi-rimmed cartridges, I find it interesting that Colt chose to use a semi-rimmed case for the .38 Super rather than a rimless case and headspace on the small rim rather than the case mouth when they introduced the 1911 in that cartridge. Early pistols were not known for being accurate and in later years Colt changed over to headspacing on the case mouth. FWIW, if you reload, the 9mm Largo case works beautifully in the .38 Super and is a true rimless case.

 

[Jim K]

As I mentioned, Colt did not "choose" semi-rimmed cases, Browning did. That whole series of cartridges (.25 ACP, .32 ACP, .38 ACP, 9mm Browning Long) were all semi-rimmed, reflecting Browning's initial use of revolver cartridges. Only the later .380 ACP and .45 ACP are true rimless and are supported on the case mouth.

Jim

 

[unspellable]

head space

It would be interesting to know who first came up with the idea for headspacing on the case mouth. I would think it would be possible to headspace the transitional 9 mm cartridge on the case mouth while more or less ignoring the shoulder, but in the end the straight tapered case would be simpler to manufacture. There is some evidence to suggest that the Luger presented for British consideration was using the transitional 9 mm with shoulder.

The US, German, and British military were all requesting a caliber larger than the 7.65 at more or less the same time.

In a former life I and some friends used to hunt jackrabbits. A hardball from my 7.65 Luger stopped them dead every time without fail. On the other hand I've seen them run after a fair and square hit with everything from a 455 Webley to a 30-06. I have no explaination for this, there is nothing that special about a 7.65 hardball. Jack rabbits are notoriously hard to put down, far tougher than a cottontail.

 

[billyhornsby]

Finnish Luger

I have a Finnish Luger pistol. The markings have the SA designation, a 35 on one side, a 36 on the back of the bolt, and a 699 or 996 depending on how you look at it on the side as well...tapped out with xxx...Does anyone know about the pistols?

 

[unspellable]

reliabilty & velocity in previous posts

My velocity figures for the 9 mm come from the original DWM specs.

The reliability vs the 1911 comes from the actual US Army test report in which a test was conducted with both pistols clean and properly lubed at start, simple endurance test to see which gun jammed first. The 1911 jammed first.

 

[Jim Watson]

Ed Ezell showed data from the 1903 tests of the then-new 9mm. For some reason he metricated everything, but converting back to American money, they tried two loads with 123 grain bullets, one about 1150 fps, the other about 1190 in 4" barrels.
Of course this was in the old model action with ribbon springs. Does a new model REALLY need "hot European loads?"

Billyhornsby, as I understand it, the Finns adopted the 1923 version Luger in 7.65mm.
After that they started building 9mm Lahtis and bought some Brownings for the Finnish Air Force. So they standardized on 9mm and rebarrelled their Lugers for the same round as the other guns. That is what was surplused here, mostly. With Tikka or Sako barrels, ugly but visible square front sights, and a dull reblue.

 

[unspellable]

Hot loads again?

No, the New Model does NOT need hot loads. Urban myth. Leads to the unknowing screwing up the recoil spring. What it would really like is a load with the correct OAL.

 

[HisSoldier]

I've found reference to the 45 Luger beating the Colt in the 1907 endurance trails,

The reliability vs the 1911 comes from the actual US Army test report in which a test was conducted with both pistols clean and properly lubed at start, simple endurance test to see which gun jammed first. The 1911 jammed first.

A 1911 in 1907?

I love my Lugers, but for a combat situation I'll grab the 1911 any time for many reasons.