Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

This is the public release.

Files

Previews only

Small Arms of WWI Primer 145: Swiss Luger 1900

Support this content at: https://www.patreon.com/CandRsenal https://www.subscribestar.com/candrsenal https://utreon.com/c/candrsenal Prints/patches/shirts from the show: https://candrsenal.com/shop/ Othais and Mae delve into the story of this WWI classic. Complete with history, function, and live fire demonstration. C&Rsenal presents its WWI Primer series; covering the firearms of this historic conflict one at a time in honor of the centennial anniversary. Join us every other Tuesday! https://candrsenal.com/primer-gallery/ Additional reading: https://candrsenal.com/recommend-reading/ Central Powers Pistols Jan C. Still The Luger Story John Walter Paul Mauser: His Life, Company, and Handgun Development 1839-1914 Mauro Baudino & Gerben van Vlimmeren The Borchardt & Luger Automatic Pistols Vol 1 -3 Joachim Gortz, Geoffrey Sturgess The Guns of John Moses Browning Nathan Gorenstein Ammunition data thanks to DrakeGmbH https://www.youtube.com/user/DrakeGmbH/ Animations by Bruno! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTkD8fyZRgT5icMbKeMFEbQ Snail Mail/Contact us at: https://candrsenal.com/contact/

Comments

David Herman

I just had a realization about why the Luger trigger sucks so much; it comes down to the toggle action. You can't do a nice hammer fire because there's no space behind the grip because that's where the recoil spring is. You also can't do a nice stirrup transfer bar because you don't have the space to weave back to get the striker because again, recoil spring. And you can't make the striker longer because that would necessitate lengthening the back of the action and there go your ergonomics. So basically the only thing left is some goofy system around the side.

Bruce Brodnax

I'm certain John Browning could have worked out something better. Heck, the Luger disconnector is shielded pretty well from dirt; I'm sure that if the design was adjusted & tolerances tightened it could be made at least tolerable...

Harry Mitts

Speaking as a gunsmith, if I was designing a new gun today, I would just buy all existing examples and then figure out what works and what doesn't, then combine the best elements and call it a new gun. In the late eighteen hundreds, no one knew what work best. Figuring out the proper grip angle the type of operating system, Etc. This stuff was still being developed. For the time of development, the Luger is a brilliant design. Was the 1911 (which was developed around 1900) better? I think so, and the High Power, developed 30 years later, even better. But to bad mouth someone creating something new out of whole cloth... Yeah let's see you do better.

Bevin Alexander, Jr.

I agree with Mr. Mitts. The context in which this design was developed was not the same as things are here some 120 years later.

Bevin Alexander, Jr.

I also had the opportunity to play with a Model 1900 Swiss Luger with very little apparent wear. Compared to my well used 1941 P. 08, the trigger was much better. I believe the design is not by any means as good as hammer fired pistols of the Browning pattern, or modern striker fired pistols using the Glock/Sig/CZ/etc. locking system, which can be made quite crisp. However, in the absence of lots of wear, it is far better than most of us get to experience with the bulk of the "well loved" P.08 Lugers we get to shoot.

CandRsenal

Essentially, releasing the striker itself isn't any different once in lock. I bet you could tackle it from underneath but then the bore axis is out.