Handgun Construction Methods and Materials

[larvatus]

Is it me, or are Manurhins and Korths just not really all that attractive???

Grant Cunningham has a series of articles about revolver design. I take it that by his lights, the Korth loses big time to its role model, the Colt Python. Its barrel assembly looks tacked onto the squared-off frame shoulder, subject to Grant's criticism of the early Dan Wesson, and its protruding flanged muzzle end looks like an obscene afterthought. Whereas the MR73 yoke, admittedly much stronger than the S&W design, has an unfortunate Charter Armish look about it, while the hammer tang is too stubby for good looks or comfort. In fairness, Grant admires the radical MR93 design that nearly drove the company out of business.

I believe that familiarity is a major contributor to our perceptions in this matter. The Chamelot Delvigne 1873 revolver was far superior to all of its contemporaries in every technical aspect except for its anemic chambering. But ever since the Colt SAA earned joint credit with Winchester as "the gun that won the West", every other period sidearm has been relegated to the realm of afterthought. The best they can vie for is a supporting part in a cheesy Hollywood monster movie remake. Our opinion of its looks is aligned with these prospects.

 

[larvatus]

Ergonomically unsatisfying and a combat flop unless you count popping dervishes...but then again, state of the art for 1896

The C96 cut a wide swath through the greater Asia that begins at the Landstrasse. Its ergonomics make perfect sense with the stock attached.

And durable...I would dispute that...with the whole bolt resting on on small, poorly designed part and a two springs

A couple of decades ago, Visier wrung 200,000 shots out of a C96 without incurring measurable wear of its parts.

Easily solved with C&S parts.

Do they make upgrade parts for a Rolex?

 

[45_Shooter]

According to one unverified source, http://www.gunsworld.com/french/mr93_us.html, at least some of the vaunted Manurhin guns are CAST, not forged.

I can't verify this article, but then at a glance I can't verify much of anything Manurhin.

Would this mean the Manurhin is actually a Timex?

In order to produce a more affordable handgun, Manurhin signed an

agreement with Sturm Ruger. They got Ruger's investment casting

technology and know how. They did also start the production of a new

revolver. Although it had different names, it was finally known as the

MR-88. Thisd revolver kept the cylinder and barrel of the MR-73, but

the frame was the one of the Security Six. The french police was then

issued this gun.



After this gun was released, Manurhin started producing a new revolver

truely on his own. they tried to create an entirely new gun, based on

their knowledge of investment casting, machine tools and

manufacturing. This new model would finally be called the

MR-93. Pieces are all cast, except the barrel and the cylinder whixh

are still the ones of the MR-73, although they are differently

finished.

 

[larvatus]

According to one unverified source, http://www.gunsworld.com/french/mr93_us.html, at least some of the vaunted Manurhin guns are CAST, not forged.

That was the MR93. Along with its more conventionally styled successor, the MR96, it was developed as a more affordable alternative to the MR73. Read Emmanuel Baechler's excellent review here. By all accounts, Manurhin succeeded where Ruger had failed, in assembling a match-ready trigger out of cast components. Unfortunately, these innovative guns were a commercial flop that nearly dragged down the production of the MR73.

 

[Wildalaska]

A couple of decades ago, Visier wrung 200,000 shots out of a C96 without incurring measurable wear of its parts.

Without changing a spring

I'd like to see that article by the way

The C96 cut a wide swath through the greater Asia that begins at the Landstrasse. Its ergonomics make perfect sense with the stock attached.

No wonder the Chinese never hit anybody they shot at, and the Bolshies could barely bump off a bunch of screeching aristocrats

But ever since the Colt SAA earned joint credit with Winchester as "the gun that won the West", every other period sidearm has been relegated to the realm of afterthought. The best they can vie for is a supporting part in a cheesy Hollywood monster movie remake. Our opinion of its looks is aligned with these prospects.

I would continue to argue that the Nagant designs (Russian, Swedish and Swiss) were all better combat arms than the SAA, except for caliber aenemia.

But they were badges of rank in the Ancien Regime ...unlike the Colt...

And the Swiss designs would of course be deemed better if they were ever used in combat. Ditto the Swedes.

WildammoshipmentishereAlaska ™

 

[larvatus]

Without changing a spring

The need for frequent replacement of silicon wire springs is a canard. How often do you change the valve springs in your car?

I would continue to argue that the Nagant designs (Russian, Swedish and Swiss) were all better combat arms than the SAA, except for caliber aenemia.

The Swiss 1872 and 1878 Warnant-Schmidt revolvers were Chamelot Delvigne derivatives that received an update in the Model 1882. The purest expression of that design, the French M1873, remained in service for ninety years, till 1963, beating even Webley's record from 1887 till 1957.

And the Swiss designs would of course be deemed better if they were ever used in combat. Ditto the Swedes.

The Colt SAA, adopted in 1873 and replaced in 1892, missed the Civil War by a decade and a half, and became obsolescent by the time of the Spanish-American War. Its only actual combat service took place during the Indian campaigns, along with its use as a substitute standard during the Cuban and Philippine forays. Contrast this with the Webley topbreak serving in battle nearly every day of its seventy year run. And yet the fragile SAA is still being made, even as the sun has set on the battle-worthy Webley.

 

[Poseidon28]

I do wonder what kind of warranty these guns have?

I understand you want to get others on board, so you can bring in enough to compensate for your gun.

That said, I'm not getting your logic. First you pick .357, then you say the S&W is not strong enough. However, if you actually wore one out, S&W would redo the gun, free. Lifetime warranty.

If you wanted the most accurate, strongest gun made in .357, SA, which, for target shouldn't make any difference, you could buy either a Freedom Arms 93 or 83. FA's have been winning competitions despite their hunting factory triggers, for what, 20 years?

If you want a really accurate combat gun, you have the P210, but, it would be far easier to build a tack driver 1911, for 1500 or under, or above, all depending on how much money you want to waste.

 

[JohnKSa]

I also noted that some of the guns chambered for Linebaugh's own cartridges used frames cast by Pine Tree Castings in 17-4PH (precipitation hardening) steel alloy and deep hardened.

For those who may not know, Pine Tree Castings is Ruger.

As far as the main premise of the thread. One bit of thought-provoking trivia...

To my knowledge there are no production firearms in which the manufacturer manufactures a major component (slide/frame/cylinder/barrel/bolt) using a steel and hardening that steel (whether cast or forged) to the point that it approaches anywhere near the limits (hardness/toughness) of what is currently possible using modern metallurgy and the best steels. Korth does, but I don't think most would call their firearms "production" firearms.

 

[Wildalaska]

And yet the fragile SAA is still being made, even as the sun has set on the battle-worthy Webley.

Not in my house


WildpithhelmetAlaska ™

 

[Poseidon28]

What good is something so hard you can't work it? I know I was looking at a cylinder this weekend, forged billet, drilled out and hardened, once it was machined first that was going in a custom .500 Linebaugh Maximum Ruger SRH.
I suspect that cylinder might well have been tempered to an extreme hardness, and, started out as forged stainless steel.

On the other hand, I thought part of the idea was to allow the metal to flex just a little, so it absorbs part of the impact from the firing of the round.

One of the problem with extremely hard cast bullets is they shatter, or deform.

Can't you harden forged steel so far the hardness becomes 'brittle'?

 

[JohnKSa]

Yes, but as far as I know, with the exception of some internal parts, no one is even approaching the limits in production firearms.

 

[larvatus]

To my knowledge there are no production firearms in which the manufacturer manufactures a major component (slide/frame/cylinder/barrel/bolt) using a steel and hardening that steel (whether cast or forged) to the point that it approaches anywhere near the limits (hardness/toughness) of what is currently possible using modern metallurgy and the best steels. Korth does, but I don't think most would call their firearms "production" firearms.

My thoroughly prejudicial take on Korth in advance of receiving my new toy, is that its quality of construction is wasted on an arm unsuited alike to competition and military and constabulary service. Willy is to be commended for bucking the German trend towards replacing machined forgings and silicon wire with stampings and music wire, originated by Mauser in WWII and its successors thereafter, as a result of having their asses handed to them by the Untermenschen. But a toy is a toy, and expecting anything more of it would be foolish.

On the other hand, the Manurhin MR73 was designed and manufactured as an offensive arm in the service of the French SWAT counterparts, and has amply acquitted itself therein. My examination preliminary to a formal test, suggests that its major components have been hardened to the point where they remain in their original shape after service that batters and peens their S&W counterparts way out of spec. I cannot as yet attest to its being heat-treated, case hardened, and tested to a tensile strength of approximately 60 Rockwell, as claimed by Korth on behalf of their guns. But I would be surprised if that weren't the case.

 

[larvatus]

And yet the fragile SAA is still being made, even as the sun has set on the battle-worthy Webley.

Not in my house

Two questions:

1. How accurately does it shoot?
2. Is its lockup tightened by the trigger pull?

I understand that the Webley-Fosbery is very accurate, but its price remains beyond my means.

 

[larvatus]

Can't you harden forged steel so far the hardness becomes 'brittle'?

Sure you can, but that is not what gunmakers do. Look at some old DWM Mauser actions. They are differentially hardened to leave an elastic core surrounded by glass-hard and smooth skin. In addition to imparting great resistance to wear and breakage, this process is responsible for extra smooth bolt cycling.

 

[Wildalaska]

1. How accurately does it shoot?
2. Is its lockup tightened by the trigger pull?

Using Fiocchi anemicball (265gr@700fps) I have double actioned 6 shots touching at 20 feet and 6 shots touching with single action at 30 feet with my 1916 mark VI

The lockup does tighten up with trigger pull but even then my specimen spits a bit. The sights are not conducive to accuracy but more than adequate to pop a Fuzzy Wuzzy, Jonny Boer or a Hun in the Trenches, wot wot

I just bought one in .32 made in the 1950s.

There is a Fosberry on Gunbroker being peddled at $8500.

WildandhewillgetthatsomedayAlaska TM

 

[Wildalaska]

Sure you can, but that is not what gunmakers do

Unless you worked at the Springfield Armory or RIA in the teens of the last century

On a related note, our machinist says Blaser barrels are the hardest he have ever seen....which could account for their rumoured 100,000 round lifespan

WildbutitssurfacehardeningAlaska TM

 

[larvatus]

I do wonder what kind of warranty these guns have?

Without a factory authorized import channel, this question is moot. You break it, you own it.

I understand you want to get others on board, so you can bring in enough to compensate for your gun.

I am way past that point for the purpose of my collection. In the long range, I am hoping to help Chapuis to keep making the MR73.

That said, I'm not getting your logic. First you pick .357, then you say the S&W is not strong enough. However, if you actually wore one out, S&W would redo the gun, free. Lifetime warranty.

What's the point of lifetime replacement of a product that underwhelms you in the first instance? I would rather have my Registered Magnums than any current S&W products. I would rather keep my Manurhins than my Registered Magnums.

If you wanted the most accurate, strongest gun made in .357, SA, which, for target shouldn't make any difference, you could buy either a Freedom Arms 93 or 83. FA's have been winning competitions despite their hunting factory triggers, for what, 20 years?

My interest is more or less limited to duty sidearms. I give a pass to my favorite revolver because of the Postal Service connection of its centerfire brethren:

Besides, nothing beats a .22 Bankers Special for learning defensive shooting with a belly gun.

If you want a really accurate combat gun, you have the P210, but, it would be far easier to build a tack driver 1911, for 1500 or under, or above, all depending on how much money you want to waste.

I have a couple of Colt Government Models for reference purposes, a 1957 garden variety and a 1939 National Match. The Neuhausen pistols are my hobby horse. I hoping to keep the Manurhins from following them out of production.

 

[JohnKSa]

On the other hand, the Manurhin MR73 was designed and manufactured as an offensive arm in the service of the French SWAT counterparts, and has amply acquitted itself therein. My examination preliminary to a formal test, suggests that its major components have been hardened to the point where they remain in their original shape after service that batters and peens their S&W counterparts way out of spec.

Might I be so bold as to suggest that you include an equivalent Ruger revolver in your formal test?

Might be interesting to see how a revolver using decidedly cost-conscious decisions in design, materials & manufacture stacks up against these two European champions.

 

[larvatus]

Might I be so bold as to suggest that you include an equivalent Ruger revolver in your formal test?

Might be interesting to see how a revolver using decidedly cost-conscious decisions in design, materials & manufacture stacks up against these two European champions.

The more, the merrier. I'd like to include Rugers and Smith & Wessons alongside the MR73 and its Manurhin successors. My part in this exercise is supplying the French and German revolvers. I trust that my associates would be able to furnish domestic pieces.

 

[Poseidon28]

If you are going with a 10" barrel, you might as well go with a bolt action hand cannon single shot. 300 bucks, will out shoot anything you own, and, do it with a bunch of different caliber barrels.

Your inconsistency is a bit annoying. One minute it's service guns. The next it's a 10" target revolver. The only thing consistent is you want something, expensive, exclusive, and that shoots better then you do.

That is not a difficult set of requirements. Just buy a few custom Freedom Arms revolvers, have Jack Huntington, Hamilton Bowen, etc. work the guns over, and, you can get under 1" at a hundred yards, with a revolver, and, for a very long time.