I just saw this thing.

Lavan

New member
Had to Google to make sure it was real.

img_1209917334_19024_1290189812.jpg


It is. or WAS...

Sheesh.

Sterling PPL .22 auto. :D

Wait...wait.. WAIT.... it's a .380 :eek:
 
Personally, I like the PPK a bit better when it comes to compact, all metal, straight blowback .380 pistols. ;)

It's a neat-looking gun though, reminds me of the Ruger Mark I. A snubnose Mark I, that is.
 
It also resembles the H&R self-loading .25 ACP.

Edit: The H&R doesn't even pretend to have sights.
 

Attachments

  • H&R self-loading .25.jpg
    H&R self-loading .25.jpg
    64.9 KB · Views: 104
  • H&R self-loading .25 c.jpg
    H&R self-loading .25 c.jpg
    66.3 KB · Views: 61
  • H&R self-loading .25 b.jpg
    H&R self-loading .25 b.jpg
    72.5 KB · Views: 55
Last edited:
Huh. I kind of dig it, although it doesn't look even remotely like a practical design. How much effective length does that barrel have, exactly?
 
Sterling pistols of this type were copies of the Hi Standard pistols.
These were made after GCA-68, when there was a dearth of pocket pistols.
 
Never seen such a thing but I like it. Certainly High Standardesque. So weird looking if I saw one at a reasonable price I'd buy it just for fun.
 
How much effective length does that barrel have, exactly?
Good question. I'm betting it has less than an inch of rifling engagement area. I don't remember where, but I recall reading that it was thought (or assumed?) that lower pressured revolver rounds such as .38SPL, .38S&W, all the .32's of old only needed an inch of rifling to stabilize the bullet. I'm thinking a Sterling engineer said "Hmm, hold my beer, let's see what happens."
 
I don't remember where, but I recall reading that it was thought (or assumed?) that lower pressured revolver rounds such as .38SPL, .38S&W, all the .32's of old only needed an inch of rifling to stabilize the bullet.

Yeah, well, clearly that doesn't apply to the .380. having been intrigued, I found an old, archived review of a Sterling. It was evidently having massive keyhole problems...
 
Had to Google to make sure it was real.

img_1209917334_19024_1290189812.jpg


It is. or WAS...

Sheesh.

Sterling PPL .22 auto. :D

Wait...wait.. WAIT.... it's a .380 :eek:
Pocket pistol eh? Wonder how long it takes to unsnag the hammer, rear sight and most likely the front sight, from the pockets liner? By the time one were to get it out, you'd probably have three or four holes in your shirt from the bad guy.
Yah! "Zero" seems appropriate.
 
If the riflings were in good shape I'd expect it would not keyhole, it only takes a few hundredths of an inch to get the bullet rotating.
Which reminds me of something someone said, I'd like to know where it's in print if it is, that Walther engineers responded to a statement that pistol barrels had to be perfectly straight to be accurate, so they made a pistol with a barrel like a corkscrew that was accurate. I assume the spiral was very slight but it makes sense assuming the sights were set up to the exit direction.
 
I know your joking but - don't discount not using sights.

People like - t Dwight D. Eisenhower, Henry Ford II, John Wayne, Audie Murphy, all learned point shooting under the instruction of one Bobby Lamar "Lucky" McDaniel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_McDaniel

Excellent read - about both a largely forgotten technique and man
 
I suppose little .22’s were a thing. That has a lot of High Standard in its genetics. It looks like a .22. I would not have guessed it’s a .380.

First gun I ever took off a bad guy. 1985 or so. As soon as I saw it, I knew it was stolen. It was.

S&W Escort.


SW_Escort.jpg
 
Back
Top