Makarov Problem

[JohnKSa]

So Joe Gunguy goes to the dealer and buys a Mak ("Hey, it's a Walther copy, but alot cheaper!") and decides to carry it like a Walther or any other DA pistol, trusting that hammer down means safe (or safe enough).

It's roughly a copy of the Walther PPK. The Walther PPK is not equipped with an automatic firing pin safety either. Therefore it is perfectly safe to carry the Mak in the same way you would safely carry a PPK.

because no western manufactorer would build a pistol that way

Most Colt autopistols and many 1911 style pistols are not equipped with an automatic firing pin safety and will discharge a chambered round when the uncocked hammer is sharply struck--that's the main reason that cocked & locked carry is popular for these guns.

In fact, not even the manual safeties on the 1911 style pistols block the firing pin. That means that a 1911 with a chambered round is theoretically susceptible to discharge from being dropped on its muzzle-regardless of the position of the safeties or controls on the pistol.

I'm curious if every Mak owner here on TFL was completely aware of this design and it's proper handling.

Probably not.

 

[Handy]

John,

I mustn't be stating this clearly enough. The issue is not a firing pin block. It's the lack of INERTIAL firing pin.

An inertial firing pin must fly several milimeters before impacting on the primer. There is a spring that holds the firing pin aft away from the primer. If you drop the weapon on the hammer, the hammer can not transmit enough enough force from the rest position to move the firing pin fast and hard enough to impact the primer. That firing pin spring also helps prevent muzzle drop firings. 1911's, PPK's and every other western design works like this.

The Mak firing pin has no spring and fills the entire distance from rested hammer to back of the primer. So the hammer is essentially resting on the primer. That is not the case with a PPK.

If you hit the back of the hammer on a Mak with the safety off, it WILL make the round go off. It doesn't matter if you bump a door knob, whack it with your wrist watch, drop it, whatever, it will go off. That's really dangerous in a way no other weapon is, except a SAA with a round under the hammer.

 

[JohnKSa]

Ok, I pulled my PPK and one of my Maks out of the safe and did a little testing.

1. The PPK firing pin will protrude from the breechface when the hammer is resting against the slide. I.e. it is not an inertial firing pin although it does have a spring.

2. The Mak firing pin will protrude from the breechface when the hammer is resting against the slide. I.e. it is virtually identical to the PPK configuration except that it does not have a firing pin spring.

3. The PPK hammer does not rest against the slide or firing pin. There is an interlock built into the gun that doesn't allow the hammer to travel fully forward unless the trigger is fully rearward. To do the test in part 1, I had to hold the trigger back and push the hammer forward.

4. The Mak hammer does not rest against the slide or firing pin. There is an interlock built into the gun that doesn't allow the hammer to travel fully forward unless the trigger is fully rearward. To do the test in part 2, I had to hold the trigger back and push the hammer forward.

Your comments about the Mak being a uniquely dangerous gun are not borne out by the facts. Its safety features are identical to those built into the PPK, and probably very similar to most DA guns that were designed prior to the advent of automatic firing pin safeties.

So to recap.

The Mak firing pin has no spring and fills the entire distance from rested hammer to back of the primer. So the hammer is essentially resting on the primer.

Not true.

If you hit the back of the hammer on a Mak with the safety off, it WILL make the round go off.

Only true if you strike the hammer hard enough to destroy the internal interlock.

That's really dangerous in a way no other weapon is

Not true. It's essentially identical to the PPK configuration--the only similar gun I have to compare it to. The only difference is the firing pin spring--which is, by the way, quite weak and really only serves as a return spring.

 

[Handy]

Ah, thank you John. I had never heard mention of the hammer blocking device in either pistol. That explains the non-sprung firing pin perfectly and should be about as safe.

It is surprising that it took five questions about the hammer resting on the firing pin for the answer to come up.

 

[JohnKSa]

Alright, just go ahead! Say it!

If I hadn't been so lazy, I could have opened my safe, done a 2 minute experiment, and answered the question right the very first time!

Ok, I admit it--I'm lazy! Just don't tell my wife...