Sig 7.65 parabellum?

Some countries that use the 9mm Parabellum as their service cartridge ban civilian ownership of pistols in that caliber (e.g., Italy). So many companies make pistols in 7.65 Parabellum for sale in those countries. They are not usually imported into the U.S. since we have no such restriction and people generally prefer the 9mm.

FWIW, Colt made the Commander in 7.65 Parabellum (barrels were marked ".30 Luger") for export; they were never sold in the U.S.

Jim
 
No experience personally, but it's a high-velocity cartridge (93gr bullet at 1,200 fps) that was originally developed for the original DWM Pistole Parabellum, aka Luger pistol. It's also known as the .30 Luger. If you're astute, you may notice that the English and metric caliber designations are inconsistent with one another; interestingly, it fires neither a true .30-caliber (7.62mm, 0.308") nor a true .32-caliber (7.65mm, 0.312") bullet- it's actually 0.309" or 7.63mm caliber. It's one of only a handful of bottleneck pistol cartidges in common use, along with .357Sig, 7.63 Mauser, and 7.62x25 Tokarev.

The round has a reputation for gilt-edged accuracy, but also for a lack of effectiveness for SD or police use; as with other high-velocity small-caliber rounds, its greatest strength is that it penetrates like crazy, but this is also its greatest weakness, as it tends to create straight-through non-lethal wounds.

DWM was a German company, but the round's perceived lack of lethality prompted the German army to reject the pistol and call for something more potent. This led Georg Luger to shorten the cartridge case slightly and neck it up for a 9mm bullet, thus creating the ubiquitous 9mm Luger. :) Despite the Germans' adoption of the 9mm version, the Swiss military and several other European forces continued to use the original 7.65 round, and it was also used for a large number of Luger pistols produced during the Weimar Republic era when the production of commercial 9mm pistols was strictly limited by the Treaty of Versailles. (The Nazis would later unilaterally renounce the treaty and restart full-scale production of the 9mm version, along with all sorts of other prohibited weaponry, but I digress.)

In recent years, the round's main reason for existence- besides use in original Luger pistols- is for civilian use in a few Western European countries that banned the commercial sale of pistols in so-called "military" calibers, IIRC notably Italy; 7.65 Parabellum was supposedly excluded from the "military" list for some obscure reason. Since the 9mm Luger round was originally designed to work in a pre-existing 7.65mm pistol, changing calibers the other way is generally quite easy- most 9mm pistols will function in 7.65mm with only a barrel swap, often using the 9mm recoil spring and magazines. Consequently, many older 9mm pistols were also available in 7.65mm for European sale, but these were seldom sold in the USA in significant numbers, making them sought-after collector's items in some cases.

Both Winchester and Remington have historically loaded the round, but AFAIK Fiocchi is the only company that consistently offers commercial ammunition in this caliber today.
 
Last edited:
Browning sold off some Hi Powers in 7.65 a few years back. They were apparently intended to be sold in Italy, but somehow ended up in the U.S.

The Hi Power is an example of one 7.65 P that was fairly extensively re-engineered to work with the round. The slide was lightened, the barrel was much slimmer that the 9mm, and the mags are completely different.
 
I bought one of those 7.65MM Hi Powers when some distributor was closing them out years ago. These hi Powers have the very lightweight, delicate appearing IMHO slide, small diameter barrel, and mgazines specific to the caliber. I shot a little factory .30 Luger ammo in it but never reloaded for the caliber. Just dug out my old chronograph notes that indicate that Winchester Western 93 grain ball ammo averaged 1191 FPS and Peters .30 Luger JHP ( neglected to list bullet weight) averaged 1177 fps, some old WRA ball averaged 1197 FPS.....
 
I thought going from .30 Luger to 9 X 19 required only a
barrel change for the Luger pistol?
I once had a commercial Luger in .30 Luger.
Wish I still did.
 
I thought going from .30 Luger to 9 X 19 required only a
barrel change for the Luger pistol?

In some cases that is true, but as I and rock185 pointed out, the Hi Power had a redesigned slide, slim barrel and unique magazine. The only way to convert would be to buy a whole 9mm Hi Power upper.

Actually, the 7.65 Lugers are still generally the cheapest to buy, so you can rectify your mistake.

BTW: I have never shot my Browning, but I keep promising myself to get to it one of these days. What was your impression of how the gun shot rock185?
 
Very cool...

Thank you guys for the information and experiences. It's amazing the knowledge that is here on this forum...

Even though Abraham Lincoln was quoted as to have said that one cannot believe everything on the internet... I bet he would have looked to TFL for his weapon questions. ;)
 
gyvel, My impression was of light recoil, reliability, and accuracy consistent with the average 9MM Hi Power. In short; unremarkable....
 
gyvel, My impression was of light recoil, reliability, and accuracy consistent with the average 9MM Hi Power. In short; unremarkable....

Interesting; So, basically no better or worse than any other military style pistol.
 
As Chris says, the Swiss adopted the 1900 Luger in 7.65 and were happy with it for many years. They officially went to 9mm with the P47/8 (P210) but also made 7.65 barrels for the new gun to use ammo on hand and to suit the preferences of shooters used to the original caliber. I figure the P75 (P220) shown was built with the same logic, there are still Switzers who prefer the 7.65.

And it was the German NAVY that led the charge to the 9mm. The German navy adopted the 9mm Luger in 1904, it took the army til 1908 to come around. Which is not unusual. Before the flyers took over, the navies of the world were usually more technologically advanced than the armies.
 
The idea of a bottleneck pistol round was a natural, following the success of bottleneck rifle cartridges. The idea originally was to retain the powder capacity of the old "big bore" (10-13 mm) cartridges with a lighter and faster bullet.

But when the German military asked Luger for a larger caliber (they specifically mentioned 9mm), he had a problem. He wanted to keep the pistol arrangement the same, which meant the same breech, receiver and magazine. But the bottlenecked 7.65mm case was supported (headspaced) on its shoulder. When Luger expanded the case to take a 9mm bullet, the shoulder effectively vanished. He tried to keep it, and there are a few surviving 9mm rounds with tiny shoulders.

A few cartridges had been made without rims or shoulders, but they were tapered and sort of wedged into the chambers, an arrangement that demanded a high degree of precision in both pistol and cartridge and would probably not do in mass production.

Finally, good old Georg hit on the idea of using the case mouth for support; that worked and the 9mm Parabellum was off to the races. The case, though, still had one problem - it was tapered. Tapered cases have advantages, but in feeding from a magazine, a straight case is better. Did Luger consider going to, say, 9.1mm and using a straight case? But the Army had suggested 9mm, and in Germany at that time, an Army suggestion amounted to an order. I don't know if Luger considered a straight case, but other designers did, including John Browning, who tossed his idea of a semi-rim as soon as he found out about using the case mouth for support; his last cartridges, the .380 ACP and .45 ACP have straight cases.

Jim
 
When the Sig-Sauer P220 first came to America (in it's original "European" configuration) in the 1970s, it was offered in 5 calibers. .22LR, .30 Luger, 9mm Luger, .38 Super and .45ACP.

Sales were unimpressive. Probably because, at the time, the gun was considered homely as a mud fence, and its heel type mag release was not as desirable as the Colt style pushbutton.

In the late 70s, Browning imported them under their name, a few hundred .38 Supers, a couple thousand 9mms, and the bulk in .45ACP, as the Browning BDA (Browning Double Action). I've had a BDA.45 since 1980, and have no intention of parting with it.

Sig later redesigned the P220, changing the mag release and recontouring the grip shape a bit. The rest, as they say, is history...
 
I've had a BDA.45 since 1980, and have no intention of parting with it.

I have read at various times and sources, that the BDA had a tendency for the slide to jump the frame rails and come off the gun. Has that ever happened to you?
 
I'm curious as to why 7.62x21 was chosen over the 7.63x25 mauser. It generates about 100ft-lbs more energy and if I'm not mistaken it's interchangeable in many guns with the 7.62x25 tokarev.

The .30 Mauser was also designed 2 years before the .30 Luger. Is there a drawback to the .30 Mauser compared to the .30 luger that I'm overlooking? The .195'' longer OAL of the Mauser round surely couldn't be the reason could it?
 
Alright, I might have missed something, but...
What's the difference between 7.65 Parabellum & 7.65 Browning/.32acp??
 
Alright, I might have missed something, but...
What's the difference between 7.65 Parabellum & 7.65 Browning/.32acp??
7.65 para is slightly more powerful, has slightly more case capacity a longer and fatter case and different bullet diameters AFAIK.

.30 luger is .309 cal
.32 acp is .3125 cal


.32 acp is fairly straight walled, while .30 luger has a bottle neck shape, which is said to be better for reliable feeding.
Also, I believe the .30 Luger operates at a higher peak pressure.

.32 NAA is closer to the .30 luger than the .32 acp, IMO.
AFAIK.
 
The .30 Mauser was also designed 2 years before the .30 Luger. Is there a drawback to the .30 Mauser compared to the .30 luger that I'm overlooking? The .195'' longer OAL of the Mauser round surely couldn't be the reason could it?

The .30 Mauser was actually derived from the earlier 7.65 1893 Borchardt round which are so close as to be interchangeable.

However, the original Borchardt round was not as powerful as the later .30 Mauser, although I did fire a magazine full of .30 Mauser about 45 years ago or so through a Borchardt pistol that was in horrendous condition without breaking anything.

There is also an early Mannlicher pistol that used a Borchardt-derived round, too.
 
Last edited:
Alright, I might have missed something, but...
What's the difference between 7.65 Parabellum & 7.65 Browning/.32acp??

Regarding the 7.65 Parabellum, think of a shorter version of a .30 Mauser round or a 7.62x25 Tokarev round.

Regarding the 7.65 Browning, think of a much shorter straight-walled case midway in length between a .32 S&W and a .32 S&W Long, only with a semi rim.

Also:

7.65 Mannlicher (1), a bottleneck round based on the earlier Borchardt case and dimensionally identical to the 7.63 Mauser and 7.62x25 Tokarev, and (2) another 7.65 Mannlicher that was a straight-walled case somewhat longer than a .32ACP, used most notably in the Argentine Modelo 1905 pistol.

Also a 7.65 Roth-Sauer, straight-walled and shorter than a .32ACP, and the 7.65 French Long, used in their 1935S and 1935A pistols with a straight walled case much longer than a .32ACP.

Thoroughly confused?:confused:
 
Last edited:
JD0x0 said:
I'm curious as to why 7.62x21 was chosen over the 7.63x25 mauser... The .195'' longer OAL of the Mauser round surely couldn't be the reason could it?
Although I'm not certain, I suspect it WAS the reason.

The 9mm Luger cartridge was designed to work in a preexisting 7.65 Parabellum magazine, so it stands to reason that a 7.65 Para cartridge will fit in most 9mm mags, and more significantly, in most 9mm magazine wells. Since 9mm Luger was the de facto standard European military cartridge by the end of WWII, most modern service pistols were designed around it, and likely don't have enough extra room in the mag well to fit a magazine that's ~0.2" wider lengthwise.

[EDIT: I assumed you're asking about the reason for using it in older European-market pistols, and NOT the original Luger Parabellum pistol. Jim Watson subsequently addressed that pistol.]
JD0x0 said:
I believe the .30 Luger operates at a higher peak pressure.
SAAMI pressure specs are 28,000 psi for .30 Luger and 20,500 psi for .32ACP, so it's a LOT higher.

For further comparison, the nominal .30 Luger / 7.65mm Para standard load is a 93gr bullet at ~1,200 fps with ~300 fpe of muzzle energy, whereas the nominal .32ACP standard load is a 73gr bullet at ~1,050 fps with ~170 fpe of energy. 7.65 Para is substantially more powerful any way you slice it. Additionally, most 7.65 Para pistols are locked breech, whereas most .32ACP pistols are straight blowback.
JD0x0 said:
.32 NAA is closer to the .30 luger than the .32 acp, IMO.
I don't quite agree. The original .32NAA load was 60gr at ~1,200 fps with ~200 fpe of energy- IOW it equals the .30 Luger / 7.65mm Para in velocity, but it uses a bullet 2/3 the weight, and its muzzle energy is correspondingly 1/3 less. The .32NAA doesn't outperform .32ACP by that great of a margin, while its larger-diameter case reduces capacity; these are arguably the main reasons for its limited market success.

The .32NAA DOES fit in a physically smaller pistol than 7.65 Para, assuming Boberg doesn't have a 7.65 Para pistol in the works, which is probably a safe assumption. :)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top