Why no makarov in 9mm?
- Thread starter militant
- Start date
Cheapshooter
New member
I hope they do get it right. I was very close to buying one. I really liked the look, and feel of the one I looked at. The only thing that kept me from buying it was that they wanted over MSRP, but the salesman claimed he didn't know how long it was going to be "on sale" for that price.
Walt Sherrill
New member
agent109 said:
It's ONLY the last round that can cause wear on the follower, as it slides onto feed ramp from the mag. Earlier you told us that just a few hundred rounds through a PF9 could ruin the follower. That's less than 30 mag exchanges!!! Seriously? Are you telling us this from personal experience?
Let's walk through what happens when that last round is fed from any mag in a gun with a feed ramp:
- The top of base of the round will be pushed forward by the slide.
- That forward movement will cause the round to stay FLAT on the follower until the the nose of the round starts up the ramp.
- When the nose of the round starts up the ramp, the bottom of the cartridge base will scrape across the follower as it is pushed forward.
- The the nose of the round TILTS UP as it starts up the ramp; the tilt begins almost immediately.
- The top of the base is pushed forward by the slide while the bottom of the base remains in contact with the follower.The same thing will happen with ANY round, regardless of caliber when the round must go up a feed ramp. It's true of rounds that aren't slightly tapered and it's true whether the mag is single-stack or double-stack.
I've not heard of any great problems with PF9 followers failing -- although it might occur. I've also not heard of a rash of other Mec-Gar mags having follower failures, either, and I've been shooting Mec-Gar mags for many years.
Just what was your point, exactly?
Last edited:
Peace!Honestly Agent, I don't see this as a question of respect for one's opinion. All you need do is offer a plausible explanation to how his explanation of a rounds trip through the mag is flawed or how the taper of a shell could possibly be the cause of failed followers, and how this could possibly only occur in single stack magazines if it were true.
Opinions need to be supported by either facts or reasonable logical scenarios. Time after time others have offered up physical evidence and pretty much irrefutable explanations for conclusions that you hold to be truth. You counter by sighting conclusions instead of explanations.
I would hope that you could, maybe, take a different approach to the subject matter here and start over with the assumption that you just might be wrong. look at the evidence that others have offered and without looking for conclusions to "fight back" with, just see if it makes sense to you.
I have no great knowledge of how guns work myself. I have been following this thread, though, and can plainly see what makes sense.
Why don't you just go and try it with a PF 9 and see for yourselves? I am never going to change my mind or opinion that single stacking the tampered 9x19 cartridge is a real challenge to do and can cause feeding problems. Am i not entitled to do my own thinking or must I part of the herd and forum clique?
My conclusions are formed from my personal experiences and seeing with my own two eyes and speaking with engineering folks at gun makers. Just because you have not seen or spoken to the same is irrelevant. I am getting tired of the new fish in the tank harassment as well from the forum clique and squatters.
With all due respect, I will do my own thinking and form my own conclusions. This only the internet anyway and the internet is widely known as a place for false, misleading and misinformation. No big deal guys!
My conclusions are formed from my personal experiences and seeing with my own two eyes and speaking with engineering folks at gun makers. Just because you have not seen or spoken to the same is irrelevant. I am getting tired of the new fish in the tank harassment as well from the forum clique and squatters.
With all due respect, I will do my own thinking and form my own conclusions. This only the internet anyway and the internet is widely known as a place for false, misleading and misinformation. No big deal guys!
Last edited:
lee n. field
New member
The only problem I have ever heard of WRT PF9 magazine followers was related to the slide not holding open after the last round.
I think that's been fixed. I know I have never experienced that problem with mine.
Take a look at your follower. It is supposed to be flat. Now see the hole dug in it by the cartridges after shooting 50 rounds. This is caused by the tapered design of the 9x19. Try it for your self and see.
Kel Tec has more problems than a hippopotamus with chapped lips!
Here you go:
http://www.thektog.org/forum/f95/
Kel Tec has more problems than a hippopotamus with chapped lips!
Here you go:
http://www.thektog.org/forum/f95/
Last edited:
Maybe you missed the post from the forum mod above while you were feeling sorry for yourself:
The issue is not that your opinion differs from anyone else's. Be clear about that.
The issue is that many of your opinions, like the Glock-related post I quoted above (and many, many others from THR), are either extremely amateurish/fayboyish in content or simply incorrect. You post as if you have nothing left to learn from people with knowledge obviously superior to your own, and you persist in arguing these positions even when they've been clearly controverted. Instead of recognizing that you should revise a given position when faced with evidence that contradicts it, you behave as if you've been attacked personally. It's a very juvenile manner of posting, and it inevitably puts you in conflict with most of the other posters on the forums you visit (as on THR before this one). The problem is not with these other posters. This monolithic "clique" you imagine does not exist -- many of the posters responding to you disagree with one another on a variety of issues. You're the common denominator here.
And you are certainly not helping to improve its reputation.
Walt Sherrill
New member
I noticed another misunderstanding in one of your earlier comments, and it's a relevant point -- in post #36:
If you check the original HP design drawings and patents you'll see that Browning's initial design had a single-stack magazine; that gun was striker-fired, not hammer fired. Browning felt that 7-8 rounds were enough. As we can see with other guns in use today, he easily could have increased the capacity to 9 or 10 rounds without a lot of effort if that was required. It later was required.
Here's a link to an earlier discussion ON THIS FORUM which has some of the patent information and illustrations. http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=492206 We can thank WVsig for doing some of the research. Just jump down to the SECOND POST!! (To quote WVsig, "The gun we shoot today and call the Browning Hi Power is not what JMB designed.")
As the HP project went forward, the FRENCH GOVERNMENT, which commissioned the work, asked for a higher capacity weapon, and Browning's co-worker, Dieudonné Saive developed a working model of the double-stack mag based on a modified FN Model 1903. Saive then passed the completed magazine to Browning who developed two 9mm pistol designs alternately using locked and unlocked breaches. Saive later took over the HP project after Browning's death and eventually became head designer for FN, the Belgian firm that had hired Browning to develop the HP.
You'd think that if it those tapered rounds were as big a problem as you claim, a true firearms genius like John M. Browning would've said something. The taper that so offends your sensibilities also exists in a double-stack 9mm magazine. The CZ Tactical Sport in 9mm holds 20 rounds, and that's the equivalent of two 10-round mags side by side -- and it takes up less space! Staggering the rounds doesn't make the issue of proper round presentation go away -- as the bases of the rounds still take up the same space whether they tilt or not -- but proper mag and follower design illustrates that the 9mm taper doesn't really matter.
agent109 said:
If you check the original HP design drawings and patents you'll see that Browning's initial design had a single-stack magazine; that gun was striker-fired, not hammer fired. Browning felt that 7-8 rounds were enough. As we can see with other guns in use today, he easily could have increased the capacity to 9 or 10 rounds without a lot of effort if that was required. It later was required.
Here's a link to an earlier discussion ON THIS FORUM which has some of the patent information and illustrations. http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=492206 We can thank WVsig for doing some of the research. Just jump down to the SECOND POST!! (To quote WVsig, "The gun we shoot today and call the Browning Hi Power is not what JMB designed.")
As the HP project went forward, the FRENCH GOVERNMENT, which commissioned the work, asked for a higher capacity weapon, and Browning's co-worker, Dieudonné Saive developed a working model of the double-stack mag based on a modified FN Model 1903. Saive then passed the completed magazine to Browning who developed two 9mm pistol designs alternately using locked and unlocked breaches. Saive later took over the HP project after Browning's death and eventually became head designer for FN, the Belgian firm that had hired Browning to develop the HP.
You'd think that if it those tapered rounds were as big a problem as you claim, a true firearms genius like John M. Browning would've said something. The taper that so offends your sensibilities also exists in a double-stack 9mm magazine. The CZ Tactical Sport in 9mm holds 20 rounds, and that's the equivalent of two 10-round mags side by side -- and it takes up less space! Staggering the rounds doesn't make the issue of proper round presentation go away -- as the bases of the rounds still take up the same space whether they tilt or not -- but proper mag and follower design illustrates that the 9mm taper doesn't really matter.
Last edited:
Possibly, if you can design a system that tells the gun when it is, and is not being fired. I think it would be an overly complex, and possibly fragile and expensive solution to a problem that really does not exist.
one person did mention that there IS a blowback 9mm Luger pistol that was by armed forces, the Astra. yes, the spring is on the stiff side, and recoil is not what you get from a locked breech gun. And, its LOUD, too! A real eye opener when I shot one.
And thanks for all the banter about the taper of the 9mm Luger round. It was nice, but don't quit your day job!
If you want a hi-cap single stack 9mm, go to the source, get a Luger and a Snail Drum!!!
Frank Ettin
Administrator
44 AMP said:
The gas retarded blow-back H&K P7 has been mentioned. A very neat and completely reliable gun in 9mm Luger -- with a single stack magazine.
Of course you're entitled to your opinion. But that doesn't mean that anyone has to pay any attention to your opinion or that no one can challenge your opinion. It is never unreasonable for me, or anyone else, to expect someone offering an opinion, here or anywhere else, back that opinion up. All opinions are not equal, and how much attention an opinion deserves depends on how well it can be backed up.agent109 said:
Be my guest. But don't be surprised if others don't share your conclusions, especially if you can't support them with evidence or if others supply evidence casting doubt upon your conclusions.agent109 said:
Lets just leave it alone guys! I have drawn my own conclusion and formed an opinion. Just leave it alone! It is not a world disaster, it is the internet and that's all!
If no attention was paid then, why all this consternation? These internet gun sites seem to have the worst cliques I have ever seen. They are far exceeded those of politics in this country.
If no attention was paid then, why all this consternation? These internet gun sites seem to have the worst cliques I have ever seen. They are far exceeded those of politics in this country.
Last edited:
Now to answer the original question, the Russians wanted a none standard ammunition so it could not be picked up off the battlefield and used against them. It is a 9x18 round with a .362 diameter bullet not the .355 everybody else was using. That's all there is to it. They were able to single stack higher because it was straight walled cartridge design and their mags are even interchangeable with the 9x17 Kurz the German were using.
At one time, you could buy a field hand operated press and barrel pin to swap barrels to or from 9x17 to 9x18 or vice versa.
ref:
http://www.gunpartswarehouse.com/pistol-parts/makarov-pistol/makarov-barrel-press.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9×18mm_Makarov
There are several 9 mm rounds in various sizes and loadings but 9mm seems to be taken as only the 9x19 Luger tapered cartridge round only and that is a misnomer.
At one time, you could buy a field hand operated press and barrel pin to swap barrels to or from 9x17 to 9x18 or vice versa.
ref:
http://www.gunpartswarehouse.com/pistol-parts/makarov-pistol/makarov-barrel-press.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9×18mm_Makarov
There are several 9 mm rounds in various sizes and loadings but 9mm seems to be taken as only the 9x19 Luger tapered cartridge round only and that is a misnomer.
Last edited:
Frank Ettin
Administrator
Thank you for you opinion, which you have stated as fact. Now provide evidence supporting it.agent109 said:
Frank Ettin
Administrator
Here's a hint. The way we do things downtown is we dig up the facts and the evidence before we make a statement, and we include citation to the evidence with the statement.agent109 said:
So we now know that your claim that:
We also know that your claim that: