Luger vs. Colt 1911 Gov't accuracy
Jim Furman
Please help settle a longstanding argument- discussion I've been having
with a friend concerning the accuracy of the Luger vs. the Colt 1911 Gov't.
He claims that the Luger is the most accurate military pistol ever and I
disagree by pointing out that the Luger has poor to non-existent sights
whereas the 1911 has a National Match version with appropriate target
sights and a long tradition of competitive match accuracy in which it is
used in both military and civilian competitions. I contend that most
Lugers, except for a few models with longer barrels (the artillery version
for example) had four inch barrels and were mainly intended as sidearms . I
don't know if it had a 'National Match' type counterpart ? Were there
competitive events in Germany featuring the Luger and if so how did it
fare? Were there ever any matchs that pitted the Luger against the 1911?
I seem to recall an article in one of the gun magazines a number of years
ago that reported on a gunsmith in the midwest? who specialized in Luger
accurizing and that it was a rather expensive and extensive operation.
Comparing this to the basic accurizing of the Colt which essentially means
a good slide-to-frame fit and a match barrel with close tolerance bushing
made me wonder even more about Luger inherent accuracy. Any thoughts on
this subject would be appreciated.
Thanks, Jim Furman
JSPRINE
From: "Jim Furman" <jbfg...@lightlink.com>
Date: Mon, Feb 23, 1998 10:05 EST
Message-id: <6cs37n$i...@xring.cs.umd.edu>
#He claims that the Luger is the most accurate military pistol ever...
Your friend is misinformed. The average Luger...if you can get it to fire
without some sort of malfunction, is not a bad piece...if kept very clean and
fed absolutely clean ammunition.
The Walther P-38 was even more reliable, and less prone to malfunction than was
the P-08. The Beretta 92 series is far better than either of them, and much
more reliable to boot.
And a good .45 ACP in 1911 or 1911A1 versions...or commercial makes of the
breed...are certainly no slouch in the accuracy department, either.
Then, you can go for the SIGs, Brownings, Glocks, you name it: The Luger P-08,
in whatever configuration, is not, was not, and shall never be 'the most
accurate military pistol ever...'
On the other hand, it is a fun thing to play with...it looks nice, has that
interesting if ungainly toggle action, a horrendous trigger, terrible
sights...but it fits the hand wonderfully. In short...it looks nice...feels
nice...but tends to let you down when you need it the most...kinda like some
women I know...
James S. Prine
http://www.prinebooks.com
Bruce Brodnax
In article <6cs37n$i...@xring.cs.umd.edu>,
Jim Furman <jbfg...@lightlink.com> wrote:
#Please help settle a longstanding argument- discussion I've been having
#with a friend concerning the accuracy of the Luger vs. the Colt 1911 Gov't.
Don't know the answers to your question, but do know this: the Luger has
greater *potential* for accuracy against an equivalent (same barrel
length) M1911 for one reason alone: the barrel doesn't move, slip-slide,
or rock'n'roll between shots! This tends to leave the front sight in the
same relation to the barrel shot to shot, and the rear sight on the the
luger is more "fixed" in it's relation ship to the barrel than that on the
M1911's slide too (respectively.)
Hope this helps fuel your argument! (Nothing like a good argue to keep you
warm over a long cold winter... ;-)
Ciao,
Bruce Brodnax
"We preserve our freedoms using four boxes: soap, ballot, jury & cartridge."
- Anon.
RDJ
Jim Furman wrote:
#
# Please help settle a longstanding argument- discussion I've been having
# with a friend concerning the accuracy of the Luger vs. the Colt 1911 Gov't.
# He claims that the Luger is the most accurate military pistol ever and I
# disagree by pointing out that the Luger has poor to non-existent sights
# whereas the 1911 has a National Match version with appropriate target
[snip]
Jim,
You pose an interesting question and, then, "compare apples and
oranges." It is certainly unfair to compare a German military sidearm
to a Colt Gold Cup "National Match" as representative of a 1911 or
1911-A1 service pistol. One of the "problems" with the Luger was its
tolerances were so close that malfunctions were common with pistols not
properly maintained. The 1911-A1, on the other hand, would function
after many other service pistols had begun to fail. Why? More tolerant
of fouling from debris. This very feature, resulting in much better
reliability, made the 1911-A1 the better sidearm for the purpose. If
you found you life depended on being able to defend yourself at close
range, the .45 could be better counted-on to fire. This "feature" tends
to result in poor accuracy, though, in comparison. This is particularly
true of the "issue" 1911-A1. As you noted, "fitting" is what helps make
a 1911-style pistol more accurate. Two primary points of "fit" are
slide to frame and barrel (lock-up) to slide. With the sights mounted
on the slide, this relationship is critical. The fact that, with the
Luger's toggle linkage, there was virtually no movement of the
barrel/frame alignment from shot-to-shot makes the Luger -inherently-
the more-accurate firearm. Yes, the sights were almost useless, having
no adjustments available on the typical Luger. However, the sights on
the 1911-A1 (especially that little half-moon front sight cast in the
slide) didn't offer much better.
--
Visit THE GUN GUY page for current shooting news, U.S. range
locations and categorized links to hundreds of firearms and
hunting sites. Point your browser to
http://www.gun.lover.org/~gun_guy now!
If you encounter any access problems. use the current server;
http://www.webcom.com/gun_guy
John Will
On 23 Feb 1998 10:05:27 -0500, "Jim Furman" <jbfg...@lightlink.com>
wrote:
#Please help settle a longstanding argument- discussion I've been having
#with a friend concerning the accuracy of the Luger vs. the Colt 1911 Gov't.
#He claims that the Luger is the most accurate military pistol ever and I
#disagree by pointing out that the Luger has poor to non-existent sights
#whereas the 1911 has a National Match version with appropriate target
#sights and a long tradition of competitive match accuracy in which it is
#used in both military and civilian competitions....
My advice is to forget the argument, it's one that neither side can
ever win. :-) I'll say that if I were looking for an accurate pistol
in my safe, and I was choosing between my WW2 Mauser Luger and my
Kimber 1911, it would be no contest. The new Kimber would be the one
in my hand when I closed the door. :-)
Johnny C. Kitchens
j
#On the other hand, it is a fun thing to play with...it looks nice, has that
#interesting if ungainly toggle action, a horrendous trigger, terrible
#sights...but it fits the hand wonderfully. In short...it looks nice...feels
#nice...but tends to let you down when you need it the most...kinda like some
#women I know...
#
The toggle lock was the ultimate device for firearms at one time. Everyone was trying to get them into a gun, or at least it seems. Last I heard toggle locked firearms were credited with killing more than any other firearm in history. It did work...
Johnny C. Kitchens
"Jim Furman" <jbfg...@lightlink.com> writes:
#Please help settle a longstanding argument- discussion I've been having
#with a friend concerning the accuracy of the Luger vs. the Colt 1911 Gov't.
#He claims that the Luger is the most accurate military pistol ever and I
#disagree by pointing out that the Luger has poor to non-existent sights
#whereas the 1911 has a National Match version with appropriate target
#sights and a long tradition of competitive match accuracy in which it is
#Lugers, except for a few models with longer barrels (the artillery version
#for example) had four inch barrels and were mainly intended as sidearms . I
#don't know if it had a 'National Match' type counterpart ? Were there
#competitive events in Germany featuring the Luger and if so how did it
#fare? Were there ever any matchs that pitted the Luger against the 1911?
#I seem to recall an article in one of the gun magazines a number of years
#ago that reported on a gunsmith in the midwest? who specialized in Luger
#accurizing and that it was a rather expensive and extensive operation.
#Comparing this to the basic accurizing of the Colt which essentially means
#a good slide-to-frame fit and a match barrel with close tolerance bushing
#made me wonder even more about Luger inherent accuracy. Any thoughts on
#this subject would be appreciated.
#Thanks, Jim Furman
#
#
The Swiss had shooting matches using the Luger, since it was their sideaerm as well. The Swiss had some specially prepared Lugers with all the extras for shooting matches!!!
Jim Furman
Ah, now this is the first reply that answers the part about accurizing. I
might have rephrased my original question to ask how would a target prepped
Luger compare to a target prepped 1911? Would there be any results
available from the Swiss trials? Your message doesn't say who else was
represented.
--
Jim Furman
Johnny C. Kitchens
"Jim Furman" <jbfg...@lightlink.com> writes:
#Ah, now this is the first reply that answers the part about accurizing. I
#might have rephrased my original question to ask how would a target prepped
#Luger compare to a target prepped 1911? Would there be any results
#available from the Swiss trials? Your message doesn't say who else was
#represented.
#--
#Jim Furman
#
#
In the 1911-12 trials it went up against the Ordonnanzpistole, Heer (Spanish), and Two Brownings Mle1910 pattern. It was the most accurate tested and equaled the Browning in reliability. The Browning is a blowback design. In 1929 it went up against the Ordonnananzpistole, Star Modelo A, Czech vz.27, and L Francis. The Lugar and Star were the most powerful. The Luger was lighter than all but the vz.27(Blowback). It was by far the most accurate! The Swiss made a large number with long barrels. Several different patterns of experimental target pistol were produced by the Eidgenossische Waffenfabik prior to the 1949 world shooting championships, held in Buenos Aires.
Bob D.
# with a friend concerning the accuracy of the Luger vs. the Colt 1911 Gov't.
# He claims that the Luger is the most accurate military pistol ever and I
# disagree by pointing out that the Luger has poor to non-existent sights
# whereas the 1911 has a National Match version with appropriate target
# sights and a long tradition of competitive match accuracy in which it is
# used in both military and civilian competitions. I contend that most
# Lugers, except for a few models with longer barrels (the artillery version
# for example) had four inch barrels and were mainly intended as sidearms . I
As others have pointed out, you're comparing apples and oranges by
comparing a tuned target version of the government model (the gold cup)
with a military issue Luger.
# don't know if it had a 'National Match' type counterpart ? Were there
# competitive events in Germany featuring the Luger and if so how did it
# fare? Were there ever any matchs that pitted the Luger against the 1911?
I will mention that there has definitely been at least one target
version of the Luger (and surely this was not the first target version
ever produced). I recall back in the late 70's or early 80's
seeing ads in Shotgun News for a Mauser produced 5" bull-barrel luger
with adjustable target sights. Memory says they were going for around
$500-600. Oh how I wish I had taken out loans, run a credit debt or
whatever to purchase one then. I'm sure they're worth plenty now.
--
============================================================
...two thousand, five hundred Terabytes of spinning data,
all at home on the 'net....home to net wanderers, drifters,
and aliens...the name of the place...Internet '98.
Gryffin
In article <6d0242$r...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, jsp...@aol.com (JSPRINE) wrote:
<<snip>>
#> On the other hand, it is a fun thing to play with...it looks nice, has that
#> interesting if ungainly toggle action...
Interesting? My friend, that action is a veritable marvel!
If you doubt it, look at the design Georg Luger was inspired by: the
Borchardt. Also a toggle lock, but this one hung backwards over the
shooter's hand a good four inches or so, and the entire piece was over a
foot long. Luger's redesign squeezed this same basic action down into what
is still one of the sleekest, most elegant handling handguns of all time.
And fires a more powerful cartridge, too.
In short: damn nice trick :{)
--
Gryffin
gry...@gryffnet.com
"Never attribute to malice that which can
be adequately explained by stupidity."
Clinton D. Coates
Gryffin wrote:
# .....Luger's redesign squeezed this same basic action down into what
# is still one of the sleekest, most elegant handling handguns of all time.
Indeed it is. Too bad the trigger sucks so bad though!
T.R. Green
Clinton D. Coates wrote:
#
# Gryffin wrote:
#
# # .....Luger's redesign squeezed this same basic action down into what
# # is still one of the sleekest, most elegant handling handguns of all time.
#
# Indeed it is. Too bad the trigger sucks so bad though!
A Parabellum trigger is a dream compared to the creepy, mushy, spongy
double action auto triggers that mark contemporary technological
advancement.
Johnny C. Kitchens
gry...@gryffnet.com (Gryffin) writes:
> ...
There was actually a transition piece called the Borchardt-Luger, worked on by
both men!!!
Ben Torre
In article <6dd1q0$7...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, csa...@bellsouth.net says...
#
#Clinton D. Coates wrote:
##
## Gryffin wrote:
##
## # .....Luger's redesign squeezed this same basic action down into what
## # is still one of the sleekest, most elegant handling handguns of all time.
##
## Indeed it is. Too bad the trigger sucks so bad though!
#
#A Parabellum trigger is a dream compared to the creepy, mushy, spongy
#double action auto triggers that mark contemporary technological
#advancement.
I have two Lugers. One was worked on a bit, and has a darned impressive
trigger. The other one is a bit mushy. I have found that by adjusting
my technique a bit, I can land good scores with either one.
While I love my Lugers and 1911's, for some strange reason I shoot my best
scores with my Model 29 S&W. At 50 ft, I drop 'em in the "X" almost all
the time. Go fig.
Ben
Red Rider
T.R. Green <csa...@bellsouth.net> wrote in article
<6dd1q0$7...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
# Clinton D. Coates wrote:
# #
# # Gryffin wrote:
# #
# # # .....Luger's redesign squeezed this same basic action down into what
# # # is still one of the sleekest, most elegant handling handguns of all
time.
# #
# # Indeed it is. Too bad the trigger sucks so bad though!
#
# A Parabellum trigger is a dream compared to the creepy, mushy, spongy
# double action auto triggers that mark contemporary technological
# advancement.
#
Of course it is better than modern Double Action Triggers. That is because
it isn't a double action.
According to T.R. Green then logicaly it is then.
One is a dog and the other is a cat, they both are covered with fur, have
four legs, a tail and are keep as pets. THEY MUST BE THE SAME.
One is a Parabellum and the other is a double action, they are both
pistols. THEY MUST BE THE SAME.
--
Red Rider
(J-V-B) We Shoot For Accuracy
tria...@gibralter.net
"I may have a bad memory, but I have 36 years of diaries, log books and
notes".
MatQuig
Having had some recent experiences with the Browning- type-action weapons
(Browning P-35 and Colt 1911A1), I feel compelled to comment (actually, it
doesn't take much to provoke me to comment). I have several Colt Government
style pistols, in various states of modification, the latest being a
Springfield frame with G.I. NM slide and slightly enlongated barrel (threaded
for use with an AWC Nexus Suppressor), and mounted with a Weigand weaver style,
frame mounted scope base. My intent, after buying a "surplus" and slightly
boogered frame from Springfield Armory's junk bin (it had the scope mount holes
drilled in the "dust cover" recoil spring area) at the local gun collector's
show, was to have a .45 that could see over my sound suppressor, and possibly a
gun for long range plinking with a .45. The barrel shot pretty well in my Colt
70 series, and I put it into this pistol as a dedicated item, and had a local
.45 smith weld and fit barrel hood/lugs for precise lock up. Now, without the
the can on, it shoots poor groups, about 5-6" at 35 yards. Go figure. Browning
style lock ups can present accurizing problems from all different directions,
irregardless of the quality of the barrel. On the other hand, I have a
1936-1937 year production Browning P-35 with the v-notch tangen sight, that
shoots 4 1/5-5" groups at 50 yards with absolutely NO modifications and the
alleged worst sights in the world, according to some...the typical Luger sight
picture, v-notch and pyramid front. For some reason, I can align these sights
and pop pop cans all the time at 40-50 yards, standing, unsupported, two hand
Weaver. Go figure. My experiences with Lugers are that they tend to be as
accurate as the shooter, if the shooter can get past a really complicated
trigger mechanism. A good trigger means a lot, and my Browning has decent
trigger, considering the mag safety is still in. Lugers with a non-tilting
barrel should maintain a nice degree of accuracy. I believe, given equal
quality of barrel manufacture, gunsmithing, trigger work, sights, etc, that the
Luger would have the inherent edge on accuracy over the 1911 style guns. I'd
like to get one of the new .45 Lugers being produced, put an artillery length
(8 inch?) match grade barrel on it, and do an adjustable sight and trigger job
on it, and see what I get. Might even be one of those dream pistols...MatQuig