Revealing my ignorance . . .

Info, pictures, advice...
Post Reply
kempin
Member
Member
Posts: 158
Joined: January 25th, 2006, 12:11 pm
Location: Minnesota

Revealing my ignorance . . .

Post by kempin »

Ok, I don't intend to try, and I'm sure there is a good reason why not, but I am curious to know:

If the Walther trigger spring for a 380 PPK is interchangeable in a p-64, why not the recoil spring? Is the diameter too small because of the 380 caliber barrel?

Just curious.
abwehr
Veteran member
Veteran member
Posts: 888
Joined: November 8th, 2005, 11:31 am
Location: Upstate SC

Revealing my ignorance . . .

Post by abwehr »

kempin,

This is not an "ignorant" question, but very logical. As to the correct answer from me, that may be "ignorance", LOL.

Seriously, the questions is good and it has been asked before. I took a quick look to find what was said, but I am out of town and don't have much time to check thru a number of postings. But, if my memory serves me correct, it has to do with the diameter of the Walther PPK Barrel vs. the P-64. I think the PPK barrel is smaller diameter and the Recoils Spring I.D. is too small for the larger diameter P-64 Barrel O.D.

Several of us on the Forum, have e-mailed Wolff to manufacture as set of Spring dedicated to the P-64. Wolff stated they have this Spring Pac on the drawing board for this year. This way, we should be able to buy a full Spring Pac or individual springs.
jbailey
Member
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: November 26th, 2005, 12:39 am

Revealing my ignorance . . .

Post by jbailey »

I THINK my .32 PPK and the .380 share the same barrel diameter, about 12 mm. The P-64 is about 13. AND, the PPK spring is really snug on the barrel. Also, recoil springs are specific to caliber (and loading), slide mass, slide travel, free length, installed length, and room left before full compression (coil bind). I would be VERY surprised if a PPK spring would fit, much less function. Let's keep after Wolff, after all, they are the 'experts'.
abwehr
Veteran member
Veteran member
Posts: 888
Joined: November 8th, 2005, 11:31 am
Location: Upstate SC

Revealing my ignorance . . .

Post by abwehr »

I think "jbailey" hit the "nail on the head" with his infromation on the Walther PPK Recoil Spring. This is one spring I will wait for Wolff to come out with one that is engineered for the P-64 properly. We know we can use the PPK Hammer Spring and it works OK, but the Recoil Spring is too important.

Give Wolff a call or e-mail and ask when they will have a Spring Pac for the P-64. The more calls they get, the faster they will have them.
duhawki647
Posts: 7
Joined: February 12th, 2006, 5:31 pm

Revealing my ignorance . . .

Post by duhawki647 »

The 9mm MAK bullet is slightly larger in diameter than 9 mm luger. So, barrels would be expected to be a bit larger in outside diameter for Makarovs as a rule. Seels to me that some other Makarov pistol or maybe an FEG PA-63 might have a donar recoil spring of the correct diameter. Has anybody looked into this?
Duhawki
jbailey
Member
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: November 26th, 2005, 12:39 am

Revealing my ignorance . . .

Post by jbailey »

PA-63 barrel diameter is about 13mm, like the P-64. The FEG slide is about 10 mm longer than the P-64, so it MIGHT work, but coils may have to be cut off. Also, that 10 mm has more mass, so spring rate may be "less"? What are we hoping to gain with all these recoil spring swaps? I can understand the mainspring/DA pull issue, but unless we a determined to shoot heavier/faster loads than the gun was designed for (which will have more recoil/kick, no matter what), we seem to be risking trouble here, at least in my humble opinion.
duhawki647
Posts: 7
Joined: February 12th, 2006, 5:31 pm

Revealing my ignorance . . .

Post by duhawki647 »

Because the main and recoil springs both oppose the motion of the slide, if the spring mass system was properly tuned and balanced to start with, it will not be after the main spring is replaced with one of lower rate. A slightly higher rate recoil spring should reestablish the correct blowback response.

I have measured the I.D., pitch and wire diameter (1.4 mm) of the recoil spring in my E.G. Makarov and found it to be virtually identical to the P64. (of course it is longer and has more coils) There are higher rate replacement Makarov recoil springs available from Wolff for this pistol. I think the number of coils of the original P-64 is correct. I'm not sure who or why the P7 was picked as the donar gun of choice for a recoil spring, but I'm thinking Makarov at this point.

Duhawki
mikethewreck
Member
Member
Posts: 172
Joined: December 3rd, 2005, 3:34 pm
Location: Chattanooga, TN

Revealing my ignorance . . .

Post by mikethewreck »

Is someone willing to be the guinea pig (I mean P-64) for trying a Wolff Makarov spring?
jbailey
Member
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: November 26th, 2005, 12:39 am

Revealing my ignorance . . .

Post by jbailey »

Duhawki makes a good point. I hadn't seen the issue that way, since I did not change mainsprings. I wonder how the mainspring change effect compares to the effect of different loadings and bullet mass? Gonna go off somewhere and think/calculate on this.....
jbailey
Member
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: November 26th, 2005, 12:39 am

Revealing my ignorance . . .

Post by jbailey »

After some thought: If the mainspring change affects slide behavior in recoil, would we expect to see the brass from a SA first shot fly somewhat differently than subsequent shots? Has anyone moticed this? I'm going to get somebody to watch carefully next time I'm at the outdoor range.
jbailey
Member
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: November 26th, 2005, 12:39 am

Revealing my ignorance . . .

Post by jbailey »

OOPS! I think I should have thought this through more carefully before posting, what? Of course slide and brass behavior should be the same for all shots, DOH! It's slide and brass behavior before and after mainspring change, right? I'm crawling back in my hole now.......
Post Reply