The Unofficial P64 Resource Forum

What kind of ammo now days can you get to replicate what the polish shot out if the p64?

What about 9X18 Brown Bear or Silver Bear ?

Unless there's more to your question, any of the ComBloc 94-95gr ammo should be a very close approximation if not identical to the Polish ammo for shooting purposes. The actual ammunition it was used with initially was designed for their SMG at the time, the PM-63, and had a very hard primer. This is what led to the heavy main spring (not the original intent of the designers) and horrible DA trigger pull we associate with the stock P-64. I would guess it would be hard to come by in the US and other than for collector's, sounds less than desirable for actual shooting.

Perhaps one of the Polish posters would be able to comment? I'm curious if the ammo designed for the PM-63 continues to be used today by the agencies there that still carry the P-64?

DocCasualty wrote:Unless there's more to your question, any of the ComBloc 94-95gr ammo should be a very close approximation if not identical to the Polish ammo for shooting purposes. The actual ammunition it was used with initially was designed for their SMG at the time, the PM-63, and had a very hard primer. This is what led to the heavy main spring (not the original intent of the designers) and horrible DA trigger pull we associate with the stock P-64.

The heavy hammer spring also helps reduce recoil.

I would guess it would be hard to come by in the US and other than for collector's, sounds less than desirable for actual shooting.

I don't know how close it approximates the ammunition in question, but Buffalo Bore makes a top-end pressure curve "hot" 9x18 Makarov offering. Bring your wallet.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

How does the hammer spring reduce recoil?

DocCasualty wrote:How does the hammer spring reduce recoil?

Well since the slide acts on the hammer to cock it for the next shot, the hammer spring resists that action, thus applying forward force, in turn reducing recoil.

An example would be manipulating the slide with the hammer down vs back. We all know that it takes more force to pull the slide back if the hammer is down. That same force equates out to recoil resistance.

I think the hammer actually increases felt recoil. Think about the extreme case, a hammer that didn't budge at all (equivalent to an infinitely stiff spring). Your hand would have to absorb all of it.

An ideal energy dissipation would have infinitesimally small spring stiffness, coupled with infinite travel. This would spread the energy out over an infinite amount of time. The shorter the distance the slide has to travel, and the stiffer the spring, the less time the energy has to dissipate before the slide hits the stop. This is the definition of an impulse, a.k.a. recoil.

The hammer increases the spring stiffness for at least part of the slide's travel, which means the recoil energy transfers into your hand in less time.

snailman153624 wrote:I think the hammer actually increases felt recoil. Think about the extreme case, a hammer that didn't budge at all (equivalent to an infinitely stiff spring). Your hand would have to absorb all of it.

An ideal energy dissipation would have infinitesimally small spring stiffness, coupled with infinite travel. This would spread the energy out over an infinite amount of time. The shorter the distance the slide has to travel, and the stiffer the spring, the less time the energy has to dissipate before the slide hits the stop. This is the definition of an impulse, a.k.a. recoil.

The hammer increases the spring stiffness for at least part of the slide's travel, which means the recoil energy transfers into your hand in less time.

Nah. Mechanical energy gets gets bled out of recoil and absorbed in compressing the spring which is then stored as potential energy (with some loss as friction and heat). It is directly analogous to rubber buttpads on shotguns and spring butt-stops on some rifles. The recoil compresses the spring/rubber. What the spring fails to absorb (for various reasons) gets passed on to the mount (shooters hand, etc.)

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

The hammer effectively increases the recoil spring stiffness. Would you replace your soft rubber butt pad with a hard rubber one?

Everything it absorbs gets passed on (other than frictional losses), it's just spread out over a larger period of time (unless your slide locks back, such as on the last shot in the mag).

I believe the physics involved is much more complicated than anything described here. More importantly, I think the effect of the hammer/mainspring on recoil, felt or otherwise is negligible and certainly not noticeable .

I did change out the stock mainspring for a 17# Wolfe ages ago and certainly felt no difference (i.e. - no worsening of recoil). While many have changed out the slide spring for a stiffer one (which I never did), even that has led to mixed results regarding felt recoil, with many reporting no improvement. It's a small, relatively light pistol with a stiff round. Springs just aren't going to make much of a difference when it comes to recoil, unless they were taken to such an extreme that they would be impractical.

snailman153624 wrote:The hammer effectively increases the recoil spring stiffness. Would you replace your soft rubber butt pad with a hard rubber one?

Everything it absorbs gets passed on (other than frictional losses), it's just spread out over a larger period of time (unless your slide locks back, such as on the last shot in the mag).

Sorry, but it really is that easy. Just like springs on your car.

But I can see that you will not be convinced.

...do you think that putting stiffer springs on your car would soften the ride?

Sorry, friend. I guess I wasn't clear in my last post. I'm not going to argue with you about it. No point to it, wastes both of our time, and clutters up the board.

While I appreciate your cordial response, there's nothing wrong with a healthy debate, but to each his own.

Kirk
thank you
norm