Beavertail?

Mods and Fixes by P-64 users...
callisto
Posts: 7
Joined: June 6th, 2006, 12:54 pm

Beavertail?

Post by callisto » June 6th, 2006, 1:43 pm

Almost everybody (including myself ;D) who has fired the P-64 has noticed that the recoil of the little pistol can only be described as "wow, a little more than I expected." Ever since that first pair of bloody railroad tracks, (read: "first round outta the thing") I have been searching for the answer to tame the recoil. My specemin seems to be exceedingly accurate for a pistol of this size, though I undrestand that this is common among these little pieces of Polish work. Add to this the fact that I am throughly impressed with the fit and finish, which is better than most modern factory guns I have dealt with, let alone milsurps and you get a gun that I REALLY want to shoot more than I do. Since I have noticed that a big part of the problem with the recoil is that the pistol tends to "torque" the wrist like a revolver, the addition of a good beavertail to the pistol should tame the problem.

I think that I can carve out a pair of wooden grips for the old gal, with a kind of integral beavertail as part of the stocks, rather than part of the frame, or as a seprate piece, as it is on the famous 1911 pattern, but frankly I am looking for suggestions on how to design this, as my design experience is utterly miniscule. Any suggestions on how the heck I can pull this off would be greatly appreciated.


P.S. I have been meandering around the forums, and you folks seem like a pretty good bunch, not the typical "yeah, well.....you're stupid!" stuff that gets pulled on the internet. I look forward to learning a lot more about this curiously overlooked little weapon!

Cheers!

User avatar
space
Forum supporter
Forum supporter
Posts: 236
Joined: February 25th, 2006, 4:37 pm
Location: NH

Beavertail?

Post by space » June 6th, 2006, 6:08 pm

There are some on this board that make and sell pretty nice grips for the P64.

Maybe someone can make one with the "beaver tail" you talk about.

For myself, I have a large callous on the web of my hand so I don't bleed much anymore when I go to the range :)

b52stan
Senior member
Senior member
Posts: 237
Joined: November 9th, 2005, 11:44 am
Location: Niceville, Fl/Central City, Pa
Contact:

Beavertail?

Post by b52stan » June 6th, 2006, 9:13 pm

Callisto,
I've been on this board from it's inception, and have seen it all. Shot my 64's yesterday with Fiocchi 90 grain, Hornady 95 grain, American Eagle 95 grain, and Barnaul 95. All were pleasant to shoot with no bite or feed problems, I suspect because those are the weights and lengths the pistol was designed for.
The 100 to 115 loads have habitually been the cause of excessive recoil, and the 115's have even damaged guns. If you will just read the priceless history here on the P-64 board pertaining to the subject, you can avoid a lot of effort and unnecessary expense.
Hope this helps.
Stan

callisto
Posts: 7
Joined: June 6th, 2006, 12:54 pm

Beavertail?

Post by callisto » June 6th, 2006, 10:16 pm

The loads I have been using are 95 grain FMJ. They still happily bite the hand that holds them (mine ;D). I admit that this may be result of a high grip by a revolver trained, relatively large hand on this small auto. In the past I have tried to conciously keep a lower grip, but it just feels...wrong.

Also, I should have been more precise in my original post. I have always been a do it yourself-er, and even if the recoil was not an issue, I would still look to make myself a set of custom stocks. There is just somethign satisfying about making something yourself that is different from all the readily available stuff. So what I am really looking for is some tips from people who have attempted this in the past about what worked well for them. For example, should the grips be made of two side panals with a separate backstrap, or have models with only two pieces that wrap around the back like the stock grips worked best? Things like that. Sorry if I wasn't completely clear before, this is a project that I am looking forward to doing. I see making things for my firearms as a labor of love, some guys restore cars, I try to make my guns better than they were when I got them.



P.S. Space, where did you find that cut-away of the P-64? I would love to have a full size version for the reloading room.
Last edited by callisto on June 6th, 2006, 10:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
abwehr
Veteran member
Veteran member
Posts: 888
Joined: November 8th, 2005, 11:31 am
Location: Upstate SC

Beavertail?

Post by abwehr » June 7th, 2006, 4:45 am

I guess I am fortunant that the pistols does not bother me shooting. My hand is small and it seems to "fit like a glove". I know there are many .45 ACP 1911 shooters that get the dreaded "bite", but as much sas I have fired this pistol, I have never been bitten.

The Beavertail grip for the P-64 may certainly be a help for some!!

kempin
Member
Member
Posts: 158
Joined: January 25th, 2006, 12:11 pm
Location: Minnesota

Beavertail?

Post by kempin » June 7th, 2006, 2:30 pm

Callisto,

I have to say that I am with you on this. The pistol doesn't "need" a beavertail, and I am a believer (along with b52stan) that the 100+ grain loads are just too hot, but I think my hands are just a little bigger than optimal for this pistol. I have no problem shooting it, but if my form gets at all sloppy, it will "keep me honest." I think a beavertail extension on the grip sounds like a fabulous solution.

The only question is whether you would consider making an extra set for me to buy . . .

God bless and straight shooting,

-Kempin

himmel
Veteran member
Veteran member
Posts: 733
Joined: January 30th, 2006, 4:21 pm
Location: East Texas

Beavertail?

Post by himmel » June 8th, 2006, 3:18 pm

Hey Callisto,
I have to say with the other guys, i haven't had any of the recoil or "bite" problems some folks have had with the P64, but maybe i'm just lucky with the way my hands are built. My son is one of those who makes the grips, to answer one of your questions in our experience the way to go is with two side panels and a separate backstrap. One possible problem you would need to watch for tho is weakness at the panel/backstrap seam. Hope this helps..

callisto
Posts: 7
Joined: June 6th, 2006, 12:54 pm

Beavertail?

Post by callisto » June 12th, 2006, 10:13 am

Well, it took a few days but I got some scrap wood that I am not afraid to mangle for the sake of experimentation; so, starting tomorrow, I will begin work on this. My plan is to try different things, two- and three-peice construction, palm swell and no, different contours on the backstrap. I don't have a digital camera, but I will try to borrow one sometime in the process to post some pictures, and will keep updates on the process posted. I sure hope this works out....."the best-laid plans of mice and men" you know.

fjblackesq
Member
Member
Posts: 155
Joined: November 11th, 2005, 12:45 am
Location: SW FLA - NAPLES & SW MICH - G

Beavertail?

Post by fjblackesq » June 12th, 2006, 3:15 pm

I echo the remarks of "b52stn" et all.... I got web-bite from higher than the designed for 90 and 92 gr., ammo.... this little girls can't handle hot loads, not only results in bite, but wear and tear is greater. Stick w/ 90 gr., stuff in the mags. I even got ahold of some 70 graijn, no problem...

kempin
Member
Member
Posts: 158
Joined: January 25th, 2006, 12:11 pm
Location: Minnesota

Beavertail?

Post by kempin » June 12th, 2006, 8:13 pm

CZAKboy,

Is that 70 grain ammo the "powrball" (or whatever it was called) ammo you mentioned before? (i.e. really expensive defensive ammo.) If so, please report how it shot in the p-64. I think it was still a pretty hot load, something like 1200fps. I would love to get my hands on some of the bullets and try loading them to different velocities.

GBASS,

-Kempin

fjblackesq
Member
Member
Posts: 155
Joined: November 11th, 2005, 12:45 am
Location: SW FLA - NAPLES & SW MICH - G

Beavertail?

Post by fjblackesq » June 12th, 2006, 11:01 pm

kempin, et al: yes, the 70 gr, was great. also got some "MAGSAFEaMMO" PREFRAGMENTED: nO RICOCHETS OR OVERPENATRATION--- CONSIDERED ultra-potent Much less recoil & more energy ... called 51 grain defrender w/1700 feet per sec/327 ft-lbs claims tp have double FMJ energy... more wound damage than any hollowpoint 10mm bullet. cost $18.95 for six, I got on sale for $9.00 OTD... bought them all Made in USA May not kill, but will sure stop em in their tracks...

b52stan
Senior member
Senior member
Posts: 237
Joined: November 9th, 2005, 11:44 am
Location: Niceville, Fl/Central City, Pa
Contact:

Beavertail?

Post by b52stan » June 13th, 2006, 12:44 pm

Kempin,
The recoil is not primarily a function of velocity. IT'S THE BULLET WEIGHT! Lighter bullets mean less recoil for a given weapon, unless a handloader really redlines his load.
This comes from a handloader of many years of experience. From what I've seen, though, guys with large hands have to watch that web creeping up. Some have expressed success with the use of a slip on grip from Hogue or Pachmeyer.
Hope this helps you and Callisto.
Stan

kempin
Member
Member
Posts: 158
Joined: January 25th, 2006, 12:11 pm
Location: Minnesota

Beavertail?

Post by kempin » June 13th, 2006, 2:43 pm

Thanks, b52stan--good info on the bullet weight and recoil.

Perhaps I should have explained more, since I was following a thread talking mainly about recoil, but my comment was referring to a different issue.

I have been looking for a lighter weight bullet to try and duplicate the load that the p-64 was engineered for, as per the specs in the little manual I received with the pistol. According to the manual, the original standard load was a 71 gr. bullet at approximately 1000fps. My comment about the "hot load" was referring to the pressures, not the recoil. (As compared to the original.)

I'm not even sure why I am particularly interested. The p-64 performs well with quite a wide variance in load data, but I would like to know how it performed and how it felt to shoot it with the original load.

God bless and straight shooting,

-Kempin

b52stan
Senior member
Senior member
Posts: 237
Joined: November 9th, 2005, 11:44 am
Location: Niceville, Fl/Central City, Pa
Contact:

Beavertail?

Post by b52stan » June 13th, 2006, 7:37 pm

Kempin, never saw the reference to the 71 grains, but suspect it was an error. A while back, Bartosz, the Polish Army Officer, sent the original design specs, and they were for 90 to 95 grains as I recall. If you search back through his threads and posts, you can read the real stuff, including info on the designers.
Stan

b52stan
Senior member
Senior member
Posts: 237
Joined: November 9th, 2005, 11:44 am
Location: Niceville, Fl/Central City, Pa
Contact:

Beavertail?

Post by b52stan » June 13th, 2006, 8:58 pm

Kempin,
Found one of the old posts on original ammo.
Stan

bartos,

This is very interesting.

Cu and Zn are the chemical symbols for copper and zinc, respectively.

I think it's interesting that the ammo comes in 16 round boxes. That enough for two Makarov magazines. But with the CZAK, you fill two magazines and you still have 4 rounds left over.

Converting the data you gave:

bullet(lead) - 5,85g = 90 grains

bullet(lead+steel) - 6,16g = 95 grains

Start velocity - 315meters per second = 1033 feet per second

I appreciate you taking the time to look this up and post it.

Dziekuje bardzo.

jw

Post Reply