Spoke to 2 military armorers

Info, pictures, advice...
Post Reply
User avatar
vermonter
Member
Member
Posts: 113
Joined: September 23rd, 2006, 9:25 am
Location: Chittenden County, Vermont
Contact:

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by vermonter » October 6th, 2006, 12:19 pm

I am a former armorer from the USAF. Although I am certainly no expert, I do own a nice 1971 P-64. Having read the posts and experienced the operation of this fine pistol on the range I decided to contact 2 master armorer friends of mine who have over 20 years experience. Their opinion is that the stiff recoil is due to the lighter slide weight, lighter recoil spring combined with the use of ammo that is out of spec for the pistol. Even the manual states the weapon fires 71 grain FMJ. I suspect that firing the heavier weight projectile combined with a possible heavier powder charge causes the slide to slam the frame harder, transferring more energy into the shooters hand. I am also concerned about long term abuse to the frame at the contact point. In addition this may explaing the safety being engaged on some pistols. The only solution is an ENGINEERED heavier recoil spring, not some modified HK spring. I for one would be glad to chip in an additional $5 on my order to pay for a special run from Wolf. Perhaps if 100 people chipped in $5 this would cover the price of labor to engineer a spring that would work well with 95 Grain FMJ.

dolang1
Forum supporter
Forum supporter
Posts: 233
Joined: November 12th, 2005, 5:21 pm
Location: OKC

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by dolang1 » October 6th, 2006, 6:44 pm

Put me down, only 98 more to go.

nbender
Forum supporter
Forum supporter
Posts: 687
Joined: April 14th, 2006, 6:35 pm
Location: Washington State

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by nbender » October 6th, 2006, 9:03 pm

I think the 71-grain was a misprint in the manual. I've never seen a 9x18 bullet from Europe less than 92-grains, and I have Hungarian, Polish, East German, Russian commercial and military, Italian, Slovakian, and Czechoslovakian 9x18 ammunition, as well as Chinese. The standard weight 9x18 bullet is 6-grams, which translates to 92.6 grains. You see Russian and other rounds advertised as 93, 94, and 95-grains but pull the bullet they generally weigh in closer to 93 or 94. A 71-grain bullet would be a complete pipsqueak.

User avatar
normsutton
Global moderator
Global moderator
Posts: 3560
Joined: February 26th, 2006, 6:59 am
Location: LAKELAND FL.
Contact:

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by normsutton » October 7th, 2006, 4:46 am

NBENDER

I think your right about the miss print in the book

and I know you are right about the bullet wt's of the 95, 94 ,93

because I have weighed them before I read about your studies on the 9x18 on makarov.com


NORM
NORMSUTTON@AOL.COM
N.R.A. LIFE MEMBER 1976

ImageImage

User avatar
vermonter
Member
Member
Posts: 113
Joined: September 23rd, 2006, 9:25 am
Location: Chittenden County, Vermont
Contact:

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by vermonter » October 7th, 2006, 9:07 am

I was not aware that was a misprint in the manual. As I stated I am far from being an expert on the pistol. If so then the recoil is probably due to the light weight of the slide and size of the pistol. It still would be a good idea to convince Wolf to step up production of a heavier spring. I am going to try and contact some people at Radom to get more info. I will post my findings.
Last edited by vermonter on October 7th, 2006, 9:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by himmel » October 7th, 2006, 4:13 pm

Yeah, the 71-grains must be wrong--that's what my .32 acp bullets weigh...

User avatar
steve98664
Member
Member
Posts: 140
Joined: December 18th, 2005, 6:17 am

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by steve98664 » October 9th, 2006, 1:13 am

I have written Wolf already. They do not appear to be doing this any time soon.

To have someone make a spring, you need the material, the diameter of both ends, taper if any, wire diameter, and approximate rating of the spring. I think a company might take a sample and copy it in a higher strength. The 2 below both take requests. I'm sure there are others. There are lots of companies like this on line, some of which have great online catalogs that you might be able to get a close size/type of spring, then size it.

I think the easiest way is to get a spring of the right diameter and approximate size. Cutting a spring to size is not unheard of. I may ty the HK spring.

I believe the safety spring is custom cut looking at the end of it on the non-plunger end.

http://www.newcombspring.com/

or

http://www.pcspring.com/

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

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by kempin » October 12th, 2006, 8:24 pm

Hey Vermonter, (and everyone else too),

I am in total agreement with you that the current 9x18 loads are out of spec for the original p-64 design. It is possible, perhaps even likely, that the 71 grain bullet was a misprint in the documentation, but don't forget that the pistol went was adopted in 1964 and was therefore designed before that. It may well have been designed for a lighter, higher velocity cartridge load than what is currently available. As the Soviets were not known for their individualism, the specialized load may have been vetoed for the sake of uniform mass production.

I have no data to back this up, nor am I particularly motivated to try and research it, but whether or not it is historically the case, I am pretty sure about two things:

One, I think standard Mak loads are too much for extended use in the p-64 and share concerns that it abuses the frame at the contact point; and,

Two, I would love to obtain some lighter bullets to experiment with.

God bless and straight shooting,

-Kempin

p.s. Of course, it could just be poor production on the springs. Perhaps they were designed to be stronger. Maybe I should learn Polish.

User avatar
oneshot
Junior member
Posts: 14
Joined: October 11th, 2006, 1:25 pm
Location: DFW

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by oneshot » October 13th, 2006, 9:09 am

Hello everyone ,
I have shot everything I could find through my p64 and there is no indication at all that the slide is m
aking contact with the trigger guard/frame. This pistol is one of the finest I have ever shot as far as
accuracy and reliability. I have been shooting since my 8th birthday. I think it's like many have said
the recoil spring on some are just too light. I was thinking that in combination with some changing or m
odifying the main spring could be the problem. As for the safety dropping I am inclined to believe there
are problems with the take down spring in combination with the plunger/cats eye on the safety.

I disassembled it and cleaned mine, did some light polishing on the ramp the trigger the sear, trigger b
ar and have not changed the main spring because once I cleaned it up and polished everything it really l
ightened the DA quite a bit

I look forward to getting my hands on as many of these fine pistols as I can.

The only round I haven't shot through it is the Powrball 70gr I am going to try them out today. On corbo
n.com it states the 70 GR. 1150 FPS 206 ft/lbs

On the box I got it says 70gr 1300 fps 263 ft/lbs

ps thanks guys for the forum !

User avatar
oneshot
Junior member
Posts: 14
Joined: October 11th, 2006, 1:25 pm
Location: DFW

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by oneshot » October 13th, 2006, 9:11 am

sorry it timed out and I copied and pasted and it messed it up :(

najaf
Member
Member
Posts: 52
Joined: September 12th, 2006, 6:51 pm

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by najaf » October 13th, 2006, 12:37 pm

Id say the P64 is one very robust design thats underrated. The bluing itself is like the EG makarov, deep and polished, takes a lot to fade. The SIg 228 I have didnt take too long to have its phosphate finish faded. These Polish pistols are worth the money.

User avatar
oneshot
Junior member
Posts: 14
Joined: October 11th, 2006, 1:25 pm
Location: DFW

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by oneshot » October 13th, 2006, 7:29 pm

Hey najaf,

I wish I could say the same about the finish on mine :( it was new but the finish has worn off very quick.

Hey and uh as for the 71gr being a pipsqueak I don't know but wow the 70gr powrball is one hot round.
I sure wouldn't want to get hit with one ! The Hornady seems like a light load compared to the powrball.

I had my first feed problem today and I think it might be the clip because I had two not feed and both times it was with the same mag and both times it was the next to the last round and that was with wolf 109gr both times.

I must have spoke too soon on the safety dropping. Mine did once today but I am sure it was caused by an old habit I have had of slopping the grease on every gun I have ever owned until I break them in and then I go with a light coat. after the safety dropped I cleaned off all the grease , ran another 100 through it and it was fine. And yes I inspected the plunger and it was fine. I did notice the hammer causes the safety to move over when it hits and I removed a small bit of metal off of the safety on both sides to stop that. But I am sure the "heavy" coating of grease caused it but I thought removing that little bit on both sides would help. I just beveled the safety slightly to give the hammer more room.

User avatar
tunnelrat
Member
Member
Posts: 190
Joined: January 5th, 2006, 2:05 pm
Location: Toledo, Ohio

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by tunnelrat » October 22nd, 2006, 8:13 pm

... then the recoil is probably due to the light weight of the slide and size of the pistol.
I notice that the unpleasant felt recoil of this little pistol is substantially different from the recoil I experience with other handguns. It is not so much that the 9x18 round generates all that much power and recoil energy. In fact the recoil isn't noticed so much at the rear of the pistol and the web of the thumb, rather the recoil energy seems to be channeled directly down to the shooter's fingers through the trigger guard.

It is possible that the slide actually strikes the trigger guard during the recoil cycle. One shooter once opined to me that perhaps the trigger guard acts something like a shock buffer. That may even have been engineered into the design due to the power of the cartridge on such a small platform. If such is the case, it would surely explain the little extra sting the P-64 offers to the fingers.

I have fired several thousand rounds through mine. I've used various bullet weights up to and including 115 grains. Though many on this forum (wiser heads than I) recommend against using anything over 100 grains, I have fired half a case of Silver Bear 115 grain ammo with no evident ill effects (except, of course, some tender fingers...).

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

Spoke to 2 military armorers

Post by himmel » October 26th, 2006, 11:09 am

I find that the triger itself whacks my finger pretty good--and i know it ain't recoil, because it happens when I dry-fire it...

Post Reply