Dead end handgun designs.

[Jim Watson]

The Browning 1910 / 1922 pistols come to mind. No one reproduced them after Browning quit making them which I think is a shame.

There was an outfit in Texas that made them for a while.
The company whose main firearm product is the Browning .25 showed the 1910 for a while but no longer, appears they did not get them in production.

[stuckinthe60s]

gyrojet....lol. what a crazy idea.

[ballardw]

Originally Posted by stuckinthe60s

gyrojet....lol. what a crazy idea.

Suspect the Space Force might be re-evaluating for consideration in zero-G.

[Trevor]

A dead end design would be delayed gas blowback pistols such as the HK P7 and the Steyr GB. I owned a sample of each in the 1980s and found them quick to foul and stop working. They also heated up too much.

A model that is based on a tried and true technology, a striker fired pistol with a removable fire control unit, that was a poor seller is the Beretta APX. It lasted about six years in the Beretta catalog and has now been discontinued.

An A1 version has been released, but it is one SKU, while the previous version had about thirty-five SKU numbers. It seems Beretta is waiting to see how the new version sells and whether it earns more variations on the theme.

I doubt it will. There is nothing wrong with the APX, but cheaper striker fired pistols made in Turkey are making it tough to compete successfully.

As for the idea that the traditional double action pistol ought to be a dead end, well, it is not, and Beretta has a good hold on this market. It ought to bring back to American market the model 84--gone but not forgotten.

[Mike Irwin]

"A dead end design would be delayed gas blowback pistols such as the HK P7 and the Steyr GB."

Except that that design is, once again, back in production in the form of the Walther CCP.

I have both a P7 PSP and a CCP.

Yes, the area over the trigger where the gas piston is gets downright hot and could use a heat shield (like is on the later American versions of the P7, the M8 and M13), but I've fired hundreds of rounds through each gun with out cleaning and the system has never once stopped working because of fouling.

What I find to be unlikely is that a gun so designed would simply stop working because of fouling. If anything, it would, as the gas port and piston fouled, become more and more a straight blowback, which would NOT be a good thing at all. Big reason to NEVER shoot lead bullets out of them.

[Jim Watson]

I had a P7, early version with heel catch, and I did not have enough magazines to dump and get it too hot for comfort. Or the inclination to do so. It would get me through an IPSC stage and that is all I asked of it.

I traded it away because of the squeeze grip operating system, too different to alternate with conventional guns. If I had wanted to shoot it all the time, that would not have been a problem, but I didn't want to retire my other pistols.

[Trevor]

I disliked the GB and P7 so much that I forget the gas-delayed blowback system has re-appeared in the Walther CCP. Walther's website lists the M2 version as current. It looks like a good carry pistol.

[Mike Irwin]

I absolutely ADORE the P7s. They're weird, they're funky, and by god I can shoot those things.

The ones with the magazine catch on the heel are the PSPs. They also didn't have the later heat shield above the trigger.

I've carried mine on and off over the years.

I never spent much trigger time with the Steyr GB, but I always felt that it was a gun I could have really grown to like.

My Walther CCP? I've never had a handgun fit my hand that well. It's as if it were made for me and me alone.

Unfortunately the first time I took it to the range it had a critical malfunction that required it going back to Walther. It came back fixed, and I was putting it through its paces to make sure I could trust it when COVID hit.

I've carried revolvers primarily, but really do see the potential for the CCP becoming my primary CCW.

[stuckinthe60s]

1940 iver johnson trigger cock revolver. you pulled the trigger to cock and advance the wheel....then pulled it again to fire. saw only one in 40 years of collecting and gun showing. and like an idiot, i passed on it.

[rock185]

As regards the HK P7 line of pistols, I think at some point the P7s just could not compete with less expensive pistols in the World market. So a dead end design? Well maybe, just due to cost to manufacture the P7 line, as compared to later, less expensive to manufacture, pistol designs.

FWIW, I had a P7, then bought a new P7M8 back in the '80s. Still have the P7M8, and have never experienced an instance of gas fouling compromising functional reliability of either pistol.

[Mike Irwin]

Oh without a doubt. The P7s were crazy complicated, crazy over-engineered, and crazy expensive.

In case you never heard of it, HK also made the squeeze cocker in .40 S&W, the P7M10.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r49h0iBO9g

I had some trigger time with one and I didn't really like it. It was way too big for my hand.

HK also made some prototype P7s in .45 ACP. I got to hold one, but never got to shoot one.

[wild cat mccane]

I have read that a rotating barrel gets beat extremely bad if not done right.

Walther CCP is a gas delayed blowback...but I don't think many liked the CCP for other reasons.


The on I thought really interesting was the R9 for being small and the now Bond gun that loads by grabbing the cartridge backwards.

[Red Devil]

Originally Posted by CDW4ME

Revolvers - with few centerfire exceptions, maximum capacity of 7 rounds. Dead end.

In Reality - where the odds of getting into a citizen involved armed confrontation, and firing more than six(6) rounds to stop the threat, is only ~ 40% greater than ending up a Highway Fatality that same year?

Revolvers - are here to stay.




Red

[Carmady]

Here's another one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxdPbG2PXu4

[micromontenegro]

The COP comes to mind

[micromontenegro]

As do blow-forward designs

[CDW4ME]

Originally Posted by Red Devil

In Reality - where the odds of getting into a citizen involved armed confrontation, and firing more than six(6) rounds to stop the threat, is only ~ 40% greater than ending up a Highway Fatality that same year?

Revolvers - are here to stay.




Red

I've had concealed carry 30+ years and never "needed" a single bullet.

Instead of odds, statistics, location, anticipated threat, I have a simple method one can use (if they are inclined) to select a carry handgun. Which I'll share:
Would I prefer this handgun* in hand if I had to defend myself, wherever (anywhere).?

For me, a Glock 17/22/34/35 meets my simple criteria of preferred in hand, a revolver does not.
There is no statistic, odds or discussion that would change my preference of Glock 17/22 > revolver

handgun* - A Glock 17/22 is easily concealable, a rifle or shotgun is not, selection limited to handguns.

[Trevor]

The Cult of the P7 seems to be alive and well. HK discontinued the pistol in 2008. There are agencies in Europe that still use it. When HK discontinued it they said they would support the pistol for ten years. Tens years is now long gone. I wonder how the users of the pistol manage to squeeze on with an orphan.

When Nevada started shall-issue concealed carry in the 1990s, my first permit had a PSP model on it. The pistol is a marvelous piece of mechanical ingenuity but its low capacity and curious design left me cold while the pistol heated up to the point of not being able to hold it after fifty rounds through it in short order. The HK USP Compact seemed like a better answer and I moved on.

Note the P7 came about in the 1970s when the German government wanted a ready-to-shoot pistol without an external manual safety (as in the then popular P1/P38). Walther provided the P5, a lovely pistol now only seen in films. Sig provided the P6, which is known here as the P225. These are traditional double action (TDA) semi-autos with a long and heavy first trigger pull.

The P7 with its squeeze cocker action provides a single-action trigger that is inert when at rest but readily deployable without clicking off a safety as in a 1911. It is great. And the aesthetics of the pistol are impressive. But for extended range sessions to master the pistol it leaves a lot to be desired. I would rather use the TDA design, which I have always favored despite striker-fired mania.

[44 AMP]

curious design left me cold while the pistol heated up to the point of not being able to hold it after fifty rounds through it in short order.

Everyone has, of course, the right to like, or dislike, based on their own personal criteria, but a statement like this leads me to wonder about some things in general, beyond this specific pistol and shooter.

Many vocal people find fault with a gun when it does exactly what the designer built it to do, when that happens to differ from what those people think the gun ought to do.

Many American consumers simply do not understand many European designers point of view, and vice versa.

Many times it reminds me of the old joke where a guy goes to the doctor, waves his arm a certain way, and tells the doc, "Doc, it hurts when I do this!"
TO which the doc replies, "well, then don't do that!"

[Red Devil]

Originally Posted by CDW4ME

I've had concealed carry 30+ years and never "needed" a single bullet.

Instead of odds, statistics, location, anticipated threat, I have a simple method one can use (if they are inclined) to select a carry handgun. Which I'll share:
Would I prefer this handgun* in hand if I had to defend myself, wherever (anywhere).?

For me, a Glock 17/22/34/35 meets my simple criteria of preferred in hand, a revolver does not.
There is no statistic, odds or discussion that would change my preference of Glock 17/22 > revolver

handgun* - A Glock 17/22 is easily concealable, a rifle or shotgun is not, selection limited to handguns.

Your "preference"... is a 1:6,000 statistical advantage.

Which makes your argument obfuscation.

As the Revolver is far from a Dead End firearm design.

You just don't like them... which is a subjective sample of One(1.0).




Red

[CDW4ME]

Originally Posted by Red Devil

Your "preference"... is a 1:6,000 statistical advantage.

Which makes your argument obfuscation.

As the Revolver is far from a Dead End firearm design.

You just don't like them... which is a subjective sample of One(1.0).

Red

I already said statistics don't factor in my carry and you are correct, I have no love for revolvers.
For someone who is not "into" guns, seldom shoots, or is uncomfortable or incompetent with loaded chamber in a semi then a revolver is likely a better choice. I'm neither of those.

Odd you chose to try to take me to task over my preference when you chose the same as me (a Glock) in another thread:
What is your do it all pistol?
https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...71#post6929571

"GLOCK G23.4/.40/180 gr..
Big/small/light/heavy/concealable/fightable... enough."

FYI: My 1st centerfire handgun new in 1987 was a S&W 686 357 Mag, first handgun I bought my wife was a Charter Arms 38 snub. I've owned various 44 mags, 357 Mags, 38 snubs. Its not that I have not owned revolvers, I have and they are not my preference.

When it comes to carry I prefer a semi (Glock 9mm/40) not only for the capacity but also for speed of subsequent shots.
If not a Glock it would be:
1911 > revolver
Sig 365 > revolver

There is not a bigger waste of your time and internet than trying to convince me that I'd be better off with a revolver than a Glock.

[JohnKSa]

There is not a bigger waste of your time and internet than trying to convince me anyone that I'd be better off with a revolver than a Glock of something they're not already inclined to believe.

The value in arguing a point isn't really in convincing the person opposed, rather it is in providing a viewpoint and supporting rationale for others who haven't already made up their minds.

[Mike Irwin]

"The value in arguing a point isn't really in convincing the person opposed, rather it is in providing a viewpoint and supporting rationale for others who haven't already made up their minds."

You may now stick your fingers back in your ears and sing LALALALALALALA at the top of your lungs.

[Paul B.]

"There is not a bigger waste of your time and internet than trying to convince me that I'd be better off with a revolver than a Glock."

I wouldn't try. My preference in a Colt Combat Commander in .45 ACP. Frankly, I don't see much different in weight between the Commander over the standard 1911. Maybe if mine was one of the lightweights will aluminum frame I'd see a difference. FWIW, Back up in my pockets is and S&W M60 snubbie. here are times when I cannot carry the 1911 style because of state laws. No firearms allowed in hospitals and doctor's offices. It's easier to hide the M60 somewhere in my vehicle than the Commander or a full size gun like the Glock. I figure it's better than a handful of rocks and thankfully I'm comfortable with both type of handguns.
I don't remember which one of his books that he said this but Elmer Keith once said, "I prefer that each man scratch his own fleas in whatever manner he chooses." Well said Elmer.
Paul B.

[Ricklin]

I'd like to know my pistol is loaded when I pick it up, with my G19 empty vs. full is quite apparent.
I like the fact that the ammo is a big part of the weight of my carry piece. That strikes me as efficient, and I love efficiency.
I need to put a loaded 15 round flush fit mag on the scale vs. the unloaded pistol.
They might be close to the same weight. I shall check that when I go to the range today.