Breechblock pistol for high impulse cartridges

Introduction

Currently, the main type of short-barreled weapons, used in the army, law enforcement agencies, private security companies and civilian circulation, are self-loading pistols with a movable barrel and a bolt rigidly attached to it, designed for the use of high-impulse cartridges of 9x19 and 9x21 mm calibers. Simpler models of pistols with a fixed barrel and a free breech, using low-impulse cartridges of 9x17 and 9x18 mm calibers, are gradually being removed from service and forced out of circulation. This is due to the insufficient stopping effect and penetrating ability of the latter in the conditions of the proliferation of body armor.

In addition, the movable barrel reduces the accuracy of short-barreled weapons, limiting the effective range of fire to 25 meters. The fixed barrel allows this distance to be increased up to 50 meters.

In the early 1990s, an attempt was made in our country to modernize the most common PM pistol with a free breech by creating cartridges with a larger weight of powder charge, which coincide in size with standard cartridges 9x18 mm. The modernized PMM pistols entered service with law enforcement agencies, but were soon sent to warehouse storage due to the small resource of the weapon due to the high recoil momentum.

To eliminate this problem in the early 2000s, an OTs-27 pistol was developed chambered for 9x19 mm with a free breechblock, a heavy breechblock and an elastomeric buffer, which solved the problem of a small frame resource, but had a lot of weight, which made it uncompetitive in comparison with such widespread pistols such as the Glock-17 of lesser weight. In the German pistol HK VP70 with a free blockage of 9x19 mm, which was put into service in 1970, a spring recoil buffer was used, which also significantly increased the mass of the pistol.

The use of a free bolt in pistols with a caliber of 9x19 mm and more is complicated by two factors:

- rupture of the spent cartridge case in the process of its exit from the barrel under the conditions of the pressure of the powder gases until the bullet was released (the safe constructive exit of the cartridge case is 3 mm, which is ensured in pistols with a movable barrel and a bolt coupled to it);

- the multiply increased recoil speed of the free bolt in comparison with the recoil rate of the coupled barrel and bolt, as a result of which the frame experiences heavy loads when the bolt strikes it.

The rupture of the liner is eliminated by increasing the mass of the bolt from 300 to 400 grams. Reducing the shock load on the frame is achieved by using a buffer, including a pneumatic one - the lightest known, used in the designs of submachine guns with a free breech: the Finnish KR-31 Suomi and the German MR-38/40. In the first PP, the working cylinder of the pneumatic buffer was located behind the gate and was equipped with a valve, which was triggered at the moment the gate came to the extreme rear position, releasing the pressure in the cylinder. In the second PP, the working cylinder was made in the form of a telescopic casing of the return spring, equipped with throttling holes with a flow area an order of magnitude smaller than that of the casing.

In both cases, the pneumatic device worked as a two-way brake / damper of the shutter - in the compressor mode during the rollback phase and in the pump mode during the rollback phase (as opposed to the return spring, which brakes the shutter during its rollback and accelerates when it rolls over).

The pneumatic buffer did not gain further distribution in automatic PPs due to the rapid heating of the working cylinder when firing bursts. On the other hand, this device was not used in the design of self-loading pistols due to the significant dimensions of the known designs of the pneumatic buffer.

Proposed technical solution

In order to reduce the mass of a pistol with a free bolt of 9x19 mm and more to the level of its competitors with a movable barrel and a bolt coupled to it, the VP-20 pistol concept offers:

- to reduce the weight of the bolt to the level of PM (300 grams) by increasing the distance of the safe exit of the cartridge case by “drowning” the cartridge case in the barrel chamber and entering the ejector into the chamber;

- use an integrated spring-pneumatic bolt recoil brake, arranged in the dimensions of the front part of the pistol around its barrel without increasing the dimensions of the structure.

The cartridge sent to the barrel is immersed in the chamber 1 mm deeper than in conventional pistols so that only the sleeve flange protrudes beyond the breech end of the barrel. The spent cartridge case ejector goes into the depth of the barrel chamber by 1 mm (the thickness of the cartridge case bore). The dimensions of the groove in the chamber are 1x1x2 mm, which is comparable to the dimensions of the Revelli grooves in the chambers of the weapon barrels with semi-free locks, which provide permissible plastic deformation of the metal sleeve when fired.

The ejector is located at the upper point of the shutter mirror, so the cartridge flange fits freely under its tooth (in contrast to the lateral placement of the ejector in known pistols). The reflector of spent cartridges / misfire cartridges is installed on the frame in the same vertical plane with an ejector with a slight shift to the left to eject the cartridges in the forward-up-right direction.

The spring-pneumatic brake consists of a return spring, put on the barrel, but at the same time contacting only with the inner surface of the bolt, and the working cylinder of the pneumatic buffer formed in the annular space between the barrel and the inner cylindrical surface of the bolt. On opposite sides, the space of the working cylinder is limited by the ends of the bolt and the barrel breech.

The coils of the return spring, wound from square wire, close when the shutter rolls back to the extreme rear position. The return spring presses the throttle sleeve to the end of the bolt, and the compression ring to the end of the barrel breech.

The throttle sleeve overlaps the gap between the bolt face and the barrel surface when the bolt rolls back quickly after firing (increasing the braking force by connecting the pneumatic buffer) and does not overlap the specified gap when the bolt is slowly retracted during manual reloading (reducing the force of the arrow to the compression force of the return spring) The compression ring bridges the thermal gap between the bolt and the barrel breech.

On the inner surface of the shutter, there are grooves passing over the compression ring at the moment the shutter speed is reached, in order to release the pressure in the working cylinder to atmospheric, after which the pneumatic buffer begins to work in pump mode when the shutter is rolling under the action of the return spring, softening the impact of the shutter on the frame at forward position.

Detailing of the pistol concept

The concept of the pistol is configured like a PM pistol, differing from it in the handle for a double-row magazine, a shock trigger and the absence of any controls on the side surfaces. The controls include only the release button, located inside the protective bracket, and the magazine latch, located on the front lower tide of the pistol grip.

Protection against an accidental shot when the pistol falls is provided by inertial devices as part of the trigger. The shutter delay is turned off automatically when an empty magazine is removed from the pistol.

The external dimensions of the pistol are selected in accordance with its intended purpose - to serve as the main short-barreled weapon for the army, law enforcement agencies and civilian use (within the framework of current legislation). In this regard, the length of the pistol barrel is assumed to be 115 mm (versus 114 mm for the "Glock-17"). The length of the pistol is 185 mm (versus 202 mm) due to the fixed barrel and more compact design of the trigger, the height is 132 mm (versus 138 mm), the width is 25 mm (versus 25,5 mm for the bolt and 34 mm for the side controls) ...

The length of the sighting line is 176 mm (versus 164 mm for the Glock-17), the tilt of the handle is 107 degrees (versus 108 degrees), the distance from the butt plate of the frame to the table axis is 14 mm (versus 18 mm) while maintaining the normal grip of the shooter's hand in contrast to the piled-up sports grip of the PL-15. The normal grip allows, at a short distance, to intuitively aim the pistol at the target without using sighting devices, focusing on the direction of the index finger of the hand lying on the trigger.

The magazine capacity is 15 rounds (versus 17 for the Glock-17) due to the insertion of the loaded magazine into the pistol only when the bolt is located in the extreme forward position and the pistol grip width is limited. The length of the breech part of the barrel increased to 50 mm with a greater wall thickness allows the use of reinforced cartridges of the 9x19 + P + and 9x21 mm type with a maximum pressure in the barrel of up to 3000 atmospheres.

The muffler is installed with a loose fit on the smooth muzzle of the barrel protruding beyond the butt end of the bolt with fastening by hooks on the side guides of the frame. The length of the side guides is sufficient for simultaneous installation with a silencer of an underbarrel tactical flashlight / laser pointer and a supra-barrel optical sight (fixed relative to the shutter).

By optimizing the design, the concept of a pistol without a magazine includes only 16 assembly units, which is almost half the size of the Glock-17 (29 units). The shutter consists of a casing and a larva mounted in the breech of the casing with the aid of a rear sight with a dovetail-type spike fastening. The shutter is guided by a frame coupling with knife projections on the outer surface.

The barrel is installed in the hole of the frame coupling by means of thermal diffusion welding in order to form a non-separable structure to prevent abnormal replacement during operation. The safe exit of the spent cartridge case is 3,83 mm.

As a structural material, it is proposed to use stainless steel with molding of parts under pressure into investment molds (according to the type of production technology of ChZ pistols). With subsequent machining, rotary forging of the barrel, electrochemical polishing of contact surfaces, shot blasting (matting) of visible surfaces, as well as finishing oxycarbonitration of all parts.

The weight of an all-metal pistol without a magazine is estimated at around 700 grams due to the compact design, low weight of the bolt and deep grooves of the surface of the frame and bolt (average thickness of 2 mm) by corrugating the handle, molding the side rails of the frame and notching the bolt casing for manual reloading.

Pistol concept trigger

The proposed pistol uses only double-acting striker trigger without preliminary cocking of the mainspring.

The trigger section of the trigger includes the trigger, the trigger and the return spring.

The release button is installed in a seat in the front wall of the handle and moves only in the longitudinal direction.

The trigger rod on one side is pivotally connected to the key, and on the other side - to the protrusion of the drummer. With its end, the thrust contacts the frame guide so that when moving backwards, the thrust decreases and comes out of engagement with the protrusion of the striker. After firing and releasing the press from the release button, the associated thrust is returned to its original position under the action of the return spring. As the latter, one of the feathers of a two-leaf leaf spring, located inside the butt plate of the handle, is used. The other feather serves as a return spring for the slide stop.

The striking part of the trigger is completely mounted in the bolt head and includes a striker, combat and rebound coil springs, wound from a wire of rectangular cross-section. The striker consists of a head part with a diameter of 2 mm (located in the cavity of the larva and serving as a guide for the striker spring) and a tail part with a diameter of 8 mm (located outside the cavity of the larva and serving as a guide for the mainspring). A support for the trigger rod is located between them.

The profile of the coils of the mainspring in relation to the axis of the striker is oriented axially (which provides it with a small working stroke with minimal preliminary compression). The profile of the bounce spring coils is radial. The mainspring rests on the inner surface of the butt plate of the bolt head, the baffle spring - on the inner surface of the shutter mirror. When the trigger is pressed, the striker shank extends 8 mm beyond the longitudinal dimension of the pistol through the corresponding hole in the end face of the bolt head.

The striking part of the trigger is non-separable during operation (similar to the "Tiger" carbine) - the head and tail parts of the striker with the springs mounted on them are connected by means of a temperature tension directly in the cavity of the bolt larva. Dismantling of the resulting connection is carried out in a weapons workshop using multidirectional heating / cooling of parts.

Cleaning the striker part from powder carbon deposits during operation is carried out using a soap solution, aviation kerosene or specialized cleaning agents.

The USM includes two inertial fuses.

As the inertial blocker of the striker, a bouncing spring is used, wound from a rectangular plate with a large ratio of width to thickness (2x0,5 mm). In the unloaded state, the coils of the spring are located normally to the surface of the striker. In the case of shock loading from the side of the pistol barrel, the turns take a position at an acute angle to the surface of the striker, blocking its movement due to the increase in the stiffness of the spring. When the shock load ceases, the turns return to their original position.

As an inertial blocker of the release button, a lightweight U-shaped one-shoulder lever is used, located inside the button and resting on a helical torsion spring. When struck from the side of the butt plate of the pistol, the lever is deflected up to the stop in the magazine, blocking the inertial movement of the key and the associated trigger rod. After the shock load has ceased, the lever is returned to its original position by the torsion spring.

Conclusion

The presented concept of a free-action pistol is characterized by increased firing accuracy.

Has a wide operating temperature range from –50 to +70 ° C (in contrast to the temperature range of guns with a plastic frame from –30 to + 50 ° C).

Can be used as a concealed carry weapon. Half the complexity of the design compared to the known models.

Safe to use without using a manual safety device.

Comments

[Vladimir_2U]

striker trigger only double action

Doesn't this contradict the declared "increased firing accuracy"?

(which provides it with a small working stroke with minimal pre-compression).

And the "low speed" does not convince at all, it clearly threatens with a fuzzy pricking of the primer and hence misfires!

[Avior]

Glock has a single action trigger with a pre-platoon drummer.
Maybe this is what you need?

[mark1]

I bring in my 2 kopecks. A very good high-impulse cartridge in a blowback pistol is combined with a powerful return spring (which will dampen this high impulse). But the use of this leads to serious physical efforts when cocking the shutter casing (an example of Dreise pistols from the WWII era). Therefore, the spring must be replaced with two - the main (very tight) and the auxiliary (not very ...). One under the barrel, the other on the barrel. The main spring is made to be disconnected (by means of a latch) and does not create resistance when manually charged (pulled). Also, the main spring can be turned off (or even removed) when using low-impulse cartridges. I think a front damper is desirable

[Operator]

A powerful recoil spring will break the bolt and breech when the bolt is rolled to the extreme forward position.

Therefore, instead of one powerful return spring, a standard spring is used in combination with a buffer - elastomeric (OTs-27), spring (VP70) or pneumatic (PP Suomi).

[mark1]

I said about the buffer (when returning to the front position).
A free shutter circuit with a powerful spring was used in Draise, the only thing I suggested using instead of one spring is 2 of them, one can be disconnected (how? If you have an engineering education, this is not a problem for you. There are many options)

[Operator]

A front breech buffer is not possible by definition - then the breech will bounce back instead of closing the bore.

[Vladimir_2U]

Explain, please, how "only double trigger" is combined with the increased accuracy of your concept?

[Operator]

Double trigger means that the force on the trigger / key must be at least 1,5 kgf (elastic force of the mainspring plus friction losses). Sports pistols for practical shooting are equipped with a single trigger and have a force of 1 kgf - the difference is not great.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Operator

Double trigger means that the force on the trigger / key must be however 1,5 kgf

Let's not believe it! For the PM, the descent forces are indicated, at self-cocking as 3,5 kg, and with a preliminary cocking of 1,5 kg, there can be a striker mechanism only with self-cocking less effort for cocking requires, but personally I doubt that much less.

[Operator]

I told you the standard effort on the trigger of the Glock-17 with a striker trigger, and not the effort on the trigger of the PM with the trigger trigger.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Operator

I told you the standard effort on the trigger of the Glock-17 with a striker trigger, and not the effort on the trigger of the PM with the trigger trigger.

Not certainly in that way.

Quote: Operator

Double trigger means that the force on the trigger / key must be at least 1,5 kgf (elastic force of the mainspring plus friction losses).

Well, the figures of the Glock trigger are somewhat different.

The trigger pull is 2,5 kg and can be adjusted from 2 to 4 kg

And the grades are not very
great effort and the length of the trigger stroke, which in general are quite acceptable, but nevertheless negatively affect the accuracy of aimed shooting, say at a distance of 14 meters, in comparison with pistols equipped with a double or single action trigger.

[Operator]

Let it be 2 kg, an effort of 4 kg is used mainly in the USA, where poor shooting training of police officers leads to a large number of cross-arrows from the popular "Glocks" at the moment of getting / inserting from / into the holster of this pistol without a safety lock. - injured policemen put their index finger on the trigger even before the weapon exits / enters the holster, and an obstacle in the form of clothing or the edge of the holster leads to a spontaneous shot.

Another thing is that the police regularly wear a holster on their side and in the case of a lean build, the bullet would have passed the thigh or buttocks, but the victims are usually well-fed people

[Ingenegr]

In systems with a free shutter, no return spring is able to dampen the recoil pulse of the shutter. It is precisely for this reason that it is called return, and not buffer or damper.
Such an interesting discipline as "Dynamics and Strength of ITM" is taught in technical universities at specialized departments. Take an interest. Very informative and helpful.
Now for some arithmetic:
- the mass of the shutter is 300 g;
- shutter speed (for cartridge 9x19 Para) 8x365 / 300 = 9.7 m / s;
- we take the shutter travel equal to 35 mm, then the acceleration required to reduce the shutter speed upon arrival at the KZP to 3 m / s will be (3 ^ 2-9.7 ^ 2) / (2 × 0.035) = - 85.09 / 0.07 = -1216 m / c ^ 2;
- the spring force required for braking (average) will be 0.3x1216 = 365 N or 37 kg.
The maximum force will be approximately 2 ... 3 times greater with a spring stiffness of 35 kN / m or 35 kg / cm. Such a lousy spring, huh?
Real braking is provided by the frictional force of the shutter when it moves along the guides of the frame.

[Operator]

The shutter rollback at VP-20 is 40 mm, the calculated pressure in the working cylinder of the pneumatic brake in the KZP before being discharged into the atmosphere reaches 30-40 atmospheres.

[Konnick]

There are elastomeric buffers that allow 5000 ATM, but of course not in pistols.

[mark1]

Let's look at Draize M1912 with a cocking lever (by the way, he fought) ... and the impossible becomes possible. The only thing I was concerned about was how to do without the lever mechanism and, accordingly, simplify (as well as universalize) the design.
PS It is not worth blaming Dreise for the imperfection of the design, he was quite efficient and was on sale until the early 30s. But for the prototype, I would still take the 1903 Browning and add a spring to the barrel and refinements.

[Simargl]

Quote: mark1

A very good high-impulse cartridge in a blowback pistol is combined with a powerful return spring

Doesn't match! Even in the PM, the return spring is too tight and the pistol kicks more than the 9x19. And as a withdrawal from the line of sight ... there is even a Smith & Wesson Bodyguard 380 under .380 ACP and with a short barrel travel ...

[mark1]

Quote: Simargl

the pistol kicks harder

Subjective feeling, I didn't kick anything. Well, besides, forgive the entire text - the front damper (yes, at least pneumatic)

[Simargl]

Quote: mark1

Subjective feeling, I didn't kick anything.

May be. But the PM takes away from the line of sight more.

Quote: mark1

And besides, forgive the entire text - front damper

How do you imagine this?

Quote: mark1

Therefore, the spring must be replaced with two - the main (very tight) and the auxiliary (not very ...)

Well, there will be a disconnectable main spring, so what? Either way, both will work when firing.

[mark1]

Quote: Simargl

How do you imagine this?

For example, air bypass inside the guide tube of the lower spring. You see, everyone is torturing me, what and how and when they refer to their technical education. But if you have a good education, why don't you see the obvious and ask about nonsense decisions?

[Simargl]

Quote: mark1

For example, air bypass inside the guide tube of the lower spring.

Pneumatic brake - there are such solutions. So what?

Quote: mark1

But if you have a good education, why don't you see the obvious and ask about nonsense decisions?

I am trying to isolate a possibly valuable solution from bullshit.

[Aag]

I have blunted something, already in the drawing (this cannot be called a drawing) AJLahti, Fig 1 ... Detail 3 (presumably, a store fixing device) where (how) can it move? ...
Item 5 is a skin deflorator arrow between the thumb and forefinger of the arrow?

[agond]

It seems to me that in order to reduce the mass of the free bolt, it would be possible to attach a swivel washer with internal grooves sliding along special grooves on the outer surface of the barrel (approximately like a drill) to the bolt in the front sight area, when fired, the bolt will pull the clutch, which will rotate around the barrel and slow down shutter speed, and all this will happen without the use of a powerful return spring and without increasing the mass of the shutter as a whole

[Operator]

Friction pairs are extremely unreliable in small arms, since they have to work in dirty conditions with a range of friction coefficients from 0 (liquid clay) to 1 (dry sand).

[Simargl]

Quote: agond

it would be possible to attach a swivel washer with internal grooves sliding along special grooves on the outer surface of the barrel to the bolt in the front sight area

Do you know what it looks like? PP Kalashnikov

[MORDVIN13rus]

OTs-27 "Berdysh" "will be more pleasant in terms of internal constructive, without any dancing with a tambourine.

[Operator]

All OTs-27 are either in storage in the system of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Federal Penitentiary Service, or distributed as a weapon of self-defense to prosecutors, investigators, etc. The reason is the extremely low resource of the elastomeric buffer.

Plus the weight of the OTs-27 is 930 grams due to the large weight of the shutter (400 grams) due to the low energy consumption of the elastomeric buffer, which makes the OTs-27 uncompetitive compared to the Glock-17 (625 grams) and PLC (730 grams) ...

[Pontifex]

Stop playing sports!
A combat pistol is not required to hit a point 50 meters ...
There are other types of weapons for this ...
And the muck is not in the PY or GSH, but most likely in the author's head ...
If nobody wants to buy our short-barrels, then we need to look at the domestic civil market and lobby for their legalization ...
Weak?
Apparently, yes ...
And about the concepts, first revive or re-create the design personnel ... and make or buy machines, since there is no brain to create ...
And here everyone can use the tongue .... good without bones ...))))

[Avior]

By optimizing the design, the concept of a pistol without a magazine includes only 16 assembly units, which is almost half the size of the Glock-17 (29 units).

this is an incomplete disassembly of the Glock - 4 parts

compare with the given

The difference is obvious.
The fact that the Glock trigger is possibly more complicated is the result of the fact that in a real pistol a lot of attention is paid to reliability and safety, in contrast to the preliminary computer layout.

[Operator]

The second figure shows full disassembly of VP-20.

A complete disassembly of the Glock looks like this

[Avior]

why are you comparing a real pistol with a simplified layout in terms of the number of parts?
Not to mention the fact that the USM of the unit has been tested by time and operation (and most of the details are there), and yours is only a picture so far.
Compare the partial disassembly illustrating your suggested diagram - this is the top of your drawing.
A USM is a separate topic. As well as any grip pads, fuses or slide delay.

[Operator]

The explosion diagram VP-20 shows a complete set of parts (16), however.

Incomplete disassembly of the VP-20 is carried out by dismantling the rear sight (1) with a dovetail attachment, removing the larva (2) from the bolt and removing the bolt (3), throttle sleeve (4), return spring (5) from the frame (6) and compression ring (7).

[Avior]

You have, judging by the diagram, savings in the number of parts is achieved by a very simple trigger mechanism and the lack of available additional parts in the Glock, which improve this operational properties.
And, as I understand it, you have not actually tested the design of your trigger, and you don’t know how it will work with real operating experience.
In general, the design of the automation is much more complicated than in the Glock.

[Operator]

Indeed, the VP-20 in its composition contains an assembly of a larva and a drummer mounted in it from two parts, a combat and a rebound spring. When disassembled in a weapons workshop, four more parts are added to the number of pistol parts - a total of 20 primary parts.

"Glock-17" contains two units:
- a returnable spring device of two springs and a guide;
- trigger rod with trigger, safety pedal, hook and pedal axles, pedal spring.
A total of 7 additional parts and a total of 35 primary parts.

What is the complexity of the design of the fully functional VP-20 USM, which contains 6 primary parts (instead of 12 for the Glock-17) and works on the principle of a slingshot (without preliminary cocking of the mainspring)?

[Avior]

Did I write about complexity?
On the contrary, the Glock is more complicated, he has a single action trigger with a pre-platoon, therefore there are more details, this is understandable.
He has a proven circuit that works stably, including the fuses, and yours is only in theory.

And until it is tested in practice, it is difficult to talk about the reliability of the trigger and the possibility of its application.
Glokovites, perhaps, went through a hundred options, until they achieved their goal, and you have only the initial stage.

[Operator]

Glock's design is a "deep tradition" (C) 40 years ago.

History is silent about the number of options that were considered during the creation of the Glock in the Austrian company for the production of entrenching tools. In general, any engineering design is first developed in the mind, then worked out on paper / in a computer, and only then a prototype is made. The 3D image of the concept was created in AutoCAD and checked for the fit of all parts in dynamics.

At the beginning of the article, its subject is called a concept, and only in this capacity is it compared with the conceptual approaches used in Glock.

[Avior]

Glockstal is a kind of standard for the modern pistol.
Here is a more recent Zig Sauer 320

Look at the complexity of its trigger.
Can you show a diagram of a real-life pistol with a trigger similar to the one presented by you, which has proven itself to be successful?
I don’t understand why you didn’t take a ready-made USM from a real pistol and focus on the automation, which you emphasized.
These are two completely different tasks.
The picture will withstand everything, you can draw a trigger from a children's pistol with caps, the diagram will also work formally in the picture, but in reality a huge amount of tests is being carried out.

[Operator]

40 years ago Gaston Glock made his trigger the way he could, 110 years ago John Browning made his trigger the best he could. 180 years ago, Samuel Colt made his trigger the best he could.

In your opinion, should you always return to the primary sources?

[Avior]

Not. But from the picture it is impossible to assert about the effectiveness of the USM application. Otherwise, the trigger from a children's pistol will be the best - it will work great on the model

[Operator]

I adhere to the principle of evolution - if the Glock has a shock trigger with a pre-fired mainspring, then why not make a trigger without pre-firing (and easier and more reliable)?

The drawing is secondary, the main thing is the function, in this case the trigger of the crossbow.

[Baron pardus]

The accuracy or inaccuracy of the pistol is ensured by the reliability of the barrel LOCKING at the moment of the shot. And this is achieved in several ways. For example, the accuracy of the fit. These are the so-called "race guns", pistols specially made for competition. As a rule, this is a model of an already serial pistol, fitted to the limit. An example of such a pistol is the Tanfoglio Witness match Extreme, https://eaacorp.com/product/tanfoglio-witness-match-xtreme/. By the way, even such a race gun, as a rule, then each shooter modifies for himself. The second option is the so-called "slide within frame". when not the shutter "hugs" the frame, but the frame hugs the slide. This solution is used in Chz75 and its heirs, for example Tanfoglio Witness of all brands. Another option, demonstrates the Beretta PX4 pistol, where the barrel rotates around its axis. It also works on the Grand Power K100, the concept is the same, the performance is slightly different. Another option is Arsenal Strike 1. There the trunk is locked not with a skew, but with a special shift, with a straight backward movement. Blow back system pistols should really be more accurate IN THEORY, but this is a spherical horse in a vacuum. You see, to the market of practical shooting, when people spend 2000-3000 dollars on a race gun, and then they still adjust it, if the THEORY that blowback pistols are more accurate, then it would have already been made, the market for it, especially in the USA - huge. But theory and practice are two different things. Precise fit of parts, with minimal tolerances, good clear trigger action, good interior finish of the barrel, and fit to the arm, in practice, affect accuracy and accuracy much more than whether the barrel is moving or not. Another practical factor is a common shooter's skill level. If your aiming line is 4-5 inches, then it is very difficult to achieve high accuracy when shooting at 50 meters with a pistol, I do not argue that there are people who can do this. But the average police officer, even in the United States, where they are given a large amount of ammunition for training, the accuracy of police fire from pistols is 35%, it is generally that they hit a criminal. Anywhere. And given that they usually shoot from a distance of 50 feet or less. And the reason is not that the "barrel moves" but that: a) the sighting line is short, b) shooting from hands without a stop (there is no stock), c) Shooting is conducted under HUGE nervous tension. Whether the barrel moves or not, there will be no difference, since the specifics of the work. If a police officer has to open fire from a distance of 50 meters, then for this he has an M4, or, in some small towns, a carbine for a pistol cartridge. If you are making a pistol for the POLICE, then it makes no sense to issue race guns to the police. At the shooting range, even from standard glocks, they calmly put 10 shots at a target less than a person's head from 10-12 meters. And during a shootout with criminals, they (like everyone except the special forces) will be shaken, so even with a race gun, as there were 33-35% accuracy, they will remain. And consider the specifics of the work. Policemen rarely shoot pistols from a distance of 50 meters. Civilians who wear a conceal carry also do not shoot from 50 meters, as a rule, they work at even shorter distances, 5-10 meters. Nobody in practical life shoots at 50 meters from a pistol. It is easy to miss, and for all the cases that the bullet will do them, you will have to answer, even if you just drop someone's glass - they will be dragged through the courts for a "nervous shock". If you are making a universal pistol for civilians, then, firstly, most civilians do not spend 250-500 rounds per month on training, their training is initially low, and they do not need a new concept weapon (which, due to its novelty, will be expensive) ... There just won't be any difference. Athletes will buy race guns and finish them off. Individual tuning, as well as minimum tolerances, precision in machining, as well as fit for the hand, will be needed even on a "theoretical" pistol with a fixed barrel. Otherwise, the accuracy will be at zero. In the United States and Europe, a different path has been outlined - high-impulse cartridges with low recoil. For example 5.7x28. A Ruger 57 pistol was made for it in the USA, which shows very good accuracy and penetration at 50 meters, with a recoil only slightly different from 5.6 (22lr), there are other calibers, for example, the rather old 22WMR, revolvers and a Kel Tek PMR30 pistol are made for it , this is a very good ammunition for RIFLE, but in the pistol, due to the slowly burning powder, the potential is not fully used. In rifles, the 22WMR shows results comparable to the 5.7x28, at a cost two times lower. The Rock Island Arsenal company created its own cartridge, 22TCM is a shortened 5.56 NATO sleeve compressed under a 5.6mm cartridge, the ballistics is identical to 5.7x28, but such a cartridge is cheaper to manufacture, and it is cheaper to make pistols for it, since the bottom of the sleeve is almost identical to 9mmx19, and 9x19 gates work quietly for this caliber. Rock Island arsenal produces the M1911 in this caliber.
A system with a fixed barrel for calibers 9mm and higher is either a heavier system, or its complication (with a decrease in reliability and an increase in price). Precise fit, tight tolerances, precision interior finishing + low impulse cartridges are a much cheaper way to improve PRACTICAL firing accuracy. It must be remembered that the Olympic shooting is one thing, ISPC is another, the work of a police officer, this is the third, the conceal carry, this is the fourth, the army pistol is the fifth, and the civilian pistol is the sixth. It is simply impossible to make ONE pistol for ALL requirements at an acceptable price, although the cz75 and Ruger 57 came close to this.

[Operator]

The technical accuracy of shooting from firearms, including pistols, is ensured by a set of solutions:
the most significant is a fixed and free-hanging barrel (which is the case in free-action pistols and not in pistols with a short barrel stroke);
second in importance is small tolerances for the manufacture of parts (but this reduces the reliability of the pistol's automation in the field);
the third in importance is the length of the sighting line (the VP-20 has seven inches).

The bolt guides in the VP-20 are the barrel breech (and not the frame, as in all other pistols). This is the most optimal solution for shooting accuracy.

In calibers 9x19 and 9x21 there is a large number of cartridges with bullets weighing up to 5 grams and an initial velocity of up to 500 m / s, which provide flat shooting at a distance of 50 meters or more, so you do not need to experiment with other calibers.

As for shooting training, this is the subject of a separate article.

[Baron pardus]

I repeat. If a fixed bolt were the most important factor in shooting accuracy, then all exercises at 3 and 7 meters would be won by Walter PPK, Makarov, and Cz82 / 83, and others like them. But we DO NOT OBSERVE this. Of non-tuning pistols at these distances, who rules? Cz75 and derivatives, M1911 in 45ACP, 38 Super and 9mm and Walther PPQ. Why? And because the CZ75 and its derivatives have a slide within frame, the M1911 has an excellent trigger, and besides, there are several design features. Well, Walter has an excellent fit of parts and workmanship and an excellent trigger, very light and sensitive. By the way, PPQ is NOT recommended for police, but recommended for special forces. Precisely because of the very light tension on the trigger ... If a pistol with a fixed barrel was needed for super accuracy, it would be made. Fortunately, pistols in the USA, Italy, Germany and the Czech Republic know how to do what.In general, the accuracy of a pistol depends on the following features:

Mechanical Accuracy Features: (repeatable lock-up): (Mechanical factors affecting accuracy)
20% eliminate rear barrel play. (Fixing the trunk in the rear position with a full rollback, it must be motionless)
20% consistent vertical lug lock-up. The shutter must lock completely and always in the same way. (I know that it is bone-lingual)
20% barrel / slide bushing fit. (no gaps between the barrel and the front of the bolt)
15% frame / slide play. (no dangling between the shutter and the frame)
10% match grade barrel. (barrel specially made for target shooting)
10% headspace. (so that the size of the chamber matches the cartridge - that is, if we have 9x19, then the headspace should be exactly 19mm, and not 18.9mm or 19.1mm
5% unavailable.

Shooter Assisting Features:
50% good trigger. (good trigger)
25% good sights. This includes long sight radius. (good sights, this includes scope radius)
25% Misc., Like good ammo, grips, etc. (Ammunition, grip, ITD)

Forgive me that in English, I don’t know half of these terms in Russian at all.

You can add factors such as the height of the trunk line above the hand. But on the other hand, it is quite high in the Springfield XD pistols and in the Sig Sauer pistols, but in practice this does not manifest itself, moreover, Sig won the competition against Glock for the contract of our Army. According to THEORY, the high barrel line increases the toss and complicates the follow-up shots, in practice and in our army tests this has NOT been confirmed.

If the theory that the misalignment of the barrel (that is, its movement) affects the accuracy, then this would be proven by practice. Pistols Beretta PX4, Beretta 92, Coguar and Grand Power K100, work on barrel TURN and not on skew. ON THE IDEA, they should have taxied in the minus of their competitors, but this DIDN'T HAPPEN. Because the PRACTICAL accuracy is different from the THEORETICAL. According to THEORY, yes, the PH4 should surpass the same cz75 COMPACT in accuracy, but this DOES NOT HAPPEN in practice, even when shooting from the stand. The "fixed barrel" theory is better than the movable one, as well as the theory that a system working on a bore misalignment is less accurate than a system where there is no bore misalignment (PX4), it is also a THEORY that is NOT CONFIRMED by practice. Here in the USA people have a lot of pistols. But ISPC and IDPA are still ruled by old systems. The same M1911, cz75, Springfield HD, Smith & Wesson M & P, Beretta 92. And their derivatives. Right now, Walter PPQ long slide has begun to be used.Even in the Compact division, although the PX4 is compact, it is not used much. If the THEORY that the system with a skewed barrel is less accurate, then everyone would have switched to PH4 and Beretta 92, this did not happen. Practice did NOT confirm the theory.


By the way, one of the problems of direct blowback pistols is increased recoil, since no mechanisms slow down or absorb the impulse, and the addition of "recoil devices" to the pistol will only complicate and increase the cost of its design.
That is, we first SIMPLIFY the design so that fewer parts move and increase accuracy, and then we COMPLICATE it back to reduce recoil, since increased recoil badly affects accuracy. It's Crazy. When I served, our first sergeant had TWO favorite expressions. Both are applicable to this situation: "If it ain't broke - don't fix it" - if something is NOT broken, don't fix it. And the second is an abbreviation - KISS "Keep It Simple, Stu5! D" - in order to avoid problems with the administration, I will not translate this. The proverb is not addressed to YOU ​​personally, but simply what our sergeant said - do not look for difficult solutions to easy problems. So, to simplify the design so that the barrel does not twitch, and then complicate it to get rid of recoil is a dubious progress. But the rise in price, complication and decrease in the reliability of the structure is guaranteed. Do you want the perfect pistol, hassle-free and inexpensive? Lord, here you are, and we don't scratch our left ear with our right hand.
a) we take the trigger from the M1911, that is, the trigger moves back, and does not turn on the axis. And at the same time, it is quite simple to manufacture and reliable.
b) The frame hugs the shutter. (As in the CZ75), moreover, we make the frame lengthened so that it hugs the shutter for as long as possible (Tanfoglio Witness). This makes the balance of the pistol more towards the barrel, but reduces the toss when fired.
c) For Beretta 92 and PX4, the barrel locks without skewing (if you really do not like the system with a skewed barrel, although in practice there is no difference in accuracy), this can be done so that the system is locked not by skewing but by turning. If you believe in Theory. So far, as I already told you, the theory that systems working with a tilting barrel are less tagged than systems where there are none has not been confirmed.
d) We make a 5.3-inch barrel for the maximum sight radius, and to squeeze everything we can from the 9x19 cartridge. In theory, you can tighten the barrel up to 6 inches, but in competitions they introduced restrictions on the length of the barrel, so in competitions, barrels longer than 5.3 inches are not allowed. Therefore, GLock stopped producing the GLock 17L. Tanfoglio produces the Hunter with a 6 '' barrel chambered for 10mm, but this is not a competition model, but a hunting model.
e) We make the magazine and feed system like a Steyr M. pistol. That first, the bolt pulls the cartridge back, and then feeds it into the chamber, this reduces the overall length of the pistol and reduces the weight a little.

You don't have to reinvent the wheel. Do not follow the example of Tom the cat from "Tom and Jerry" who invented wildly complex mousetraps, do not follow the example of Wile E Coyote, who also loved to invent complex systems. For neither Tom the cat nor Coyote, the love of complex systems "to improve the original" did not work.

[Operator]

All the factors you have cited are secondary in comparison with the main one - the trunk is mobile or motionless. At the same time, the effect of the standard barrel tilt when disengaging from the bolt is also secondary, since it occurs after the bullet has escaped.

A movable barrel (it doesn't matter if it is rotating or canted) means the inevitable play between the barrel and the bolt. While a specially made sports pistol for target shooting with a tight fit of the barrel and bolt has a shot within 1000 shots and, accordingly, a small backlash, the weapon shows better accuracy than a gross copy of the same PM. After 1000 shots, their technical accuracy is compared - and this is subject to an order of magnitude difference in prices for sports and gross models, as well as no performance of the first in army tests for dust and moisture.

The length of the VP-20 barrel is practically equal to the length of the Glock-17 barrel - 115 and 114 mm, respectively (the difference of 1 mm is taken to compensate for the ejector entry into the barrel chamber).

I did not understand - where did you see the complexity of manufacturing a VP-20 from 16 assembly units compared to the Glock from 28 assembly units?

[Baron pardus]

I don’t know how many times to explain to you. Your idea for a fixed-barrel fix is ​​a spherical horse in a vacuum. even at a distance of 7 meters, Berettas, Glocks and others like them are superior in accuracy to both PPK and Chz82 (at least they are NOT inferior to them, did not shoot from PPK, but shot from cz82). About Cz75 or Walter PPQ, I just keep silent. And no "fixed trunk" helps. This is a THEORY that is NOT CONFIRMED by practice. And it's not that 9x19 is more powerful, there is not much difference in trajectories by 20 feet. All this has already been tested and tried to do before you. Yes, any gunsmith will say that "IN THEORY" yes, you are really right. And a fixed-gate system "should" be more accurate. But this is not happening. As well as "In theory" all gunsmiths will say that systems where the barrel does not twist to lock should be more accurate than tilt barrel lock systems. But again, THEORY is one thing, REALITY is another. No race gun, for competition, was made with a pivoting barrel or a straight barrel system. No one. Moreover, in theory, you can make a pistol for 9x19 with a fixed barrel and hang a muzzle brake on the nose. Nobody did this either, although it would seem that it could be simpler. If fans of target shooting spend 2500-3000 bucks per gun, and then they finish it, then if your idea were not unfounded Theory, then it would have been done here long ago. In the United States, where there is no prohibition on the civilian possession of short-barrels. This is what kind of money could be cut down if this theory is at least somehow confirmed by practice. Make yourself a pistol out of 16 parts, screw on the muzzle brake, and sell for 2500-3000 bucks what business, what profits, and how "stupid" American, Italian, German and Czech gunsmiths did not think of it, but you did it. What a pity that theory is not reality.

Even in economics, theory is one thing, practice is another. There is a theory of "Trickle down wealth", which is beautiful in theory, but not in practice. In practice, no one saw her. As well as your idea of ​​a fix - a fixed trunk. You will not get accuracy. But you have to come up with all sorts of crap to absorb the impact. That will only make the gun more expensive and more complicated.

I understand that there is a desire to be known as the new Kalashnikov, New Tokarev, new Browning or Walter, and they will make some money. First for development, then for revision, then for revision, then for production, then for revision of production, and so on ad nauseum. somewhere I have already heard this, then it ended sadly for the "genius innocently repressed designer", but now go for it, the system has learned to forgive, unfortunately. So go for it. But I'm ready to bet 500 bucks against the cuff that nothing good will come of your concept. It can and will work. But it will be a complex, expensive machine, which will not have any advantages over even the standard Glock, M&P or HDM, moreover, even the standard Sarsilmaz 2000 or Tristar P120 will not have. And the standard, non-tuning Cesettes and Tanfoglio will drive your "brilliant" car to the minus. Wile E Coyote with you, an hour out of your family? He, too, loved to invent "new and brilliant" ideas.

In any case, you want to make a really simple and clear kid's pistol - I have already given you the ideas. the loot in half. To me for the idea. In contrast to the "increased accuracy of a system with a fixed barrel", the set of ideas that I suggested to you showed themselves and proved themselves not on pieces of paper (which will withstand everything, as you know), but in real life.


You ask me very condescendingly whether I know the manufacturing technology of VP20. No, I do not know. And I’ll ask you, how many pistols did you fire? How many different systems do you personally own? For example, I have every right to compare the Grand Power K100 with the Beretta PX4 - I have both. I have every right to compare Chz75 with Tanfoglio Witness match, I have both. In the Army, I fired from M9, moreover, I have m9 expert qualification. (the lowest level, but still there). And the fact that Chz75 is more accurate than Glock, I can tell you from personal experience. Even when it comes to quantity, detail, let me teach you a lesson, Monsieur Zaznayka. Look at the barrel of the K100 pistol and compare it to the barrel of the Glock. One detail both there and there, what do you think is more difficult to do? Glock barrel or K100 barrel. so the QUANTITY of parts does not mean anything if we do not have the comparative COMPLEXITY of the parts. Moreover. The AK receiver can be made either by milling or stamping. Question on filling, Mse "Expert", which of these details is more difficult and more expensive to do. One detail, but still cheaper to stamp (hint). Moreover, the upper part of the M4 receiver can be made milled or "forged". Forged is not only cheaper but also generally more durable. So the sheer amount of detail is not an indicator.

[Operator]

I fired an AKM at 100 meters singles in 1974 in a training regiment as part of the school's basic military training program and from PM (100 shots) and Glock-17 (100 shots) this year at a shooting range with an instructor at 10, 15 and 25 meters.

In all cases, I fulfilled the army shooting standards without preparation - a native ability, not otherwise :)

Subjectively, the Glock-17 sits much more comfortably in the hand, the recoil is perceived as in the PM, despite the difference in muzzle energy and pistol weight. However, the accuracy of my fire from the PM for some reason (fixed barrel, no?) Surpassed the accuracy of fire from the Glock-17, despite the fact that the technical condition of both pistols was very good.

Yes: I was also taught intuitive shooting "from the hip" at a distance of 10 meters - without using sights only in the direction of the index finger of a strong hand, lying on the frame above the trigger guard before pulling the trigger. This is what I liked the most.

In any case, at my disposal in the shooting range there are many models of undisturbed pistols, rifles and carbines, but I have no desire to shoot since childhood, since it is not interesting to punch the center of the target to rags from time to time. Street racing and diving are my sports.

[Pavel Ryabov]

It seems that the Alien pistol is now widely advertised, specially designed for sports practical shooting. He has a fixed barrel and automatic equipment according to the Barnitske principle (gas braking of the bolt). It seems that the first impressions of people are positive.

[Simargl]

Quote: Baron Pardus

And given that they usually shoot from a distance of 50 feet or less.

Exercises 15, 7 and 3 m. Yes.

Quote: Baron Pardus

Beretta PH4, where the barrel rotates around its axis.

And GSh-18

[Baron pardus]

At home I have both the PH4 and K100, K100, by the way, it is more convenient and personally for me to shoot from it is easier. ... There is no GSh18, there was not even an opportunity to hold it. There was an opportunity to hold Strike 1. I decided not to take it, despite the good price. In which case, no spare parts or stores can be found. By the way, I liked Strike 1. Very comfortable, lying in the hand like a glove. True, I could not arrange "Dmitry's Trials" for him. Dmitry Test "Dmitry Test", this is my test for the reliability of the pistol. At the same time, you do not need to beat or drag on the sand or mud. A pistol is taken, and 12 magazines loaded with Tula or Wolfe cartridges are passed through it (200 shots somewhere). After each magazine, the pistol is given a Minute to cool down a little. If there are no delays, then the pistol has passed the simplest reliability test. Cartridges Toole and Wolfe are famous for their "dirty", and if after 200 shots the pistol works, then the pistol is not shit at least. Although I read that GSh18 also has problems, that the pistol simply does not differ in durability and falls apart quickly enough. I don’t know if it’s true, I don’t know if this problem has been solved. I would buy Strike 1 if there was a service center in the US. But I would gladly take Gyurza :-) But who will sell it to me in the USA :-)

[Simargl]

Quote: Baron Pardus

Wolfe are famous for their "dirty", and if after 200 shots the pistol works - then the pistol is not shit at least.

In fact, it only depends on how competently the automation system works and how late the sleeve starts to start.
For example, in the Beretta it starts when the pressure in the barrel has practically dropped and gases do not break through towards the bolt, in the classic system with an earring - the sleeve begins to "crawl" almost immediately, in modern systems with a copier groove or "tooth" - the sleeve starts when it is dropped. pressure, and you can design the gun for maximum pressure relief by lengthening the coupled stroke.

Quote: Baron Pardus

I read that GSh18 also has problems, that the pistol simply does not differ in longevity and falls apart quickly enough.

I think the problem is that there is no one to bring it up. The pistol, as it turned out, is a more complex weapon than a submachine gun.

[Baron pardus]

Taurus pistol 24/7 OSS, wedged during the 7th store. The sleeve got stuck in the chamber, after which delays began, every 3-4 shots. The pistol was sent back to the firm and was replaced. The new pistol passed the Dmitry Test without any problems. By the way, the VZ58 rifle of the Sentury Arms company failed the test in the same way, I test rifles with 10 magazines, Vz58 began to choke on the 5th magazine. Full sleeve extraction did not take place. Was sent to the Sentury Arms and replaced, the second rifle passed the test. Thus, testing the pistol with "dirty" ammunition in any case reveals defects. I'm not going to drown rifles in the mud or put metal dust in the bolt group and chamber there, but the weapon must fire factory ammunition, including Wolfe and Thula. By the way, in the USA the cartridges Monarch, Barnaul, Silver Bear and Golden Bear are considered to be more "pure" than Wolfe and Tula, and Bronze Bear.
Tula and Wolfe are considered Reliable "go bang each time you pull a trigger", but not "match" or "dirty". However, that does not prevent the people from shopping with them. Cleaning Kit + 300 Wolf Ammo costs less than 300 Winchester Ammo.

Well, about the pistols. After TT, nothing particularly worthwhile from serial pistols in the USSR and in Russia was done. I have 4 TTshki, Polish Radom (by the way, the most accurate), Romanian and two Yugo M57. All have been modified (fuse added), I can not say anything but good about TTs. Not a single misfire. They are still flat, so it's easy to carry them around. For some time I carried Radom + 2 shops as a conceal carry. Now I wear cz82 + 2 stores. Makarov is inferior to cz82 in ALL indicators. Stechkin is too heavy for a pistol, and is inferior in power to both Uzi and Vz24 (Czech ancestor of Uzi). It was a huge mistake for the USSR not to adopt the cz75. And from the pistols I read good reviews about Gyurza and Arsenal Strike One, you, EMNIP, call it Strizh. Although they said that the gyurza is heavy, and the 9x21 cartridges are inferior in power to the 357 Sig cartridges. But this is again what I read. He held Strike 1 in his paws, heavier than a Glock, but comfortable, by the way, many forget that the heavier the pistol, the less recoil a person feels. This plays a cruel joke with many Americans, especially women. They take a light pistol, even in caliber 380, and with surprise, having already paid, realize that a light little plastic pistol in 380 caliber kicks no less, and sometimes even more, than a 9mm Beretta or Smith and Wesson Military & Police.

[Split]

The author somehow forgets that the solution lies in the other direction. And the fact that the main energy and impulse when the bullet passes through the channel is received by the shutter. The force with which the spring presses is negligible compared to the force that presses on the bottom of the liner (moreover, the maximum pressure is reached at the moment of penetration, i.e. when the liner is still resting dribbling in place - 3mm). And the resulting pulse of the bullet will be equal to the received pulse of the shutter. Accordingly, Obtained shutter speed = Bullet impulse / bolt mass. Accordingly, the return spring needs to absorb it, everything else will fall on the extreme position of the shutter and which directly affects the resource of the automation. And since the energy comes from the square of the speed, then in general there is a need for a low-impulse cartridge and play primarily from this (remember the same fnl with its 5,7). And to try on a free scheme to realize 9x19 higher from the evil one.
Those. total
1.small-pulse cartridge (here you have the penetrating power of the machine gun)
2. Staple absorption of the energy of the shutter about the frame
those. for example, a type shutter has a separate movable cylinder ... it is extinguished by a smaller spring. But in the rear part, this additional construction, due to the need for chambering, is unrealistic, i.e. we essentially arrive at the classic short stroke design , we use the trunk as an additional mass, only not with lowering, but with a turn or a lever. No wonder the P38 is the best pistol IMHO WWII. The resource of his emnip was 10k shots. The same Beretta 92 ... and no one complained about her too much with proper care. Yes, the PM has more ... but in our realities, we do not shoot so much. The entire resource merges with practice, but the fact that a short straight move gives excellent accuracy and at the same time has an unattainable PM energy - I myself have personally observed - I fired from Glock 34 and TAurus 92 (Brazilian copy 92). The results are 1,5 times higher and in the pleasure of the arrow - heaven and earth ! And the fact that Makarov is oblique - I know not by hearsay (shot about 2k, not much, but conclusions can be drawn).

ZY And the gas extinguishers in the pistol, well, how many gunsmiths thought, thought and thought ... a Jewess - you need to make oil "Shyutka ..." (c)

[Baron pardus]

Makarov is not very precise, it's true. But the problem here is not in the system, but in performance. The Czechs made a cz82 pistol, chambered for the same 9x18 cartridge. Makarov drives in minus, both in accuracy and in ergonomics.

[Split]

And the declared PM resource of 50 thousand shots is in fact the strength of the articulation of the barrel with the frame in view of the design, the barrel resource is very low (less than 7-8 thousand, emnip, I don’t remember more precisely). In fact, the declared 50 thousand, this is when you have to change the frame. Our system for calculating the resource is somewhat different - you have zips until the bolt or frame is worn out - the pistol retains a resource, and not with us - this is a resource for shooting without replacing the main mechanisms, except for consumables (springs, ejectors, etc.)

I saw Makarovs, in which almost all the rifling was erased in the trunks, but he was recognized as suitable, i.e. the resource is not exhausted, it can shoot, but the fact that everything was changed for him except the frame and the bolt - no one worried

[Kalmar]

Quote: Split

in general, you need a low-impulse cartridge and play primarily from this

It is difficult to provide a combination of breakdown and stopping actions with low-impulse ones. It's still critical for a pistol.

[Split]

Just that low-impulse correspond to the topic touched upon by the author ... the presence of body armor. Have you seen the speed at which state cops drop off their service glock stores? Yes, I do not shoot so much with a dart with a cutoff of 3 not in a stressful situation. If we are talking about either you will not break through the armor, or you will pierce confidently with at least how much damage there is - mine 2e is better. They tried to introduce 40 caliber, etc. - practice has shown that the stopping action depends on the state of the person being shot at and the skill of the shooter, and not on the weapon. In a stressful situation, they shoot not in the arrow, but in the direction. When they shoot at you or even try to start - I was in such a situation ... you need professional training not on the shooting range, but in stressful conditions. It only comes with experience. I think their police officer in shooting skills will make any professional shooter - the conditions are different

[Kalmar]

Quote: Split

availability of body armor

Does an ordinary police officer often come across criminals in armor?

Quote: Split

either you won't break through the armor, or you will pierce confidently with at least how much damage there is - my 2nd is better

It depends on what kind of armor: nobody canceled the action beyond the barrier. Taking a 40-gauge bullet into a soft Kevlar vest will be very unpleasant and potentially fatal (even if not penetrated).

[Split]

In the coming year, I want to afford concealed wearing for myself, although now I don't even have an injury. They are quite accessible, and if someone from the shadows is planning something seriously, I think there is more than a class 2 armored vehicle from 99% of our entire police ... I just often notice for some reason who has what weapon, not because I want to rob )

Regarding the penetrating, simple titanium sheet of 1mm (which costs a penny, although titanium, believe me, is very difficult to process, often cracks), which is not shoved due to the mass production of such lightweight ones.
If you get confused for yourself, in artisanal conditions you can fit it for yourself even with joints ... it weighs nothing, but it will hamper mobility, of course, but distributes the impact over the area.
Although the main task of aramid fabrics up to our level 3 is just to stop the bullet, in 3+, on the contrary, it is to stop the fragments of the bullet from the main plate. By the way, in the centurion, or how he was essentially switched to plate armor IMHO

[Split]

The problem with aramid fabrics is that with a large diameter of the impact object, they take the impact and dissipate energy, and if the diameter is small, they simply pierce it, pushing the fibers of the fabric apart. This is the essence of low-impulse cartridges, there have been cases and a lot of armor piercing with a knife, even 2 levels, which they hold, in theory, and vols.

Well, as a topic, neighing from the past ... I wore a cuirass 3 btm (I don't remember exactly the name, I can be mistaken), it weighs horror and I want to take a sword in it and go to the enemy with a mosink or SVD and hack to death! He holds them almost point-blank and you feel like a knight of the 15th century in almost full armor.

Somewhere even on YouTube there is a test where a plate from this armor withstood 20 hits, including from a B-32. At the same time, the author of the video, with all the arsenal provided to him, gets confused with the types of bullets, calling them this or that

[Baron pardus]

In the US, you can run into anyone. When I arrived in the USA, the poorer bandits pasted over heavy leather coats from the inside with several layers of industrial duct tape, the 9mm expansive bullet sometimes stopped. And the police and most citizens use just such for self-defense. Bullet-proof vests are easier to acquire than weapons. so it's easy to run into a bandit in a bulletproof vest. By the way, none of those who arrived at 5.7x28 said that they "felt almost nothing" :-). The stopping action of the bullet does not always work. When people are on drugs, it is possible to hit him with buckshot - not the fact that it will stop. On the web, there is a video on the youtube, a man with a knife climbed onto the policeman. Received 5 hits with a 9mm expansive bullet - IN THEORY 5 expansive bullets in a carcass = death on the spot from pain shock. However, the policeman received 3 stabs. EMNIP survived neither a policeman nor a maniac (by the way, white). In the overwhelming majority of cases, even hitting a criminal by a relatively weak 22LR leads to the cessation of aggression. Here's a link to the table by the way, this is a study done by the Ogaio State Police Department.

https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

So that's it. Small cartridge 22LR, stopped the attack with one hit to the carcass 31%, the average number of hits for the attacker to stop is 1.38, the percentage of killed 34%
percentage not stopped from one hit 31. The percentage of incapacitated from one hit to the body 60.
Compare this to the .45 ACP cartridge, which IDEA has a tremendous stopping power. The percentage of stopped (Stopped) from one hit -39, the percentage of killed 29 (22LR is more lethal - greater penetration - damage to internal organs), the percentage of not stopped from one hit 14. Number of hits on average) so that the attacker stops 2.08 (22LR stops with 1.38 hits ). Percentage knocked out from one hit to the body 51. Percentage NOT stopped from one hit 14. Interesting, right?

So - the stopping effect of a bullet / cartridge is far from being a direct dependence on the diameter of the bullet and its speed. 22LR, turned out to be a rather serious argument in self-defense, and this is exactly what no one expected. But the revolving 38 Special, in theory less powerful than the 9mm Luger, turned out to be a more serious argument than the latter.

[Kalmar]

Quote: Baron Pardus

The stopping action of the bullet does not always work. When people are on drugs, it is possible to hit him with buckshot - not the fact that it will stop.

It goes without saying, 100% effectiveness only has a warning in the head. I read that American police officers are taught to shoot until the patient stops showing signs of activity. Whether it's true or not, I can't say.

Quote: Baron Pardus

https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

Thanks for the link, interesting. True, there are some nuances in terms of assessing the results presented.

Let's say, "one-shot-stop": in many cases, the "stopping" factor is the very fact that the victim of the attack has a weapon. Not every criminal is psychologically ready to go under the bullets for the sake of someone else's wallet, even if we are talking about 22LR. Moreover, not everyone will immediately understand what exactly they are shooting at))

Then, the author writes that he took into account only hits to the head and torso (if he understood correctly). This is also a nuance: at "self-defense" ranges (within a few meters), even the notorious 22LR leaves little chance, having flown into the head.

From the article, I also did not quite understand what meaning the author puts into the term "incapacitated". Here, it seems, we are not talking about "cutting down" (loss of consciousness, etc.), but rather about neutralization, when the criminal is no longer physically and psychologically ready to continue the attack. And this is again a nuance: even a small bullet hits very, very painfully. If the recipient is not pumped up with substances and does not have a high pain threshold, it may well fall from a relatively minor injury.

In general, I took two thoughts from the article for myself:
1. It is really very difficult to objectively assess the stopping effect, because there are plenty of subtle moments.
2. Even a little thing like 22LR in self-defense will be much better than nothing at all))

[Konnick]

Quote: Intruder

The sight is not up to 200 meters, but over 200 meters. Bet on the maximum, on 200 and boldly aim at the body for three hundred and further. Maximum range (another laughing concept) allows.

In a body made of PP (even in a growth target), without optics and at 300 m!?, Monsieur knows a lot about perversion !!!

The decrease in accuracy at long ranges is compensated by the rate of fire of the PPSh. And the old PPSh can compete in high-speed destruction of targets at distances of 300 meters with super-duper assault rifles with a collimator sight. While they are aiming with an assault rifle, they simply shoot a bunch of bullets from the PPSh in the direction of the target. Aiming at ranges over 300, when the angular size of the target is comparable to the size of the front sight, then leave the sniper to shoot a single person at such a distance. And the sight on the PPSh was changed to a flip one because of the simplification and difficulty of achieving the required accuracy of manufacturing a sector sight and targeting at such a distance. With modern technologies and the quality of cartridges, the old PPSh could show himself, since the main battle distance in a city or forest area is the very thing for this "meat grinder".

[Avior]

And the sight on the PPSh was changed to a flip one because of the simplification and difficulty of achieving the required accuracy of manufacturing a sector sight and targeting at such a distance.

And on the Mosin rifle, too, was changed to a cross-over?

[Konnick]

Mosinka was made only at the Tula and Izhevsk plants with the appropriate quality, in contrast to many factories for the production of PCA.

[Avior]

No one bothered to make separate sights, and the PPSh was not done under the fence.
There were other solutions - a three-position sight, a sight at 150-300 m.
But to artificially lower the firing range by one and a half times, such a betrayal draws on close communication with Lavrenty Pavlovich's subordinates.

[Mikhail3]

There will be a small resource of a square spring. Manufacturing the pneumatic part will require precision precision. High sensitivity to dirt. Some kind of non-Russian weapon.

[Kalmar]

Quote: Mikhail3

High sensitivity to dirt. Some kind of non-Russian weapon.

The military does not really need a pistol, but it’s time for other law enforcement agencies to learn how to keep track of their weapons))

[Mikhail3]

Well, I’m saying) They will drag them to the gunsmith, as usual, and whine, whine ...

[Kalmar]

The concept is interesting. But the pneumatic buffer is very confusing in terms of resistance to pollution, because everything works in grinding. However, for sporting or police weapons, this may not be critical.

[vl903]

initially the train of thought is not correct. there have been solutions for a long time. you need increased accuracy - suspend the barrel not on one but on two earrings, or make it rotate like on rsh18. and a trigger with a pre-cocking like a glock or a trigger like a chzet.

[vl903]

although for a non-sports pistol this is a whim

[vl903]

although I see in the comments above, they have already chewed everything up and explained to me)))

[dgonni]

Well? Theoretically a bomb. But it won't work!
In terms of accuracy, the French MAS with a rotating barrel is ideal.
But the reliability let us down.
Heckler with a semi-free shutter will push this device into both bootlegs.
This is an attempt to make money on old solutions. Moreover, it is not very correct in terms of layout.
This in general!

[Split]

By the way, it is strange that the shutter braking mechanism was bypassed by the powder gases themselves! The ingenious HK P-13, with a gas cylinder, is rumored to be a reliable machine. Remember Die Hard 1 - Hans Gruber has it in his hands. With proper care, namely cleaning the gas piston or using expensive cartridges with high-quality gunpowder, it should certainly not wedge in a battle of 50-100 heights.
YES the design is monstrous, very picky should be to maintenance (the piston clogs up quickly). But for the battle and subsequent maintenance, in theory, he makes all the other structures on his head, although the scheme is not new IMHO
ZY Well, very handsome, this is perhaps the only pistol, which, not only to shoot, to hold

[Baron pardus]

As for the Sector sights, PPSh, M1 and everything else.

Sector scope is NOT an indicator. Makarov under the name Baikal was imported to the United States, with a sectorial scope. I hope you won't speak. On the Luger, the Artillery model, there was also a Sector Sight, and even an 800m ramp. To get 700 meters into something from the Luger is possible only with the help of Odin. The sector sight on the Mauser is more "optimistic", since the 7.62x25 cartridge has a more flat trajectory. But all the same, before firing a Mauser, even with a butt holstered at a distance of 800m, you need to draw runes for a long time and make sacrifices to Odin. Otherwise, you will not get there. It was actually a publicity stunt.

As for the 7.62x25 cartridge and weapons for it. a) None of those who got hit by this patron shouted that it was "just a flesh wound".
b) Penetration matters. People don't fight in the shooting range. They hide behind whatever they can, behind trees, behind bushes, behind any cover. 7.62x25 simply and trite punches more than 9x19, and even more so .45 3-inch board from 9x19 is likely to save, but from 7.62x25 most likely no longer. By the way, from 35 feet 7.62x25 sometimes even breaks through class IIIA body armor. Is it possible to shoot from a PPSh at 500 meters? Can. It will be difficult to get in. But at 200-250 meters, as far as I read, you can confidently shoot and hit the enemy.
Ballistic tables of 9x19 versus 7.62x25 are often cited. But, as always, there are several points. The tables are ... pistol. In the pistol barrel, the 7.62x25 cartridge simply does not have time to burn all the powder (therefore, the flash when firing from TTshki and Cz52). In the longer barrel, the powder burns out completely. However, this is a situation not only with TT. When the Kel Tek Company made its pistol chambered for 22ВМР, they said that "The power of 22 WМR is comparable to the power of 5.7x28". Yes, comparable, FROM a RIFLE with a barrel of at least 16 inches. But not in the pistol. The reason is the same - gunpowder. Slow burning at 22 WMR, it simply fails to burn completely in the pistol barrel. Although getting 40 gray 22 WMR in the chest, I think, is also very unpleasant, even from a pistol.
In Iraq, many of our guys, and I too, had the opportunity to hold and shoot with PPSh and other weapons. Let's just say that PPSh made a good impression on me. Yes, this is not an M4 or an AKM, but the walls in the houses of the bouncers (and the Beretta is not). The accuracy was mediocre, but again these were broken, broken, worn out Cars, in the one that our platoon got, the rifling was practically worn out, especially at the muzzle, and the inside of the barrel was in an extremely mediocre condition. Moreover, the upper and lower parts of the receiver were not rigidly fixed and backlash. It is clear that the device in this state will have zero accuracy.


About the M1 carbine. This is NOT an ASSAULT RIFLE, it has never been and has never been blown away as such .. I have read more than once or twice in Runet how the M1 is compared with the STG44, and they say, "Oh, these Americans are stupid, they made such a left cartridge." The M1 was conceived as a weapon for the second line soldiers. Our Army has tested and found that it is much easier to train a soldier to fire a rifle than a pistol. Which is not surprising. Thompson is too expensive to manufacture, moreover, it does not have a serious effective range of fire, and he is also heavy. Therefore, it was decided that it would be better for radio operators, artillerymen, cooks, and chauffeurs to issue not M1911, but something more powerful, but light, and not cut off Garand or Springfield, but something more convenient and at the same time effective. (Much wiser than giving second line soldiers a cut-off magazine rifle). So that if something happens they could fight back, no more. The task was to make the cartridge more powerful than the .45 but less powerful than the 30-06. We took the old .32 Winchester hunting cartridge, redesigned it, reinforced it and got the .30 Carbine cartridge. The blunt bullet was part of those specifications. The M1 Carbine was not the equivalent of the STG. This is, in fact, the equivalent of P90. The first production copy of PDW. The idea was that if the enemy infantry breaks through to the battery, then the gunners will be able to stand up for themselves, and at the same time the weapons will not be heavy and cumbersome to interfere with their immediate duties when the enemy is not around. Gradually, the Carbine appeared among paratroopers, gliders and marines. Moreover, back in 1943, some gunsmith sergeant figured out how to convert the M1 carbine into an automatic weapon. And this was done often. In the battles in the jungle in the Pacific, it paid off. In battles in Europe and Italy, it gave the soldiers a little more self-confidence. But the M1 was never conceived as the primary weapon of the infantry. Moreover, many soldiers, having received the M1, tried to exchange it for the Garand. Even the gunners. And the tankers rode first with the Thompsons, and then with the M3. Moreover, the M3 remained in the army and the National Guard among tankers right up to the 70s, and the M1 carbine can now be seen either in private hands or in some police stations in small quiet towns.

I have an M1 Carbine at home, made in the 60s. Very, very soft machine in shooting. Tula ate 300 rounds in a row and didn't choke :-). Recoil is about the same as a 9mm carbine. By the way, it is the M1 Carbine that is my "home defense weapon". More powerful than a 9mm carbine, much easier to handle than any pistol, and will not make holes in the walls when flying to neighbors like AK, SKS or even AP15. I'm generally more used to rifles. In the USA, there is even a joke "you need your pistol so you have something to use while you are getting your rifle" - you need a pistol just so that you have at least something while you get to your rifle.

[agond]

Quote: Baron Pardus

Baron pardus

You write in a very informative and interesting way, you can learn a lot of new things in one place at once, but what is your opinion on the pistol, gunsmith Andreas Schwarzlose with an automatics based on the movement of the barrel in front, there were quite a lot of such pistols sold in your time

[Baron pardus]

To be honest, I never even held such in my hands. The oldest pistol that I have is either one of my TTshek or Cz52 (I'm sure that everyone here already buzzed with their love for the Ceska Zbrojovka company). Of the older pistols, the Luger was HANDLING. Nothing more convenient has yet been created. But the prices for lugers and their clones are prohibitive, for these grandmas you can safely buy a couple of pistols. In one pawnshop I came across a Steir 1912, converted for a 9x19 luger. Nice machine, but they didn't let me shoot. The price was 600 bucks, it was possible to buy, but then I did not have 600 bucks in cash, and a month later this barrel was already bought by someone. Here I just remembered using the Schwarzlose system, EMNIP (a sliding back bolt locked by a larva moving up and down) was made by Arsenal Strike 1, known in Russia as Strizh. By the way, can you tell me why they didn't take it into service? Those few pistols that have sold in the USA - they have very good reviews.

[Operator]

Luger / Parabellum is the most inconvenient pistol for intuitive shooting: it has a too large angle of the handle. It is designed for target shooting

PM / Walther PP is the most comfortable pistol for intuitive shooting: it has a small angle of inclination of the handle.

The Glock is a versatile pistol for both intuitive and targeted shooting.

PS Target shooting - for sportsmen and amateurs. Army and police special forces shoot intuitively from the hip / chest without bringing the pistol forward to the sighting line on the principle that whoever fired first is alive.

[Baron pardus]

Oh my god, what nonsense. Nobody shoots "from the hip" here, only in action films and in "cowboy competition shooting". Nobody will let the policemen engage in shooting from the hip, or shooting in the style of "quickdraw", since the policeman is ALSO responsible for EVERY BULLET that he released. What a nightmare that our police officers are deprived of your knowledge, especially your hip shooting skills and its theoretical basis. You need to be a comedian with your theories of the angle of the arm, and speak in front of our police. True, they will start colic from laughing. Intuitive shooting is not "from the hip" from the word at all. The "grip angle effect" theory has long been disproved, as is your "super precision fixed shutter" theory. Therefore, here almost all pistols are sold with the ability to change the "grip angle" using pads. Moreover, in most police departments and sheriffs, police officers are not given personal weapons, but given money - buy what you want, but you want to go with what we give you. It's just that several requirements are set for weapons: 9mm or 40, the barrel length is at least 4 inches, the capacity is at least 15 cartridges, etc., etc. Therefore, the police go with Glocks and HDM, and with M&P, and with Rugers, and with Cesettes, and with Berettas and Taurus. Naturally, few police officers spend their hard-earned money on Sig Sauer or Heckler Koch there. When I arrived in the United States in 1991, some police officers were still walking around with revolvers. Especially in quiet areas. And if shooting "from the hip" is so important for the military and police, then explain to me why the Army never chose the Glock, but chose first the M9, and then the Sig Sauer, but the Glock is popular in the police (really very popular), and now explain Why did they decide to start competing with the Glock, and Springfield with its Springfield HD, and Smith and Vessno, opted for designs with a smaller handle angle than the Glock. If this is for the sake of "shooting from the hip", if you please explain why in all competitions they use both glocks and pistols with a lower inclination of the handle, because ISPC and others like it, this is target shooting and even at speed. You understand pistols and pistol shooting, sorry, like a pig in ballet, Sir. Don't confuse Olympic target shooting with ISPC. Don't confuse high-speed intuitive shooting with western hip shooting. Let me tell you a secret. IN THEORY, a large "grip angle" should be helpful when shooting with one hand. "Should" and "in theory" the results of practice are completely opposite. It is very convenient to shoot with one hand, for example, from 1911. And there the Grip angle is 11 degrees. On the Glock, by the way 22. As our Army trials showed, the Glock lost over and over to models with a low tilt angle, and everything is used in competitions. From Glocks and high Grip Angle pistols to 1911 chambered in 9mm. The Glock is very convenient, but I am better at shooting with, for example, M&P and Chz74, although I usually shoot with one hand and IDEA Glock should show better results. It all depends on the individual anatomy.
The angle of the handle is only one factor. Believe it or not, most companies understand that people will not buy one handgun for self-defense and home defense and another pistol for accuracy training. People buy one or two pistols - one for discreet carry and the other for everything else. And you will not train for home defense on Glock, but ride an ISPC with a Zatyuninin Chz or a Zatuning Kanik. What you train best with and shoot, especially pistols. By the way, direct competitors of Glock - M&P and HD / HDM have a lower Grip angle than Glock, but that is not what decides the demand for these pistols. Research results show that there are arrows that are easier to shoot from the Glock, on the same ISPC, there are arrows that are easier from, HDM or someone else. Individual anatomy of the hand and hand is what determines the success of PRACTICAL shooting with any pistol and how "comfortable" it is. More than once or twice I have seen and heard people say, "I bought a Glock at first, but I'm better at it from a Beretta" or vice versa "At first I bought a Beretta, but I'm better at shooting with a Glock." So it's not the Grip Angle that matters, but the custom fit. I repeat now that a lot of pistols are sold with Grip angle change kits, a change in the back of the grip. And other pistols have overlays. The pistol is fitted under the arm. There is no universal angle even for police weapons. There are still professionals - policemen and sheriffs, who assure that there can be nothing better than M1911. I understand that I want to be branded as a new Browning or Mauser, and to receive grants for development, revision, revision development, revision of development, etc. But please, stop studying theory and just read, or talk to police officers in the United States, you will learn a lot of new and real. The theory of "ideal grip angle" is from the same series as the theory of "high precision fixed barrel". These are THEORIES that are NOT confirmed by practice.
I repeat once again ISPC requires both speed and accuracy, and there you can see everything, from Glocks to M1911, and there is no "ideal" weapon for ISPC. Otherwise, everyone would have used it.

[Operator]

ISPC is a pure sport with inherent perversions in the form of special holsters, weapon belts, grips with an extended magazine entrance, ultra-high sights, mincing gait, etc. In fact, the pistols used there are sports equipment, not weapons.

The level of shooting training of American police officers in terms of the practical use of short-barreled weapons is very low - in almost all videos, with unexpected fire contact at a short distance (10-15 meters), they try to make the first sighting shot with raising the pistol to eye level (as they were taught in conditions shooting range), after which the police naturally become victims of armed criminals.

Follow the example of FSB agents and SWAT fighters, trained to intuitively fire the first shots, and live a long life in the country of the victorious BLM

[Baron pardus]

SWAT fighters run around with M4s, Pistols, machine guns, snipers and shotguns, and for them the pistol is a secondary weapon. SWAT doesn't run after pickpockets and small drug dealers. SWAT does not catch drunk drivers, and SWAT does not disperse drunken brawls in the bar. If the police call SWAT it is very, very serious. No need to overclock SWAT demo. It is used when the police know for sure: a) Where is the criminal b) Who is the criminal. c) That the criminals just like that, they will not take on their own. And SWAT arrives when the police clearly know that they can't do it on their own. For example, when another amer rips the roof off and he arranges a game in a shooting gallery. Although at first the police are trying to take such fans of DOOM live, themselves, for example, recently in Colorado. If they run into something that turns out to be too tough for them (a well-armed man who actively resists), then the police cordon off the place and call SWAT. So he arrives - fully armed, with snipers, people with MP5, M4 and shotguns. The SWAT pistol is a secondary weapon. Lord, well, at least do a little self-education. You have absolutely no idea what you were talking about. You have read textbooks on theoretical mechanics and physics, and with a clever look make conclusions about what you have no idea about. Either about the design of pistols and their practical application, then about SWAT tactics. Read, talk to police officers from the United States, they will tell you a lot, as a rule, everything except "professional secrets". And the police in the USA do not make the "first shot" while aiming, but on the contrary, they use intuitive shooting (not from the hip), and "Weaver Stance". Watch the tutorial videos, they are in the public domain. And best of all, shoot yourself from different things, different price levels. And on the ISPC, fancy holsters and belts are not required at all. And this is the sport of PRACTICAL SHOOTING, for speed and accuracy. By the way, if you don't know, then I tell you, there is no standard issue holsters in the US police, yes, they give out the simplest equipment, but if you want to buy yourself something fancy, go ahead, if only it meets the requirements of this police department. There are pistol holsters here: for the police, for concealed carry, but for anything - this is a huge business. I understand that paper will endure everything, but stop with a clever look to write absolute crap and indulge in fantasies and theories that have long been refuted in the United States, where, believe me, pistols are much more common than in Russia, and are used for completely different purposes. I repeat, there is no universal angle, otherwise pistols with this angle would have replaced others, but this did not happen. As well as there is no "magic precision of a fixed barrel" otherwise something would have been put into mass production a long time ago. Various gags and recoil absorbers have been known for a long time. However, do not be upset, having arrived in the USA I "invented" a pistol with counterbalance, I was very proud of myself, I was already 17 years old. The idea I had was that when the massive bolt of the pistol flies backward during a shot, its part moves as a counterweight, forward, and is set in motion by the removal of powder gases, the barrel itself is in a cylindrical casing, and when the bolt flies backward, hugging the barrel of the counterweight inside the casing flies forward, and then a special return spring returns (pun intended) the counterweight to its place. The development was for a pistol in a cartridge of 30 Carbin. I even went to the local gunsmiths with sketches of drawings, they praised me, they said that the patent for such garbage was made a long time ago, and no one started production since reliability is going to hell.
Do not misunderstand me, perhaps you will definitely be able to tell me the number of man-hours required for the production of a barrel, frame, bolt and other parts. But you, excuse me, have neither access nor personal possession of a serious amount of weapons. I would bet that you didn’t shoot from the Kanik TP9XFS to compare it with the Glock 34. That you didn’t shoot from the Taurus PT92, to compare it with the M9. And you didn't compare the PH4 with the K100. Moreover, I am sure that you did not take classes on the use of a pistol in combat, either in the army or on the same courses for the police / civilians (not special forces, I say right away, such courses are VERY expensive). I'm far from an expert. I never used a pistol in battle. In a self-defense situation, too. I train regularly, go to different courses sometimes. A couple of times I went to the local ISPC competitions where I performed mediocre. which is not surprising since I spend most of my time at shooting ranges with rifles. But I regularly read what our police officers write, who have more experience, believe me, than yours. what are your words that the police "naturally become victims of criminals" to carry such nonsense, what kind of arrogance and hypertrophied conceit you need to have ... I envy. Policemen die, as a rule, because of their mistakes or because of a surprise attack .. Not bad training, but their mistakes. Relaxed for a second, distracted. Didn't know what the criminal was armed with, decided to take a risk to save people (like a Police Officer in Colorado, or corny shot from behind, how they killed a black police girl in New York, just came up to the back of the car where she was sitting and shot. and not some mythical “white neo-Nazis.” So write to our police officers, they will be happy to share with you. Visit our forums, there are a lot of knowledgeable people, both police officers, and teachers of tactical and defensive shooting. Then you can make smart theories without getting your finger in the sky and not looking like a complete ignoramus.You can hang your noodles in Russia, where people have no pistols in their hands, and the police are not very trained in the use of service. they will simply laugh at you with your theories, at first they will try to explain everything, then they will laugh at you.

[Operator]

You, like the vast majority of Americans, draw your knowledge from Hollywood films and articles by weapons "experts" - in reality, when repelling an unexpected attack at a short distance, FBI and SWAT use a pistol, not an M4 carbine. But you will never be told about this by instructors in the shooting range who can only teach shooting sports.

About FBI agents with M4 carbines you turned it cool

[Baron pardus]

You, sir, not only are ignorant, with a clever look and aplomb carrying utter nonsense, you are also a liar. I didn't even mention the FBI. And for SWAT the pistol is a SECONDARY weapon.

[Operator]

But I mentioned it twice, and you ignored it and started hounding Hollywood stories about SWAT. Do not forget to send your photo with M4 in automatic execution with specification - with or without the right to wear

You there in the USA have completely lost touch with reality: we now have almost any short-barreled weapon legally available for gaining personal experience (in the form of lease in a shooting gallery, of course), as well as various methods of shooting training. Therefore, it's not a fig here to brag about your scanty arsenal of short-barrels and the level of training in shooting business at the level of housewives.

[Baron pardus]

You are Hamlo and an ignoramus, and in general canals and radishes. Stop lying, although of course, a charlatan and an ignoramus have nothing left but lies, how you lied that I said about the FBI, you are also lying about what I said that I have an automatic M4. Talking to a liar and a charlatan is like playing chess with a pigeon, he will knock over the pieces, shit on the board and proudly fly away to tell the same stupid pigeons as he won at chess. Continue to charlatan further, unfortunately for Russia, charlatans no longer do what they deserve. The Learned to Forgive system has the same results. Go for it.

[Operator]

All the best in USA - and Biden Vegetable with BLM to help

[Baron pardus]

Yes, you are absolutely right, we have huge social problems in the United States. But let me remind you the proverb "While the fat one loses weight, the thin flippers will stick together", at the moment the United States is on its feet stronger than Russia. Although it is not known what will happen in 10 years. If the Republicans come to power, then the big white fox will not come so quickly. My task now is to decide which language to learn. Chinese or Arabic or Spanish. And oligarchs, bandits, youth AUE and "small but very independent and proud Caucasian peoples" will help you :-)

[Alexfly]

An interesting idea, it would be very interesting to see in metal and read about the tests ...

[Mikhail Sterzer]

Such pistols (meaning the design nuances) were already mass-produced by Izhmeh in 1978. Probably forgotten. As for the export models, which sold out like hotcakes, they also forgot. Although they themselves took them out of production since 1979 (as part of a sabotage), everything is new - well forgotten old!

[Pavel Ryabov]

In 1775, the Paris Academy of Sciences decided not to consider projects of a perpetual motion machine due to the obvious impossibility of their creation. But can this really stop the brave minds challenging the dull and inert physics of the world around them?

[knyazevpit]

Quote: hrych

The Red Army chose Mauser and almost under its standard and released TT, PPSh and PPS. And they completely surpassed the counterparts of the enemy in terms of combat qualities. The aiming range of the MP-40 is 200 meters, while the PPSh has 300 meters. And ours correctly guessed the combat distance of the WWII. hypothetically, our soldier shot a German with impunity, who had to overcome a hundred-meter distance under a hail of bullets from a disk magazine in order to reach the distance of his shooting.

You probably are not aware that the main weapon of the Wehrmacht squad was the MG machine gun and the K-98 rifle, and the MP-38 \ 40 auxiliary weapon. Squad 10 people, and weapons 1pc. MG + 9pcs. K-98 + 1pc. MP-40. Now the question is: at what distance is the PPSh-41 effective and at what distance is MG? The only plus of the PPSh-41 is a forest battle, a battle in the city and in a tank assault, when the distance for effective firing up to 100 meters of the PPSh-41 can be reduced in a short period of time while riding on armor.

[Dmitry Zadorozhniy]

Again the projectors. French gign. The revolver is in use. And very, very successful.

[Chack wessel]

Quote: Avior

The Schmeiser brothers' system with a free breech was used by almost all pistols - machine guns of the Second World War.

Or the Revelli system? :)