Luger P-08.... was/is it any good?
- Thread starter CanuckShooter
- Start date
It was very dependable IF kept clean and lubed. However, it was really an obsolete weapon by 1939 when war broke out. the P38 that replaced it was more reliable, had fewer moving parts, was faster, cheaper, and easier to make and used materials easier to source underp ressures of war. It also digested the war expedient steel cased ammo MUCH better than the Luger which was picky about casing material and always worked best with soft brass.
Luger mags are also finnicky and sometimes difficult to load. The ejectors often broke and the firing pin design went through several modifications to better handle ruptured primers which often broke the guns in service.
At the time of WW1, however, the P08 was state of the art.
EDITED TO ADD: I do LOVE the luger design however and the guns themselves are some of the prettiest sidearms ever made with a really nifty toggle mechanism design!
Luger mags are also finnicky and sometimes difficult to load. The ejectors often broke and the firing pin design went through several modifications to better handle ruptured primers which often broke the guns in service.
At the time of WW1, however, the P08 was state of the art.
EDITED TO ADD: I do LOVE the luger design however and the guns themselves are some of the prettiest sidearms ever made with a really nifty toggle mechanism design!
- Location
- Downtown Vancouver, BC
They shot the same cartridge, yes? So performance wise, was the Luger any quicker at firing off its mags? And was it any more accurate? If the Luger was so expensive to make, you'd think it'd have better performance...
- Location
- Tucson, Arizona
ilovepotatos said:
Keep in mind that when the Luger was introduced, trained craftsmen were plentiful. By WW2, those skilled workers wound up in the army.
Germans have a penchant for making complicated things where a simple thing would do the job as well.
Look at the Panther tank built to counter the T34. Result, its a wonderful piece of machinery, but you can't make as many.
I have been shooting Lugers since I was in high school (a long time ago) and now have 3 of the things. If you give them a little lubrication, check the magazines and feed them ammo that is a hevy enough load, they work wonderfully. I have a 1918 that I have been feeding Sten Gun loads for over 40 years and it still chugs along very nicely indeed, thankyouverymuch.
Do I regard it as fit for a fight? Definitely.
The one gun that I have NO confidence in at all is my M1911A1 .45 auto!!!! If it came to a fight, I would take a .380/200 Webley first!
Do I regard it as fit for a fight? Definitely.
The one gun that I have NO confidence in at all is my M1911A1 .45 auto!!!! If it came to a fight, I would take a .380/200 Webley first!
Biggest problem with Lugers is in the magazines. The later extruded mags were/are wonderful. Mags were issued fitted to individual guns; field replacements were fitted to individual guns by filing the mag-catch slot to fit. If your mags fit properly and your loads are up to snuff, you should have no troubles.
The P38 was designed to be more effective and cost less in terms of time, resources and money. It succeeded in every way which is why Walther made it post-war for many years as the P1. The Luger, after WW2, served only in the Finnish army b/c they couldn't afford to replace it until 1980.
GREAT target pistol, very ergonomic, but by 1939, FAR better combat designs were out there (ie, P38, P35 Hi-Power, P35 Radom, etc.)
GREAT target pistol, very ergonomic, but by 1939, FAR better combat designs were out there (ie, P38, P35 Hi-Power, P35 Radom, etc.)
Cocked&Locked
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
Claven2 said:
Um, didn't the finns use the Lahti? The profile is similar but totally different action. They where finally retired due to metal fatigue in the frames. (poor metallurgy when made during war, the originals are great}
The swiss used it for quite some time though.
Cocked&Locked said:
Yes, they used the Lahti in concert with the Luger. When the Lahtis started failing, they fell back on their Luger stocks until eventually they could afford to buy SIG P226's sometime in the 80's.
But either way, the Luger design was showing it's years by the outbreak of WW2.
I believe the .45 Luger was actually the Model 1907. Don't forget that the 1911 evolved over the course of the tests, based to a large degree on their input. Witness the Colt 1907, 1909 and 1910 (and also perhaps the 1905, I'm not so clear on that one).
From what I have read, the .45 Luger actually performed BETTER than the 1911 prototypes in most trials (at the time the 1911 wasn't as well refined as it is now), but was discarded for superficial reasons. Rumor, of course, has the selection of the 1911 based on the "designed by an American" theory...
- Location
- Tucson, Arizona
considering that the M1911 was used all over the world and in conditions quite unlike Europe, the M1911 was the better idea.
About all you can say about the .45 luger now is that it is the world's most valuable handgun as there is only ONE in exsistance.
About all you can say about the .45 luger now is that it is the world's most valuable handgun as there is only ONE in exsistance.
Cocked&Locked
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
Claven2 said:
well there you go, learn something new every day here!
I personally love shooting my Luger, and if I can make my aging eyes do their bit with the microsopic sights, its very accurate. Trigger takes a bit of getting used to and she dosen't like light loads, gotta make her work!
I'm a tool and die maker and I take the think apart and look at it and say to myself every time, "how the devil did they mass produce these things in 1908 to the tolerances these designs need and make any money?" I'll sit there with the frame and try to figure out how you could hold it to make some of the internal cuts. Its german all right, I swear they never make one part do when they can use 10
A couple of suggestions for aging eyes - I have this problem too. There are little pinhole apertures that fasten to your shooting glasses,which will sharpen focus, or use glasses that will sharpen the sights, even if the target gets blurred a bit. Focussed sights work on a slightly blurred target, blurrred sights hardly work at all. I have uncorrected distant vision, read with 2.75, use 1.25 for handgun shooting.
I too am amazed with the intricacy of the Luger from a manufacturing standpoint. As I understand it, they were hand fitted twice. Once on initial assembly before heat treatment, and again with stones after. Consider that all the machine tool cuts were made with single operation tools. Think about the investment in machinery that was necessary. And that they were manufactured in quantity.
I too am amazed with the intricacy of the Luger from a manufacturing standpoint. As I understand it, they were hand fitted twice. Once on initial assembly before heat treatment, and again with stones after. Consider that all the machine tool cuts were made with single operation tools. Think about the investment in machinery that was necessary. And that they were manufactured in quantity.
I used to have a copy of "the Luger Story" but alas I no longer have it. If memory serves though, there were something like 7000 different operations performed on each Luger during manufacture. The volume was achieved by sheer massiveness of the assembly line where each specialized worker only did one small task and passed the gun on to the next worker. Thus a steady trickle of guns came off the line despite the weeks of work required to make each example. Many hundreds were in the production line at any given moment.
By WW2, it was evident that this gun was aeriously counter-productive to the concept of mass production. The P38 has nearly as many parts as the Luger, but required much less hours per pistol to construct and fit them.
Consider also that Lugers were rust blued with up to 7 passes through the steam cabinet!! No single operation hot-dip here!!!
Also, on early Lugers, all that grip checkering was HAND CUT. You can see why they went over to plastic!
The trigger mechanism is also downright SCARY in it's flimsiness. It all depends upon a closely toleranced transfer bar pinned to the trigger plate. No wonder Luger parts were NOT considered interchangeable in the field! Swapping a trigger plate often results in a non-working gun.
They are accurate little pistols though, if not the ideal combat sidearm.
By WW2, it was evident that this gun was aeriously counter-productive to the concept of mass production. The P38 has nearly as many parts as the Luger, but required much less hours per pistol to construct and fit them.
Consider also that Lugers were rust blued with up to 7 passes through the steam cabinet!! No single operation hot-dip here!!!
Also, on early Lugers, all that grip checkering was HAND CUT. You can see why they went over to plastic!
The trigger mechanism is also downright SCARY in it's flimsiness. It all depends upon a closely toleranced transfer bar pinned to the trigger plate. No wonder Luger parts were NOT considered interchangeable in the field! Swapping a trigger plate often results in a non-working gun.
They are accurate little pistols though, if not the ideal combat sidearm.
