10,000 round test Walther P1 and S&W M39
One hundred rounds of ball ammunition was run through each gun to check it out - to insure everything worked
correctly. It did. Some of those rounds
were employed in settling the guns in the Ransom rest. A series- of 10-round groups followed with Super Vel112/ JSP. The M39 averaged 2Ys inches at
25 yards, the P38 2Y, inches. • Then off for the serious shooting
with a trunk full of ammunition, tools,
spare parts, a basket of spare maga#
zines, ear muffs, and several pairs of
hands. On a miserable, rainy day, the
shooting commenced, with the avowed
goal of burning up nearly 11,000 rounds
as quickly as possible.
The first 4000 rounds took three
hours; the next 3000 took less than two
hours. Four people rotated, filling mag#
azines and keeping both guns talking
at the same time - except for coffee
delivery by a delightful young lady who
didn't really care for all the noise and
smoke.
Firing began with the guns clean and
lubricated normally. As firing heat and
rain caused the lube to deteriorate,
WD-40 was applied liberally. During
the entire first 7000 rounds (3500 per
Even so, ilot a single malfunction occurred that could be attributed to the guns during the first 7000 rounds. Even when as many as 200 rounds were fired as rapidly as possible (fanning the trigger two-handed, emptying a maga-
only that it happened to a friend of a friend, or maybe a third cousin twice removed on the other side of the country.
That sort of story having persisted
for 15 years or better, it seemed time to
check it out carefully.
For that purpose we acquired from
Interarms a brand-new Walther P-38
and an equally virgin Smith & Wesson
M39 - both in the one and only 9mm Parabellum (Luger) caliber, and their blatantly aluminum-alloy frames. Then we added 10,000 rounds of Yugoslavian military 9mm ball ammunition, and a new Ransom machine rest with fix# tures to fit both guns. Since surplus ball ammo isn't known for great ac# curacy, we added a case (1000 rounds) of Super Vel 112-grain JSP 9mm car# tridges. This load is known for top accuracy, so we used it to learn how well the guns shoot.
The plan was to split the ammo eveuly between the two guns, 5500
gun) no cleaning whatever was allowed. As powder fouling built up, WD-40 was simply sprayed on moving surfaces periodically to forestall malfunctioning.
After the first 1000 rounds, cham#
bers in both guns became caked with hardened powder residue,. causing oc# casional failures to extract. Eventual# ly the M39 progressed to the point that its extraction failures occurred twice as frequently as in the P-38. Each time, a shot of spray lube in the chamber corrected the problem.
It is important to note that at no time could the extraction failures be blamed on the guns. We caused them by refusing to clean the guns, feeling that allowing the guns to accumulate exces# sive dirt and crud would make the test more severe. Considering the amount of black mess that accumulated in the guns and spattered back on the shooters,
Both guns were then photographed, lubricated and reassembled, and test fired. Functioning was perfect with both ball and 112/JSP Super Vel. The guns were then taken back on the range and firing continued, with all condi tions as before - except for the rain, which had stopped.
Both were again seated in the Ran# som machine rest, fired settling rounds, then for accuracy. Walther groups with
112/JSP were 3\-ls inches, Smith &
Wesson, 2% inches.
Both guns were then hand fired rap#
idly and continuously until the balance
of the 11,000 rounds of ammunition was consumed, less 50 rounds for a final ac
curacy check with each.
Generally, the remainder of the fir#
ing was a repetition of the earlier 7000
round session, complete with misfires.
At one point, merely as an experiment,
the mainsprings of both guns were pre·
loaded by adding spacers under them, to increase firing pin impact. This
eliminated all misfires with the P-38, and they were 0rtually eliminated with the M39. Once this was accomplished, the spacers were removed and firing continued.
Chambers were swabbed out periodi
cally, and extraction failures were
eliminated. Both guns were also pe·
riodically sloshed in solvent to remove
the worst of the powder residue, then relubricated.
During the balance of the firing no malfunctions occurred which could be attributed to the guns. It was noted, however, that the lower portion of the M39 barrel bushing was apparently flexing enough under load to scrape and occasionally grab on the recoil spring guide. While this did not cause any malfunctions, it seems evident it would
eventually do so if firing were con·
tinued indefinitely.
As a final step, both guns were
cleaned modestly and fired again from
the Ransom rest. Groups with the con·
trol ammunition (Super Vel 112/JSP)
were 4Ya inches and 3% inches respec#
tively for the P-38 and M39 at 25 yards.
Comparing this with the machine rest
groups fired at the beginning of the tests, we see a 75 per cent increase in
group size as a result of firing 5500 rounds.
Final detailed examination of both
guns disclosed no frame wear or damage
sufficient to retire either gun. All the
wear areas noted earlier had progressed somewhat, but not to the extent that
one might expect any failures in the immediate future. Both guns, in fact, have since been fired a bit more with standard commercial loads without difficulty
The only evidence found of the severe use (3500 rounds, remember) to which the guns had been subjected was in the barrel seats.
The P-38framewas noticeably peened
on the upper surface of the rails where
the locking block rests in the uulocked
position. The block strikes the frame
sharply here during unlocking. The re#
sult is a slight regular depression outlin·
ing the locking block, breaking through
the surface finish only around the edges.
The same degree of wear has been noted
on several other aluminum·frame P·38s after only a few hundred rounds, and is
really part of the break-in process.
The M39 frame showed similar peen#
ing where the barrel shoulders contact it in the unlocked position. The shoul# ders were outlined oii < the frame, and
the surface finish was eradicated inside the outline. This produced a very slight regular depression, apparently no deep# er than seen on several other M39s after less than 1000 rounds. Deep enough to be felt with a scriber, but too shallow to be measured accurately with the equipment at hand.
In both guns no other peening or
severe wear were evident on either the frames or the steel components.
Statistically our test might not be
considered valid because of the ex·
tremely small sample size. Neverthe#
less, adding to it no small amount of
similar experience with identical guns,
we feel competent to say you never need worry about aluminum frames
in these particular guns.
That ought to dispel most of those
nasty rumors you've heard. If you're
still in doubt, drop by sometime and
look at our surviving guns.
