$75 pistol test

**Phrost** · Posted On: 2/09/2009 2:30pm

Originally Posted by Wounded Ronin

Why would you want it in anything but 7.62x25? It's a classic cartridge, and it performs well against armor for what it is.

For the same reason a mom doesn't cook separate meals for each kid; it's cheaper and simpler to feed them all the same thing.

**Planktime** · Posted On: 2/09/2009 3:12pm

Originally Posted by Wounded Ronin

Why would you want it in anything but 7.62x25? It's a classic cartridge, and it performs well against armor for what it is.

Phrost,

I bought mine from a friend of mine. Sadly they are running around $200 most places I have seen them. I did find one recently at the gun show for $175 I almost picked up for parts but it was in 7.63X25

Chemistry
I would not mind having a 7.62X25 however I can get dies, brass, projectiles, and powder to load 9x19 for cheap and they are readily available. I have not checked too much but I think 7.62x25 may be a bit harder to reload for.

**RemmyHun** · Posted On: 2/10/2009 1:57pm

Planktime, you used the Ruger (GP100 series 4" it looks like) as your control, might be a silly question, but were you shooting .357 or .38s?

All in all though it definitely looks like it was well worth the price. Like Phrost said, a good backup gun.

**Planktime** · Posted On: 2/12/2009 11:29am

Originally Posted by RemmyHun

Planktime, you used the Ruger (GP100 series 4" it looks like) as your control, might be a silly question, but were you shooting .357 or .38s?

All in all though it definitely looks like it was well worth the price. Like Phrost said, a good backup gun.

Good question. I was shooting .38 spl target rounds from it. which is why it is a bit low. I have it set with the sites to shoot 125gr half jacket hallow points in .357 most of the time. So the sites move the point of aim down when i am using factory target .38

It might be fun to do a test with "interpersonal relations" ammo with these three as well.
I did port and polish the autos to make the function better. Now the sig will eat most anything but the Norinco is still a bit picky.

PT

**Robstafarian** · Posted On: 2/13/2009 7:53pm

I just told my father (serious railroad enthusiast) about this and he said the following: "That's insane. Railroad tracks are incredibly hard, very high carbon steel, totally inappropriate for making firearms. Some day that metal is going to fracture, and the weapon will explode into shrapnel when fired."

I can't speak to the accuracy of his statement, but he's authoritative enough about railroad stuff that I figured I'd better pass it on.

**Planktime** · Posted On: 2/17/2009 10:13am

Originally Posted by Robstafarian

I just told my father (serious railroad enthusiast) about this and he said the following: "That's insane. Railroad tracks are incredibly hard, very high carbon steel, totally inappropriate for making firearms. Some day that metal is going to fracture, and the weapon will explode into shrapnel when fired."

I can't speak to the accuracy of his statement, but he's authoritative enough about railroad stuff that I figured I'd better pass it on.

Well the gun itself is probably ~30 years old I will have to see when it was manufactured. I would agree with the hardness statment of rail road tracks. I do a bit of blacksmithing and use one a as small anvil. I however do not beleive this gun was made from recycled tracks. I cant say that for sure but when I was porting and polishing the barrel it seemed more like a good quality high carbon steal. then the RR tracks I have dealt with in the past. It is something I will look into however.

Thank you dad for me.

PT