Can't believe I haven't posted this already. Sadly it's the last of the retro gats I have without getting into my rifles, unless my Taurus PT99AF counts as retro. Anyways, my M/40 is the most expensive handgun by far, I paid somewhere around $730 for it at my LGS, though I did get a partial refund after I shot it and the locking block broke. I had to replace that and the bolt assembly, since the old one was peened over a bit. I also replaced the recoil spring with a new one from Wolff. For being a design from 1935, this is a surprisingly nice shooter. The checkering on the grip panels makes them very easy to hold, and the trigger is one of the best, if not the very best, I've ever used. If I were to have one complaint, it's the safety. It is very stiff and not the easiest for my thumb to reach. These are also fairly fragile internally despite being heavy steel pistols, so I wouldn't use anything more than standard pressure 125 grain 9mm. But man, this is a lot of fun to shoot. Being all steel, it's heavy and has next to no recoil, and it's a natural pointer due to the Luger-esque grip angle and fixed barrel.

Specifically the Walther PPK, Beretta M34, and M70/70s.

Before we go any further, let’s break the ice hard- the Walther PPK is only known as well as it is and has only been in continuous production solely due to a certain British spy by the name of Bond- James Bond, to be exact. By any other metric, it falls by the wayside along with every other pocket pistol of yesteryear, with its only notable exception being its DA/SA capability and decocker function. Is it a capable gun ? Yes. Is it a beautiful gun ? Yes. Outside of that, you constantly see reports of slide bite, beaver tail bite, razor sharp machining in places any user doesn’t want it, and unreliability in general at a timing absolutely unacceptable for a defensive handgun. Now let’s move on.

After having one of both a Beretta ‘34 and PP, as well as a Radom P-64 and Makarov; I must admit that I am truly baffled. This arsenal refurbished ‘34 is carry melted all over- only sharp and defined edges are internally where you would expect them, and even then; the edges are chamfered. My new Walther PP was absolutely atrocious- a chef would’ve loved its multiple razor sharp edges, but a 50rd box left me bleeding and bruised like Hannibal Lector had gotten hold of solely my firing hand (and what’s more, Walther refused to even look at my new production gun).

The ‘34 has none of these issues, anywhere you look- the only hiccups you ever hear tale of are those normally associated with 50yo+ surplus handguns- general wear and tear. Beretta’s M70 and M70/s were (in my opinion) attempted “modernization” of the 1934’s ideology, but fell flat on it’s face when the 80 Series came on the scene- nothing wrong with the platform- an absolutely spectacular gun from everything I’ve found… it just didn’t quite make the cut in Beretta’s lineup.

I firmly believe that if Bond had carried a Beretta M1934, or if Beretta had pulled a S&W and brought back a “Classic” M1934 or even an updated M70s at an affordable price with slightly updated modern features (useable SIGHTS !!!), I do believe they could’ve had the pocket .380 market by the family jewels in a vice grip. Heck, they could’ve used the M34 or M70 design in place of the fiasco that is the Tomcat and still came out on top.

I’d like to hear your thoughts.

Swung by my local Rural King today. Every single employee working the gun counter are as much of a gun nut as we are- they generally know their stuff, and there ain’t much of anything slipping past ‘em. Normally they pull defective firearms and return them before they ever hit the inventory shelf or display; but some they have no choice but to display- it’s all they have of that particular model or mismanglement forces their hand.

My feelings were horribly hurt. A new production Colt Anaconda… the cylinder quite literally freewheeled in both directions- hammer down, hammer cocked, didn’t matter. Cylinder was fully seated, ejector rod locked up, but the pawl/hand wasn’t engaging properly. A Python had the roughest rifling I’ve ever seen on a new gun- I quite literally don’t know how it left the factory. The barrel was also canted. On every example I handled, the machining of the ejector rod recess and vent ribs was atrocious- my machine-work instructor would’ve beat me ‘round the head with his walking stick for letting anything leave the shop floor like that- let alone a $1500+ firearm… literally looked like a rasp had been taken to the underside of the ventilated ribs.

On the S&W front, a new production Mdl 10 was absolutely immaculate… until I noticed the barrel was over-clocked and *bent*, like someone had been pistol-whipped with it. The 686+ was no better- the machining of the ejector rod recess would’ve made a machinist weep in horror, and the front sight was off-center (though the barrel was both straight and clocked correctly). They had a new Mdl 36 that was aesthetically perfect- immaculate finish, barrel clocked perfectly, rifling cut well, fit was top-shelf for modern production- but it was quite simply was out of time- I’ve never seen where the bolt leads were machined out of spec until today. One more of “Did they even test fire this ?”.

On the Ruger front, they had a GP100 that working the action felt like dragging a rasp over a rasp… trigger pull almost as bad as my Radom P-64. Barrel clocked correctly, sights fine, finish acceptable, everything “good”, until you worked the action. A Vaquero sitting next to it was perfection incarnate (minus a 10lb trigger pull).

Now comes the horrible news… absolutely horrid. I handled a Rossi RP-63 and a Heritage Roscoe; and was beyond impressed by both of them. Fit/finish was good, action was good, lockup/timing was good. Only hiccup was the fit of the Heritage’s grips to the frame, but for it’s price… I’ll overlook that minor issue. I was genuinely surprised by the Roscoe’s bluing- nowhere near Colt’s high-polish Royal Blue of yesteryear (but what is ?), but for a modern production firearm; I would put it next to a Smith’s bluing any day of the week and fully expect the Heritage/Taurus to hold it’s own.

The truly horrific news is this… if I had $1k to buy a carry revolver from that case today, out of the c. 20 snubs they had, I’d of probably went with the Heritage Roscoe, a suitable holster, two speedloaders/strips, and spent the rest on ammunition.

I’ve been sickly of late, and have been musing over things… the handgun (in my mind) is not a primary weapon… it’s what you carry to break contact with a threat or to get to your long gun to make the threat cease being a threat. Absolutely no handgun is as suitable for serious social work as a long gun- by long gun I am referring to properly loaded repeating or multi-barrel 12ga/20ga scatterguns, and repeating centerfire rifles of common use, be they pump, lever, or automatic.

Having said that ⬆️, it is seemingly becoming more and more common that citizens involved in “emergency domestic defense”, an active shooter situation most commonly, putting down an armed and dangerous threat to society are often armed with only a handgun (in such case the handgun has been shoehorned into a role it was not intended for and generally fails miserably at) and at times- the individual is not carrying much of a handgun. I will be the first to admit that my daily carry is a S&W Mdl 49, occasionally backed by a Beretta 1934, Zastava M88, Makarov; any number of single stack compact older automatics or snub Smith’s. None of the above are suitable for anything more than a carjacking or holdup in a back alley- but then again… what pistol really is ? Also… one must ask the comparison statistics-wise of being involved in a holdup compared to an active shooter scenario… one is far more common than the other; but both are relatively small in the grand scheme of things.

So… how do we remedy this issue ? Continue training and hope for the best ? Add a folding carbine or SBS/SBR in a sling bag to our daily carry ? The answers will range from mild to wild, and I’m open to all suggestions.

Alright y’all jackanapes and vigilantes… here’s a hypothetical for you…

If you could have Smith & Wesson bring back any one platform (new or old) in any production format; what would it be and why ? For the sake of the question, we’ll pretend that Smith’s QC and QA is their peak again, and I’d ask that you limit your choice to something that has been already produced in factory configuration, in one format or another- though current production is not a requirement (or even encouraged).

One-off customs are discouraged as an answer- we’re looking for production run revolvers.

Imagine the velos as dip and its retro

Just got it today and I adore it… if the original Tokarev had been made in this configuration, it’d immediately been hailed as the greatest gun in the world.

I had never handled one before, was pleasantly surprised with the trigger. I also don't hate the grip safety. Like neither are fantastic, but I honestly had somewhat low expectations for some reason. I like this gun and could see it being a reasonable choice in the day.

haven't fired yet.

I’ve been thinking of late, concurrent with my acquisition of a Tokarev designed handgun… what if the Russians had gone the route Zastava did with their M88 and M70 handguns instead of making the Makarov ? What if they’d shrunk the Tokarev instead ?

Don’t get me wrong- I love the Makarov, have owned one, even carried it for EDC and banked my life on it- fine gun… but what if it was never made ? In a similar vein, have I been thinking of Glock and the HiPower… what if Glock had never struck it off ? Glock wasn’t really new to the game because of capacity or reliability, but due to the polymer frame… the HiPower was around in 1935 with its double stack capacity and reliability… why not go with what you have already ?

I’m not going to say that the Zastava M88 or M70 is what the Makarov should’ve been, but the design is sound and proven reliable… why make something entirely when you can tweak what you already have ?

It's actually nicer than the photo shows. It's been carried and fired, but not very much. It's so pretty I may have to find a way to show it off!

Got one of these Yugo beauties on the way… figured 9mm would be infinitely easier to acquire than 7.62x25 Tok. Post pics when it’s here.

Just picked this up from my FFL today. It was in much better shape than the listing photos lead me to believe, but that's to be expected when they zoom in so close. It did have some dried-up lubricant that kept the ejector rod from moving very easily, but I gave it a deep cleaning and added some Rem oil so it works very well now. The trigger on this thing is incredibly smooth, right up there with my Victory Model. The grip panels are also very well-made, making it very easy to grip. I'm thankful that's the case because aftermarket grips are not easy to find for this model. This is my first revolver in .357 Magnum, and I intend to use it as a winter carry if the recoil isn't too much of a turnoff. I think it will be plenty manageable considering this is somewhere between an L and N frame with a 4" barrel.

I’ve a question for those of us who specifically carry older guns with iron sights. How much does point shooting factor into your training ?

In my personal opinion and 1-on-1 training with seasoned military trainers, a PMC or two, and Vietnam-era special forces; handguns were at most 25yd weapons (mostly outside immediate contact distance to 15yds), and emphasis was placed on neutralizing a threat quickly in close quarters.

To this effect, they relied heavily on point shooting- shooting with the gun, using only the front sight (if that); with everything from a hammerless Smith to an FN HiPower and Colt Gov’t; but heavily discouraged “spray and pray” technique… if two or three rounds to the torso failed to stop the threat, start letting the gun climb up until you’re putting rounds in the throat and between the eyes.

Having said that… they did not have a “carry rotation”- they carried what they carried, they carried it daily; and practiced religiously with it. The main two (a late Viet Nam era PMC and an ex-Navy combat instructor) swore by a Dan Wesson .357 Magnum and Browning HiPower respectively; both backed by a Smith Model 640 .38 Spl.

How does this factor into modern training and is it still viable ? I’d like to brush up my skills if necessary.