30 Luger And Its Cousin the 9mm......

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
Where were we......? Oh, RIGHT--the 30 Luger and its potential utility in a 9mm pistol.

The 30 Luger/7.65 x 21 is 4 years older than its cousin the 9mm Luger/9 x 19--rolled out in 1898 vs the 9's 1902 birth year. The 93 grain FMJs that factory ammo features claim 1210-1280 FPS, but the 250 W-W rounds I bought c. 1993 just manage 1150-1175 in my Ruger P-89X's 4-1/4" barrel. Maybe they use a 6" P-08 to test this stuff with. Another weird caliber crank I knew at the time split a 500-round case with me right after I bought the pistol. In 1993, I thought the $27 per 50 MSRP was pretty ridiculous, but I still had my FFL back then and we gave about $17-$18 per box. I thought we did OK. Nowadays, you give $50-$60 for the Winchester stuff, in the unlikely event you can locate the seasonal stuff. (Note--I think "seasonal availability" is code-speak for "Twice each decade, if we feel like it". But that's OK--Fiocchi, PPU, RWS, GECO, and other boutique makers sell it for a lot less money and the brass cases are first-rate. Winchester can go get stretched.

The Ruger P-89X is ACCURATE. I know that the pistol series is not known for gilt-edged accuracy, but my example shoots very close to the sights with both calibers, and groups very well--hard on the heels of my SIG P-226.

Why the 30 Luger? Why the heck NOT? I dote upon the 32 H&R Mag and the 30 Mauser/7.62 x 25, and was doing so at the time of the P-89X's purchase. I am a Mid-Caliber Handgun Enthusiast. As long as you are willing to reload your cartridges and cast your bullets, you can make a shooting dollar go a LONG WAY. THAT is one of the "draws" for these calibers, as is their mild recoil and often-superb field accuracy for small game and varmints. Once velocities exceed 900 FPS, all of these calibers get a bit loud for their size.

The P-89X not only has 2 barrels, it has two recoil spring systems--one for each caliber. The 9mm spring and rod is a familiar arrangement, loose on its guide rod with a tighter end that fits on the rod's stop washer and a slightly wider end that extends a bit past the guide rod;s forward end. The 30 Luger recoil spring is captive on its guide rod, and is of finer wire than the 9mm spring.

Even shooting the factory W-W fodder, the pistol functioned reliably but not real vigorously. It stayed reliable for 100+ rounds before it got its first cleaning, and went right back at it without a stumble. I spent most of one day just shooting this pistol in both calibers, all 250 of the W-W 30 Luger ammo and about 150 of some 9mm handloads I had on hand--mostly sub-sonic carry rounds that I had on hand for work that I had not fired after my twice-yearly ammo change-out in the P-226. These shot reliably, though not vigorously--which is a feature of these gutless rounds in most pistols. Not a bobble in the new pistol for 400+ rounds. I liked that part. The pistol wants to run, but it craves high-octane fuel--not the neutered USA-made ammo for both calibers.

More to follow, time for bed.
 

Ian

Notorious member
I've been mulling over the possibility of a .30 Parabellum for a while now, thinking it would be the berries in a 9mm blowback AR and use Glock etc. magazines. Sort of a .30 Badger but for semi-auto suppressed use with 100 to 120-grain bullets. Starting off with a 19mm case would make a shorter cartridge than the .30 Luger but would enable use of plentiful, free brass. Looks like I need to break off from this break-off thread to do another investigation...
 

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
Those of us who own Glock 17 or 19 pistols in 9 x 19 Luger now have the option via Bar-Sto Barrels of getting a 30 Luger barrel to fit their 9mm pistols/slides. I have no experience with these products (yet), but I am not surprised to see them come on stream. Irv Stone enjoyed "one-off" projects of this sort, from what I know of the man from 3-4 phone conversations with him years ago when the company was still in 29 Palms. His shop foreman at the time (whose name escapes me at present) good-naturedly got on me a little during one such call, saying that "Guys like (me) cause havoc when you suggest this stuff to Irv! He goes full-bore for a couple hours, sometimes for a day or two, until we can talk him out of it!" I apologized profusely, which the guy laughed at and said "It all pays the same, we sell every barrel we turn out and we are always behind the curve. No sweat." Good folks. I suspect the slower twists and closer dimensions of Bar-Sto barrels would be a boon to their cast bullet performances. My two Ruger P-89X barrels use the usual 1-10" twists to run the short squatty 30 Luger and 9mm bullets with, which makes zero sense whatsoever--but they don't consult me.

Now for the details. The Ruger 30 Luger barrel has .3115" grooves and a VERY SHORT throat a few tenths larger. I size my castings at .312", and jacketed 32 Magnum bullets shoot well in their OEM .312" diameters. The jacketed bullets for the 32 revolvers feature a cannelure for roll-crimping, and I recommend its use for that purpose in the 30 Luger. These dinky necks aren't always up to the task of securing bullets in place against feedramp contact and the feeding cycle's rough-and-tumble passage from magazine into chamber. The bottle-neck cartridge design is a plus for feed reliability, but stable bullets are required for that to happen. With castings in 30 Luger and 30 Mauser/7.62 x 25 Tok, I really like the Lee 100 grain RN design with 2 lube grooves. I place the roll crimp right between the 2 lube grooves, and not lightly--it is a moderate-to-firm crimp.

Bullet alloy is usually 92/6/2. Lube has been 50/50 BW/Alox. Best powder, hands down, has been AA-7. All of these recommendations apply equally to 30 Luger and 30 Mauser. Most published loading data in 30 Luger is VERY conservative. E.G., Winchester data for 30 Luger shows from 1995 using a 93 grain FMJ bullet that 4.2 grains of WW231 imparts 1085 FPS at 25.5K CUP. Tell ya what--4.0 grains of 231 under an 85 grain Hornady JHP would not fully function the Ruger with its lighter recoil spring--it took 4.5 grains to get things running smoothly (though sluggishly).

Time went on, and I got the Ruger 30 Luger to behave itself in fairly short order. I couldn't leave well enough alone, though--that 9mm recoil spring called to me. "Put me in with that sissy-la-la 30 Luger barrel, and LET'S PARTY!" I steered in the direction of this siren song, deftly navigating to the moderation of the Accurate Arms #1 reloading manual. 3 bullet weights, 3 AA powders (#2, #5, and #7). Before long I had 85 grain Hornadys stepping out at 1500 FPS and the 100 grain Lees approaching 1250 FPS using "rated-R" weights of AA-7 with the 9mm spring in place. Accurate as could be, too--a thing to which many jackrabbits can testify truthfully. No real pressure signs in the brass, and ejection was normal (like that of full-tilt 9mm in the same gun). Summed up--if you want to go the route of 30 Luger swap barrel in your Glock 17/19, either grab a lighter recoil spring in the aftermarket or load the ammo with sufficient vigor to run the slide fully. I started getting reliable function in the P-89X at about the 1275 FPS level with the 85 grain JHPs, and at 1100 FPS with the Lee 100s. FWIW. Short version--the 30 Luger can have you close to the 327 Federal's ZIP Code, and the Glock 17 features a 17-round magazine. THAT is no joke.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ian

Pistolero

Well-Known Member
If one were not going the suppressed route, I would think that the 7.62x25 Rooskie, with the much
higher velocity would be better, esp for pistol caliber carbines. The Russian PPSh-41 and the PPS
were both considered to be very effective medium to short range weapons, of course they were sub
guns. But a pistol cal carbine with that round would seem to be a real step up, at least in range and
flatness of trajectory, over the 9mm Para.

From what I know the .30 Luger and .30 Mauser and 7.62x25 Russian are pretty much identical
physically, but the last one is loaded much hotter.

Seems like you are heading in that direction already, Allen. I am not sure about brass differences for
the heavier loadings. 7.62x25 Russian runs about 85 gr bullet at 1500 fps roughly. Your Hornady
load is right there. If the brass is not bulging at the feed ramp area, probably is OK.
 
Last edited:

Ian

Notorious member
Fantastic, Allen, a gold mine of info there and entertaining to boot. "Rated R" weights of AA-7.... :rofl:
 

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
Bill--I have spent almost 30 years with the 30 Mauser, 30 Luger, and 7.62 x 25 Tokarev. There were pre-cursor calibers like 30 Borchardt and Bergmann that preceded the 30 Mauser/7.63 Mauser that were a bit less powerful. That bit of history helps muddy the water a bit concerning the arms and ammo.

The original 30/7.63 Mauser ran an 86 grain FMJ/RN at 1410 FPS from the C-96 Mauser pistol. I own a Federal Ordnance rebuild of one of the mixed-parts ChiCom imports that arrived c. 1990. It is all Mauser, and the locking surfaces on the C-96 are substantial. The C-96 is an ancient design, but for its time it was pretty highly-advanced. It has true "no-tools takedown"--a cartridge rim can turn the slot on the firing pin head 90* to start the dismount's music. The bolt locks back when the 10-shot magazine is empty, and loading is accomplished via stripper clips--which help to hold back the bolt once the follower sinks out as the fresh rounds are pushed in.

At the time of the Soviet Revolution in 1921, Russia was already tired of the Nagant Model 1895 revolvers--even rabid Bolsheviks knew that system was bogus. By the late 1920s Fedor Tokarev went to work on a pistol upgrade that borrowed HEAVILY from John Browning and his Colt developments and Paul Mauser's C-96 cartridge. All of that culminated in the Systema Tula-Tokareva Model of 1930, which looks like a Colt 1903 on steroids. A 1933 revision gave it a better disconnector, and the TT-30/33 soldiered on from there. The pistol has Browning's toggle-link locked breech and simplified slide/barrel engagement. It has a unitized fire control sub-assembly that falls free for cleaning and is retained by the slide rails. Its cartridge (7.62 x 25 Tokarev) looks like the 30 Mauser.....but not quite. The Rooskikh variant is .020" shorter in case length and radial specs are a few thousandths smaller; the shoulder is a few thousandths farther back as well. It is as if Tokarev shrunk the thing 3%. I do know that brass cases sized in the RCBS 30 Mauser die start hanging up once the pistol gets hot and dirty. Size the cases in the very slightly tighter 7.62 x 25 Tok die, and all is peachy and rosy. Velocity specs for the Tok from the TT-30/33 are 86 grain bullet at 1390 FPS. C-96 and TT-30/33 chow are--for all practical purposes--identical. My in-house TT-30/33 example is a Norinco Type 54 ChiCom repro of the Russian pistol.

Then came the Shpagin SMG in 1941. (PPSh-41, Pistolet Pulymet Shpagin, Model of 1941). It too was chambered in 7.62 x 25 Tok, and it ran poorly with OEM pistol ammo in cold weather. Russia is like Montana and the Yukon Territory--all have 2 seasons, Winter and August. To alleviate these shortcomings, Soviet arsenals very soon adopted more powerful loadings that were PPSh-specific. These didn't destroy the TT-30/33 pistols, but such practices shortened they service life markedly via battering. My Dad went up against PPSh-armed enemies in Korea, it was a nasty weapon.

The Czechs were part of the Soviet Bloc after WWII, though their enthusiasm for their Soviet overlords was lukewarm at best. They did believe in weapons system commonality, though--if for no other reason than the free ammo from Ivan. Aware of the SMG ammo/TT-30/33 problems, the Czechs stole the roller-locking system from their late Nazi oppressors' STG-44 and adapted it to their own service pistol, the CZ-52. This pistol and its locking system could safely and reliably handle both Mau/Tok ammo and the stronger PPSh fodder without a bobble. I have one of these pistols as well, and it is a fun toy. The Later Hornady Manuals feature data that explores the CZ-52/PPSh-41 levels of this caliber in some depth. I don't try these loads in my Tok, and FOR SURE won't try them in the C-96.

Short version......3 load intensities--1) pre-Mauser Borchardt level (86 grainers in the 1150-1200 FPS bracket) 2) Mauser and Tokarev level (86 grainers at the 1400 FPS milepost) and 3) CZ-52 and PPSh level (86 grainers running in the 1700-1800 FPS ZIP Code). HTH.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 462

Pistolero

Well-Known Member
I was not aware that the Mauser and Tok were considered similar, I thought the .30 Luger and .30 Mauser (broomhandle)
were about the same with the 7,62x25 TOK bumped up to 1500 as the norm for that "new" cartridge.

Lots of info there that I was unaware of.

I have a CZ 52 and a Tok 33, but haven't shot either one a whole lot. Ammo is getting hard to find at
reasonable cost. At the time I got my CZ 52, someone was selling 9mm Para drop in barrels for about
$95 or so and I bought one. It runs fine on ordinary 9mm ammo, too. The CZ52 is an interesting design,
and I have the follow on from the StG-44, the H&K 91, too. That is the first roller locked design I ever
owned, purchasing it back in the 80s.

Bill
 
Last edited:

462

California's Central Coast Amid The Insanity
Thanks for the super duper history lesson, Allen!

I owned a CZ-52 for several years, but eventually traded it for an un-issued Yugo 24/47. Never could get used to the pistol's grip, which was seemingly designed to align with the bad guys' knees, nor its minuscule front sight. Notwithstanding all that, it's a very robust gun and its cartridge is pretty darn zippy.
 

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
Winchester did load their White Box stuff in 7.62 x 25 for a while, I suspect it is reboxed PPU or Fiocchi but headstamped W-W. It was pretty good stuff, and the brass reloads well.

30 Luger is a very different animal than the 30 Mauser or 7.62 x 25. 30 Luger case is .845" long, 30 Mauser is .990" long, 7.62 x 25 is .970" long. The 30 Luger was chambered in the P-08 like the 9 x 19, the C-96 started life in 30/7.63 Mauser and a few years later was made in 9 x 19. later yet, it was made in a longer 9mm case known as the "9mm Export". Bergmann, Borchardt, Mauser, and others were in fierce competition to outfit the world with war toys as European nations scrambled for foreign colonies. Mauserwerke sued the Springfield Arsenal over the 1903 Springfield rifle and its several patent infringements on the Mauser turnbolt system design. One facet of the Versailles Treaty was to hold the USA and Springfield Arsenal harmless from damages owed to Mauserwerke. Being an imperialistic upstart might be good or bad, but losing a war you helped to start in pursuit of said world hegemony has a down-side. Among those bad outcomes was Mauserwerke getting told to POUND SALT on their patent lawsuits. Don't START nuthin', and there won't BE nuthin'. Not 20 years later, Germany was back at it again. As my Uncle George said (immigrant from Freiburg, Germany--native German speaker and did translations in the U.S. Army after D-Day and through Nuremburg)--"G--d--- Germans, if you don't keep them at your feet, you will have them at your throat!" I suppose he would know, after many conversations with both Nazis and regular soldaten.
 

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
There is a lot of confusion "out there" concerning these mid-caliber go-fasts. I hope what I laid out dispels some of that for onlookers and potential fans of the calibers.