Video review of 2 of my 3 Stoeger .22 Lugers

[Bill_in_fl]

I thought some of you might enjoy this video on the fun to plink with, long out of production, .22 Stoeger Lugers.
Stoeger has owned the copyright to the name "Luger" on a product, since the 1920's. These .22 LR caliber Lugers are not an exact P08 parabellum as designed by Georg Luger, but they legally are a Luger and they are (debateably) close in resemblance as well as have a working toggle which does somewhat retard (delay) the otherwise straight blowback bolt. So it is correctly termed as a retarded/delay blowback action as opposed to the P08's action being recoil operated.

Some people claim these are not Lugers. But they legally are Lugers. They just aren't constructed exactly the same as the P08 was designed originally by Georg Luger. My all steel frame one has the heft and feel of a P08 while my aluminum frame ones are much lighter.

The Stoeger Luger is superior to the .22 cal Erma P08 style which was made of questionable pot metal with a steel sleeve for a barrel encased in pot metal and most of the other parts as well as the Erma's frame are zinc type "Zamac" pot metal. These being the only working toggle .22 caliber Lugers and Luger (type) pistols mass produced (not including .22 conversion kitsfor larger caliber lugers), it therefore is common for some people to confuse the Stoeger.22 Lugers and the Erma .22 P08's and to even think they are the same pistol. Both have been out of production for decades.

The Erma looks a lot more like the P08, but the pot metal parts commonly crack and break. The Stoeger, even with the aluminum frame version, holds up excellent. I know. I have two alum frame ones and one steel frame one and I have been inside them and worked on them to smooth up their operation. Most complaints on these fine pistols are made by people who do not know what to do, such as polish the feed ramp, micro chamfer the breech edge so it won't catch the head of the bullet and jam against the breech, bend (if necessary) the mag feed lips to aid feeding. Replace a worn extractor spring. Most of the public will not know these things nor do them and that, along with incorrectly lumping them in with the inferior pot metal Erma's, is why some people call them "Jam-a-matics". But they aren't. If they did the things I mentioned like I have, their Stoeger .22 Lugers would work fine.

The .22 Stoeger Luger's toggle assembly is steel as is the bolt which rides in steel recesses not in aluminum recesses as well as the entire barrel is all steel, as opposed to the Erma barrel which is a steel sleeve encased by zamac pot metal. So all steel where it was needed was used in the aluminum frame Stoeger and the aluminum frame was rated at 82000 psi. So it is very sturdy. The Stoeger steel frame ones are even sturdier and feel just like a regular P08 in weight and heft. It is a pleasure to shoot both Stoeger frame types.

The Stoeger company of today, is not the same Stoeger company which produced these .22 caliber Lugers although they still own the copyright to the name "Luger" on a product. Unfortunately, records of the old Stoeger company were lost or not kept, as to the exact production date of each individual Stoeger Luger. So all we can know is the aluminum frame Stoeger Lugers were made from 1969 to 1979 and the Stoeger all steel frame ones were made from 1980 to 1985.

Hope you enjoy the video. Also FYI, that is NOT a Nazi uniform. It is a West German army (Nato ally) shirt and cap from the 1960's/'70's. I added the Jodphurs (riding pants), suspenders and riding boots so it would look more "old timey"....Nicht Wahr? Lol.

Here's the links.....

http://vimeo.com/118525608

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxYxbi5CobM



.

[sheepherder]

Both the Stoeger and Erma 'Lugers' come up for discussion fairly regularly, usually a question as to remedy for a perceived malady.

How about a couple pics of your steel Stoeger?

[Bill_in_fl]

Originally Posted by sheepherder

Both the Stoeger and Erma 'Lugers' come up for discussion fairly regularly, usually a question as to remedy for a perceived malady.

How about a couple pics of your steel Stoeger?

Here you go. The two with the 5.5 inch barrels are my aluminum frame ones and the 4.5 inch barrel is my steel frame one.

All together...


Right side of my steel frame Stoeger .22LR Luger...


Left side of my steel frame Stoeger .22LR Luger...





.

[ithacaartist]

Hi Bill,

For the past several years, I've collected Erma toggle guns--which also means that I trouble-shoot and work on them.

I agree with your observation about others' misconception/confusion about who made what, Stoeger of Erma, and have noticed regularly that some listings on auction/classified sites mix the two in their descriptions or titles.

The largely-Zamak-constructed toggle pistols by Erma did not set the scene very well for toggle pistols, that's for sure. Zamak, particularly with a little age, can be brittle, for sure. The same problems and remedies found in your Stoegers also happen in Ermas. I would observe that the Ermas may be a bit fussier than Stoegers to tame into acceptable reliability.

I would disagree that there is any delay to the action of any toggle gun other than those of the original Parabellum design, or copies of it, such as the Houston Lugers or the 70s' Mausers. There is nothing to lock the chamber in battery, retard the motion of the breech block, or move the barrel extensions, on the Stoeger or Erma wannabes.

One Erma model your description does not address is the KGP series, begun in 1968, and lasting until the bitter end of production in the late 80s-early 90s. These models are constructed with only one Zamak component (aside from its cast trigger), albeit a major one--the grip frame. Since there is no relative motion between the grip frame and upper on these, the only wear evident will be caused by assembly/disassembly. The KGP series was a new design then, supplanting the actions of the earlier La- and Ep-22s, and tend to be more dependable and easier to cure of maladies in function. They have their own foibles, not the least of which is their tendency to throw their extractors, but generally have much better adherence to the look/lines of an original Luger. They are, however, scaled down. The KGP-69, which is the .22lr, is about 3/4 size, and the KGP-68A, which came in .380 and .32 auto, maybe about 2/3 scale.

Aside from brittleness, Zamak is also problematic to refinish. Blackened at the factory, the original finish is almost impossible to reproduce, and a coating-style finish such a Cerakote would be the most reasonable method of rehabilitating one. I wish that Erma castings were all-aluminum, like your Stoegers!

[sheepherder]

Originally Posted by ithacaartist

There is nothing to lock the chamber in battery, retard the motion of the breech block, or move the barrel extensions, on the Stoeger or Erma wannabes.

Dave, my NRA Assembly Handbook show that the Stoeger has no barrel extension; the grip frame and what would be the extension are all one piece, and the barrel is pinned into it. It doesn't move at all.

[Bill_in_fl]

Originally Posted by ithacaartist

Hi Bill,

For the past several years, I've collected Erma toggle guns--which also means that I trouble-shoot and work on them.

Hi ithacaartist. You realize that necessity to troubleshoot and tweak on your .22 toggle action Ermas and I realize that on my .22 Stoeger Lugers. It is amazing to me that so many others just lump them into the "Jam-a-matic" category if they don't operate correctly the first time they shoot them. Most people either don't know what to do, or won't even attempt to tweak them to work correctly. They expect them to work right away just as well as their Ruger MK2's. Often times they do, and owners have no problems, but often they don't, and that is often the factory's fault. But it is what it is, and if one wants a nicely operating one, they are going to likely have to work and troubleshoot problems with them....just like you said.

Originally Posted by ithacaartist

I agree with your observation about others' misconception/confusion about who made what, Stoeger of Erma, and have noticed regularly that some listings on auction/classified sites mix the two in their descriptions or titles.

Yes, the degree of ignorance and confusion between the only two toggle action .22LR brands, causes the uninformed (ignorant) to lump both brands together, make them interchangable as if they are the same brand pistol, and I have read some people who DO realize the differences in the designs, but still claim that Erma made the .22 Lugers for Stoeger! I attribute this to since they were the only two .22LR, (non conversion kit) "P08-like" brands, that it is easy for the uninformed to get them confused to the point where they think they are the same pistol. That and people talking about what they don't know. It amazes me since all they have to do is to google them up to see the vast differences between the two. True there's not a huge amount of info on either of them online, but there's certainly enough for people to adequately learn the differences between the two.

Originally Posted by ithacaartist

The largely-Zamak-constructed toggle pistols by Erma did not set the scene very well for toggle pistols, that's for sure. Zamak, particularly with a little age, can be brittle, for sure. The same problems and remedies found in your Stoegers also happen in Ermas. I would observe that the Ermas may be a bit fussier than Stoegers to tame into acceptable reliability.

I've always wondered:..."What were they thinking!!"....regarding Erma making some of theirs out of Zamak pot metal. The same cheapo, easy to crack pot metal our toy cap pistols were made out of back in the '50's and '60's! I have read that there are a few Erma .22LR's that were made with steel frames and steel parts and that those are rare, but I haven't seen any pictures of those steel frame Erma's in .22 LR and cannot confirm if that is accurate. I honestly don't know about that. Wouldn't it be great if someone used a scanner on an Erma .22 and replicated it out of steel powder on one of those laser printers like one company did with their laser printed 1911 pistol? Or even just made a steel or aluminum one on a standard CNC machine. Hopefully someone in the future will do that.

Originally Posted by ithacaartist

I would disagree that there is any delay to the action of any toggle gun other than those of the original Parabellum design, or copies of it, such as the Houston Lugers or the 70s' Mausers. There is nothing to lock the chamber in battery, retard the motion of the breech block, or move the barrel extensions, on the Stoeger or Erma wannabes.

I have to agree to disagree with you on that ithacaartist. Those that know have correctly online termed the Stoeger .22 Luger as a retarded/delayed blowback action, but many people online have also incorrectly written that the Stoeger .22 Luger is just a straight blowback design, (and perhaps that's why that misinformation continues to proliferate) but it isn't. It is a retarded/delayed blowback, (albeit just barely) because of the friction and force involved with the bolt having to move the weight of the toggle plates upward. Just as with the delayed blowback Steyr Hahn model 1912 pistol, which has angled lugs on its barrel that creates friction and retards (delays) the rearward movement of the Steyr Hahn's barrel, so does the required frictional and weight movement of the toggle plates of the Stoeger .22 Luger (slightly) delay the bolt's rearward movement. Granted, it isn't a lot of delay nor a lot of friction or weight to move,....but it is there. Thus the Stoeger .22 Luger is correctly termed as a retarded/delayed blowback and not a straight blowback (like say the Ruger 10/22 rifle is). My Stoeger .22 Lugers have barrels that are pinned to the frame and do not move as the Georg Luger designed P08's barrels move a short distance.

Originally Posted by ithacaartist

One Erma model your description does not address is the KGP series, begun in 1968, and lasting until the bitter end of production in the late 80s-early 90s. These models are constructed with only one Zamak component (aside from its cast trigger), albeit a major one--the grip frame. Since there is no relative motion between the grip frame and upper on these, the only wear evident will be caused by assembly/disassembly. The KGP series was a new design then, supplanting the actions of the earlier La- and Ep-22s, and tend to be more dependable and easier to cure of maladies in function. They have their own foibles, not the least of which is their tendency to throw their extractors, but generally have much better adherence to the look/lines of an original Luger. They are, however, scaled down. The KGP-69, which is the .22lr, is about 3/4 size, and the KGP-68A, which came in .380 and .32 auto, maybe about 2/3 scale.

I note your mention of the .380 and .32 Erma toggle actions, but those don't really apply in the discussion between Erma .22LR toggle actions and Stoeger .22LR Lugers, since I was only talking about the .22LR ones. The Erma KGP series in .22LR (I think) is the one that I've read (incorrectly or not) that Erma made a very few completely out of steel. But again, I can't confirm that and do not know. With Erma making three different series of .22LR toggle action pistols, plus the Erma .380's and .32's, the waters do get a bit muddied on the correct history of the Erma toggle actions.

It's easy with the Stoeger 22LR Lugers since Stoeger only made two versions....an aluminum frame and a steel frame. One interesting thing I have noticed about the Stoeger steel frame one is....some steel frames have the depression for the green and red safety dots, while some other steel frame ones don't have the dot depressions at all nor the green and red dots. I find that interesting that I have not read anything about that online yet. But I have seen myself steel frame Stoeger's without the green and red safety dot depressions. I have also seen both steel and aluminum frame Stoeger .22 Lugers that have the engraving for the word "Luger" on the opposite side of the frame. Another interesting deviation. Then there's that awful looking adjustable rear sight that was put on some of the Stoeger .22LR Lugers. But that's just a two bolt add on, and not really a change in design. Fuggly ugly looking thing though. Totally messes up the historical looks of the pistol in my opinion. Plus, if one wants to remove it, that leaves exposed two ugly bolt holes in the rear of the Stoeger's receiver thus totally messing up the looks of the pistol. I've seen a few like that on Gunbroker that had the adjustable rear sight removed with the two ugly exposed holes in the rear of the frame. I wouldn't have one of those.

Originally Posted by ithacaartist

Aside from brittleness, Zamak is also problematic to refinish. Blackened at the factory, the original finish is almost impossible to reproduce, and a coating-style finish such a Cerakote would be the most reasonable method of rehabilitating one. I wish that Erma castings were all-aluminum, like your Stoegers!

That's interesting ithacaartist. I didn't know about the Zamak on the Erma's being a problem to refinish. Good to know. Like you, I also wish the Erma's were either aluminum or steel, since (in my opinion) they DO look a lot more like the P08 (with the exception of not having a P08-like flat plate on the left side) than the Stoeger .22 Lugers do. When I first was thinking about getting a "P08-like" .22LR pistol, at first I really liked the looks of the Erma .22's better than the Stoeger's. Since especially the toggle action of the Erma's looked so much more like the P08 than the Stoeger does. But after reading post after post in thread after thread, plus review articles too about the Erma's and their Zamak pot metal and how it cracks, breaks and crumbles, I decided since I wanted to shoot them to get the Stoeger. If only someone would resurrect the Erma toggle action 22's in aluminum or steel.....if only.





.