TargetTalk

The MG2 is way more reliable than the 102E, although even the older pistol can be kept running pretty well. Only by people, though, who get over the 208/GSP hurdle - it may be necessary to invest more time (and spare parts) into the project than one cleaning session per season. We've had that discussion before, and there are obviously two factions here - those who get it and live happily with it, and those who'll never understand it. It's kind of a religious problem. So, as for the second group - stay away from it (or them) and do us all a favour and don't try to discuss something you can't grasp...

Thanks very much for your trouble Julio. Very much appreciated. Very helpful.

No it doesn´t ..Yes it does. No it doesn´t ..Yes it does. No it doesn´t ..Yes it does…
Every time we have a new thread involving the MG2 it ends invariably with the same old story.
My MG2 s/n 2233 has already digested 8 different ammunitions. Two of them were rifle ammo giving me lower speeds than the rest. Well… Never, yes I´ll say it again..,never had a single feeding issue or problem. I would like to add that this is the easiest loading magazine I´ve ever had and I ´ve had many. A close friend in my club bought another MG2 s/n 2232 after shooting mine about two months later, been sure that my pistol had no issues at all. This second pistol has had ejecting issues from the very start but never had a feeding problem. I want to say that he reshaped the new type extractor p/n 2010 cutting off that kind of horn not found in older guns, and now his gun is very reliable. I recently have done the same with mine.
Unlike many detractors I have a name and surname you all can see, and a face too.
Julio

Thanks, Julio.
I am, on your behalf, glad that you, at least, have one fully functional, and one some less so, MG2.
I do not.
I have a MG2, but it has had a number of issues. I have more or less given up on it.
And I, like some other here in this forum, was not allowed to use my MG2 at the clubs outings, due to high velocity brass partickles disturbing bystanding fellow shooter(s). When the cases ruptured at firing my MG2.

I think it is apropriate, to let other potential MG2-buyers learn about the very serious trobles more MG2 owners have got into.
Then, this empirical info given, every one may be able du evaluate the pros and cons of this firearm.
And whenever they may encounter problems with the MG2, they cannot claim they were not warned!
I strongly feel I have to pass my less positive experiences from my MG2 to the shooting sport fraternity.
That has releaved my heart some.
Thanks.

To all who have MG2 they don't like, how about posting the guns on the Buy-Sell-Trade section of this forum? After I get mine and get it up and running next week, I might want to have a spare :-)

In general, I find that high end semi-automatic target guns are like sheep: They know when they are alone and don't like it.

This applies to semi-auto shotguns (!) rifles and pistols. The only semi-auto gun that I have owned that has NEVER malfunctioned is a Colt Government Model 1911 Hard Ball gun built by Air Force armorer Lou Willing in the late fifties. I have put thousands of rounds through it with no failures what-so-ever.

Does anyone else on the list have a semi-auto that has never failed?

Tillman in Florida

tleddy wrote: Does anyone else on the list have a semi-auto that has never failed?

Never and never....well, I owned for many years a Hämmerli 208 that (almost) never failed.
I own a SIG 210 (9 x 19) that is utterly reliable!
And I own a Walther GSP that just about never failes, too. That GSP digests all brands of ammo...(the GSP is certainly not a beauty, but..)

The problems I (and reportedly many more) have experienced using (trying to use) the MG2 is not just a question of occasional jams, or misfires. It is a complex aggregate of interfering constructional shortcomings, say lack of sufficient R&D that renders the MG2 useless for competitional use.
And that is a very different matter.

tleddy wrote:To all who have MG2 they don't like, how about posting the guns on the Buy-Sell-Trade section of this forum? After I get mine and get it up and running next week, I might want to have a spare :-)

In general, I find that high end semi-automatic target guns are like sheep: They know when they are alone and don't like it.

This applies to semi-auto shotguns (!) rifles and pistols. The only semi-auto gun that I have owned that has NEVER malfunctioned is a Colt Government Model 1911 Hard Ball gun built by Air Force armorer Lou Willing in the late fifties. I have put thousands of rounds through it with no failures what-so-ever.

Does anyone else on the list have a semi-auto that has never failed?

Tillman in Florida

My Glock 34 has never had a failure and has disgest a sorts of 9mm factory and hand loads.

Not reliable guns... wrote:

tleddy wrote: Does anyone else on the list have a semi-auto that has never failed?

Never and never....well, I owned for many years a Hämmerli 208 that (almost) never failed.
I own a SIG 210 (9 x 19) that is utterly reliable!
And I own a Walther GSP that just about never failes, too. That GSP digests all brands of ammo...(the GSP is certainly not a beauty, but..)

The problems I (and reportedly many more) have experienced using (trying to use) the MG2 is not just a question of occasional jams, or misfires. It is a complex aggregate of interfering constructional shortcomings, say lack of sufficient R&D that renders the MG2 useless for competitional use.
And that is a very different matter.

Really your statement doesn't make much sense. If there are some that function flawlessly (seems to be more and more) I doubt there is a functional design flaw. There maybe manufacturing flaws, or design flaws that lead to manufacturing flaws or material issues, but it is evident that the pistol can function as designed.

I can understand your frustration, I'd be pretty disappointed if I laid out a coule of grand and I couldn't get it to work. But the other side there are lots of people who like nothing better then to bitch and complain. It looks to me like the factory is doing everything they can to support the pistol, have you taken advantage of this? If not why, if so what did they do or say? Give some fact, what vintage is your pistol, what ammo, what parts have been changed by the factory. We all know there were issues in the beginning as there will be and has been with every pistol, but it seems like most have been addressed, so how is it you have such a pistol that is so bad, if you have taken advantage of getting it fixed by the factory

Also your warnings probably would carry more weight if you posted a real name

tleddy wrote: Does anyone else on the list have a semi-auto that has never failed?
Tillman in Florida

My Pardini SP has had 3 failures to feed in the last 6 or 7 thousand rounds:

1. Squib round (low recoil and landed low on the target)
2. Failure to cycle off a sandbag (my 10 year old was shooting, and may have interfered with the bolt)
3. A stove pipe during a rapid fire target (this one a real failure)

So I'll give the gun the benefit of the doubt, and leave the score at 1 failure for the gun, 1 failure for the ammo (RWS target), and 1 failure for the operator in 7K rounds. I think that's pretty outstanding performance. That's with a strict maintenance regimen of cleaning the gun twice a year whether it needs it or not.

Steve.

P.S. Not to start a war, but why do people prefer the MG2 over the Pardini? Weight and Balance? I've never seen an MG2, but I've shot most of the others, and for me the Pardini works as well as anything else.

Basically it has almost zero recoil it feels like shooting an Air Pistol. Has a longer barrel, so in theory, with all other things being equal (which they are not) it could be more accurate (especialy out at 50 yards). It's very light the grip has lots of adjustments, plus it looks really cool too.

Please don't start up the bitching again - I asked for this thread to be about the mechanism of working of the gun, not whether some didn't work. I'm sure we've all read the other relevant threads.

OK, thanks to those who have responded to my request, I now have an understanding of the feeding mechanism... Next question, how is the low recoil achieved?

Richard H wrote:Basically it has almost zero recoil it feels like shooting an Air Pistol. Has a longer barrel, so in theory, with all other things being equal (which they are not) it could be more accurate (especialy out at 50 yards). It's very light the grip has lots of adjustments, plus it looks really cool too.

It's interesting, if you watch the video's http://karlslundesport.dk/default.asp?A ... u&Item=114 You can see the MG2 recoil noticeably less than some of the other guns. You can also notice that there is no noticeable reaction until the bolt hits the buffer (by then the bullet's long gone). I'm very curious what the recoil absorbing mechanism is, and how it differs from the other guns with absorbers.

Steve.

There is no recoil absorber of any kind in the MG2. It is the hammer position and the way it works along with the hammer spring and the advanced point of its anchorage what create downgoing forces that oppose to those “natural” upgoing forces generated after the shot. The hammer spring elongates when the hammer is cocked thus avoiding the problem found in the only pistol we know with a hammer that moves the same way: the Baikal IJ 35 or IZH 35. All hammer springs are compressed when the hammer is cocked with the only exception of the MG2.

Julio

Richard H wrote: Basically it has almost zero recoil it feels like shooting an Air Pistol.

No way. That is of course misleading information. Sorry having to state that very firmly.
---
The MG2 does, however, have a relativey low bore center line, compared to the "grip center" of the palm, refering to other guns. The grip angle, as gun is delivered from the factory, is obviously adjusted for the lowest possible bore center line angle, thus giving the least possible muzzle rise, and thus less "perceived" recoil, and fster recovery.
But this unusual grip angle gives the gun a distinctive "upward-pointing" tendency of the muzzle. With the grip djusted to a more conventional "slightly over sight line" natural pointing tendency, the bore center line angel becomes less favorable, and commensurable to guns like the Morini CM22 and some other models.
---
And Julio: Thanks for your mechanical considerations of the hammer spring. I think you have got a point there.

The MG2 (excluding the RF-version) has no absorber incorporated, but has a large rubber buffer. This softening the back-slamming of the slide some (noticeable when using standard power+ ammo, I think.)

Some of the recoil force (energy) is "charged" into the spring tension of the hammer spring during recoil. As Julio states, this is performed via the return rotation of the hammer. In many pistols, the hammer spring is positioned subperpendicular to the bore senter line.

Mechanical recoil energy does not siply vanish. It must be "redistributed" (cocking hammer spring) or dissipated over some time (buffers, and partly absorbers) or counteracted by mass moving in opposite direction (absorbers).
The MG2 has another unusual feature: the cradle. This cradle has some mass, though, it does not move forward or backwards, it rotates some angle on the pivot pin. This cradle starts to move when the slide has moved some distance rearward. Some recoil force (energy) is used to move the cradle, thus extending some of the recoil dissipation for some microseconds. Some energy is momentarily "stored" in the cradlemovement(s). The mass of the cradle is low, but it is rotating fast. ( "Incremental Energy of rotation) = 1/2*(momentum of inertia)*(incremental angular velocity)).
---
Feeding of rounds from the magazine. This one is not straight forward. Cartridgemass (mostly due to the mass of the bullet) is moving rearward, changing point of gravity very slightly, thus bringing in counteracting forces shoving the gun forward slightlly (refer to moving yourself in an floating rowing boat).
But the cartridge is pushed rearward by magazine spring tension...
The picture of contribution of recoil"alteration" of the horisontally arranged magazine is a bit unclear (at least to me). But, anyhow, the movement of cartridges in the magaxine is different from other guns, and could contribute just a very litle bit to recoil"supression"?

Yes, The MG2 (could) have quite a few pros. (f the cons could be cured once and for all...) :-)
Regards,
Heinrich Bauer.[/url]