Yes it’s a great bullseye gun. Very accurate
Here in Italy they can be found at cheap prices (around 250 euros). Over the years I have personally seen numerous examples for sale at my LGS, all in excellent condition. Unfortunately they were chambered in 7.65mm Parabellum (.30 Luger), an increasingly expensive and increasingly difficult to find cartridge. Unfortunately at the time they were in production, the 9mm Parabellum for civilian pistols was banned in Italy, so only the .30 Luger and 9x18 Police ones were available (I saw a few in this caliber too). I don't know if they even existed in .380 ACP. Unfortunately, I don't think they ever made them in 9x21 IMI which is the most popular pistol caliber in Italy. They are certainly very beautiful and well made pistols, as well as interesting from a mechanical and constructional point of view. If I happened to find an example in .32 ACP caliber or, if it exists, in .380 ACP caliber, I would certainly consider purchasing it.
Yes exactlySometimes it seems difficult to distinguish a delayed blowback system from a locked breech system.
In my opinion there are two simple ways to distinguish them: the first, and most immediate, is that in delayed blowback systems, when you manually operate the slide, the barrel chamber and the breech face of the slide/bolt immediately separate from each other because there is nothing that keeps them locked together. The second way is to observe that in delayed blowback systems, an external force is needed to make the delayed system work. For example, in the HK P7 delayed blowback system, gas action is required. In the MAB P15 delayed blowback system it is necessary the rotation force of the bullet in the barrel. In the HK P9S and Benelli B76 system I would say that the backward push of the case on the breech of the bolt is required to make the system act. In the absence of these external forces, the delayed blowback systems work like a straight blowback system.
On the other hand, in locked breech systems, barrel and slide remain locked together for a certain travel regardless of whether the cycle is performed manually or during live firing.
This is why in Italy we talk about pistols with stable closing (in the case of locked breech systems), pistols with labile closing (in the case of the straight blowback system) and pistols with labile closing with opening delay (in the case of the delayed blowback system).
I respectfully disagree. It is not a semantic question, it is a conceptual question. To affirm that a system is of the locked breech type, it is necessary that barrel and slide/bolt are locked together. Think of the Glock: if there were no locking block in the frame, to tilt the barrel down at some point, slide and barrel would continue to recoil together precisely because they are locked together. In delayed blowback pistols, the moment you retract the slide, barrel and breech separate from each other. The fact that in some delayed blowback systems the bolt moves slightly with respect to the slide is irrelevant because in any case these systems do not keep barrel and slide locked together. This is why, I repeat, in Italy we use the "labile closure" concept for blowback and delayed blowback pistols. In this regard, I will tell you a story that I think is interesting. Around the end of the 1990s, Tanfoglio marketed a South African-designed pistol called Tanfoglio P25 in Italy. It is the same gun that was marketed a few years ago by Wilson Combat and which was called Wilson ADP, if I remember correctly. It was a 9x19 caliber pistol that worked on the same principle as the HK P7. In order to be marketed in Italy, the chamber was reamed 2mm deeper to be able to fire the 9x21 IMI as the 9x19 was still banned. Do you know what happened? It happened that, as the 9x21 case closed the gas hole which was slightly forward the 9x19mm case, the slide moved back quickly for about 2mm, then the gas hole was finally released, the gases entered the hole and the slide closed again against the barrel and then opened again and finally completed the firing cycle. All of this is to say that without that hole, those kind of pistols are just blowbacks.Perhaps it’s just semantics, but to me, since the breechblock is locked in place until the slide moves rearwards I consider this a locked breech action. It’s not night and day different from the FN FAL’s tilting bolt action.
Tanfoglio simply tried to propose a 9mm blowback pistol that fired a very expensive ammunition due to the very expensive case.
It’s not locked together though. A locked breech keeps the slide and barrel locked together as the slide gets moved rearward. The Benelli doesn’t work like that.Perhaps it’s just semantics, but to me, since the breechblock is locked in place until the slide moves rearwards I consider this a locked breech action. It’s not night and day different from the FN FAL’s tilting bolt action.
I respectfully disagree. It is not a semantic question, it is a conceptual question. To affirm that a system is of the locked breech type it is necessary that barrel and slide/bolt are locked together. Think of the Glock: if there were no locking block in the frame, to tilt the barrel down at some point, slide and barrel would continue to recoil together precisely because they are locked together. In delayed blowback pistols, the moment you retract the slide, barrel and breech separate from each other. The fact that in some delayed blowback systems the bolt moves slightly with respect to the slide is irrelevant because in any case these systems do not keep barrel and slide locked together. This is why, I repeat, in Italy we use the "labile closure" concept for blowback and delayed blowback pistols. In this regard, I will tell you a story that I think is interesting. Around the end of the 1990s, Tanfoglio marketed a South African-designed pistol called Tanfoglio P25 in Italy. It is the same gun that was marketed a few years ago by Wilson Combat and which was called Wilson ADP, if I remember correctly. It was a 9x19 caliber pistol that worked on the same principle as the HK P7. In order to be marketed in Italy, the chamber was reamed 2mm deeper to be able to fire the 9x21 IMI as the 9x19 was still banned. Do you know what happened? It happened that, as the 9x21 case closed the gas hole which was slightly forward the 9x19mm case, the slide moved back quickly for about 2mm, then the gas hole was finally released, the gases entered the hole and the slide closed again against the barrel and then opened again and finally completed the firing cycle. All of this is to say that without that hole, those kind of pistols are just blowbacks.
Returning to the Benelli B76, there are some interesting videos on how it works. You can clearly see how the bolt movement is a simple tilting in place but above all you can see how, when fired, slide/bolt and barrel separate virtually instantly because they are not locked together.
Notice that in the Forgotten Weapons video, the word "locked" is pronounced but it is not referring to the bolt/barrel lock because that lock simply does not exist.
I did an internet search but found no reviews on QS Armi 9x21 IMI caliber pistols. There is only a few sales announcements.Have you got a source on the QS Armi blowback 9mm P?
I would like to point out that in the Forgotten Weapons review the role of the push force of the case (pressure) on the breech face of the bolt is clear. The reviewer speaks of two opposing forces (which are precisely the push force of the case as opposed to the resistance of the slide to retract, given by the mass (inertia) of the slide itself, by the recoil spring and by the hammer spring). Without the push force of the spent case on the bolt's breech face (which causes the 8-shaped toggle lever to hold down the bolt for an instant), the bolt would simply move upwards dragged by the slide with minimal resistances given above all by the lower step between the bolt and the frame. In fact, manually retracting the slide, the pistol will act like a simple straight blowback.Yeah I’ve watched that video multiple times. Ian does a nice job reviewing it, but it’s definitely a delayed blowback design.
I am familiar with the 7mm Penna (and the 7.92 VBR) to which I would refer whenever the subject of "Why don't THEY make a .32 Super?" Well, THEY did, and now we have the .30 Super Carry, all of which have sunk without a trace.
Have you got a source on the QS Armi blowback 9mm P?
I think they were in cahoots with STI at one time. You could get a lot of 7mms in a 2011 magazine.
Kind of like the Gyrojet; expensive rockets, cheap launcher.
Google Translate is pretty good. That article was very optimistic... in 2001. Where's the beef?