If I had known more about the locking system at the time P7 were on sale, it might have been enough to push me to buy one.
All I could see in the ads were 9mm and squeeze cocking. However the locking mechanism is fascinating: a gas delay blowback mechanism
Which works by gas lubrication.
Gas lubrication contradicts the long standing Army contention that case lubrication dangerously and unpredictably raises combustion and case thrust. This belief is based on a 100 + year old coverup of why low number M1903’s were blowing up on the firing line. P.O Ackley later built on the Army coverup by claiming his Ackley Improved cases “reduced bolt” and therefore allowed the use of insanely high pressure rounds. All of this is nonsense. The need for case lubrication in the P7 pistol shows there is something off with these belief systems, but the funny thing is, humans will accept contradictory ideas in order to remain part of the group think. Ideally, case to chamber friction as close to zero as possible is ideal for all mechanisms for reliable feed and extraction.
And then the P7 uses combustion gases to prevent the slide from opening.
From Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_&_Koch_P7
The P7 is a semi-automatic blowback-operated firearm. It features a unique gas-delayed blowback system modeled on the Swiss Pistole 47 W+F (Waffenfabrik Bern) prototype pistol[5] (and ultimately on the Barnitzke system first used in the Volkssturmgewehr 1-5),[6] which used gas pressures from the ignited cartridge and fed them through a small port in the barrel (in front of the chamber) to retard the rearward motion of the slide. This is accomplished by means of a piston contained inside a cylinder located under the barrel that opposes the rearward motion of the slide until the gas pressure has declined—after the bullet has left the barrel—hence allowing the slide to end its rearward motion, opening the breech and ejecting the empty cartridge case.[7]
The chamber has 18 flutes[8] that aid in the extraction process by allowing combustion gases to flow between the fired case and the chamber walls, preventing the case from "sticking" to the chamber walls. The drawback of this system is that the breech "opens" slightly prematurely to allow the slide to initiate its rearward motion. The high temperature gases cycling through a tube located below the chamber area and above the trigger made the early versions of this pistol uncomfortable, according to some, to shoot after the content of two magazines were fired due to heating. The advantages of this system are a simpler manufacturing process due to the absence of a locking system and a high mechanical accuracy due to the barrel being fixed in the frame; the barrel does not execute any sort of lateral or vertical movement during the operating cycle as with the Browning cam-action systems common to many other locked breech pistols.[9]
I have been able to shoot several P7's. The slide moves faster than human perception. All I saw was the case in the air, but I never was able to observe slide movement because it moves so fast. The P7's I handled were well built and obviously very expensive to make. I am sure the expense of manufacture was one reason it went out of production.
The squeeze cocking mechanism I did not like and I think it may have been the greatest reason the pistol disappeared from LEO use. In theory the user squeezes the front strap then pulls the trigger. People can easily get simple sequences out of order when under stress and I am very sure that a stressed LEO got the sequence out of order. Pulling the trigger and then squeezing the strap will result in the striker falling. It is very probable that some LEO, meaning only to squeeze the front strap in a potentially life threatening situation, pulled the trigger, and then squeezed the front strap shooting someone who did not need to be dead at the time. No doubt there are sealed court records that we will never see, where a settlement was made on a negligent shooting. Let us not be judgemental to someone's confusion under extreme stress as everyone has gotten some operational sequence out of order, or pressed the wrong button on the remote.
I remember the
1980's Audi 5000 lawsuits on "sudden acceleration". Drivers claimed they were experts, knew the difference between a brake pedal and gas pedal, and sued Audi claiming the car was prone to sudden acceleration. I saw several
"News Programs" on liberal networks supporting the victims claims. It turns out, sometimes drivers confuse the difference between the brake and gas pedal, and that lead to automobile companies installing black boxes in vehicles to protect themselves in lawsuits. Analysis of the black boxes positively show time and again that the driver was pressing the accelerator to the floor, and not the brake. I recall hearing of recent crashes that made the National News about killer cars that accelerated out of control, that once the black box was removed and analyzed, turns out the crash was all due to driver confusion about the brake or accelerator.
