PPS 43
I see one is going for $389.00 with free freight. I got the hots for one, but have read some comments about massive failures with injuries. I'm thinking about adding a lazer so I can shoot from the waist with a 2-hand grip. Any have experience with this gun?
0
-
Sounds kind of low on price. Are you sure this one is full auto? I fired one years ago and it was nice. Very controllable. I haven't heard anything about failures.
This is the PPS 43 submachinegun I fired.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PPS_submachine_gun0 -
If your talking about the so called PPS 43 "pistols" with the U.S. made receivers on the market now? IMHO you would be better served by buying a Tokarev or a CZ 52. They are heavy clumsy clunkers with a folding stock that is welded shut. The ones I've picked up felt like at least 7LBS+, weight wise.
If you really feel you need the firepower of a 35 round mag go with one of the police surplus Glocks, and buy a couple of the 33 round mags that are made for the G 18. It would be much more handy and effective then the PPS 43, which has the ergonomics of a blacksmiths anvil.0 -
If you think PPS43 Suderevs are klunky you want to handle the PPSH41.
I've seen two types of buffers; rawhide and rubber. The rubber bumper accelerates cycling and should reduce breakups of those rewatted dewatts.
I can't see how even a half fast welding job would fail on those blowbacks,0 -
Yes, I am talking about the "pistols". I am sure they are heavy and klunky. I have a CZ-52 that works fine and lots of ammo. I am turned on by the evil appearance of the PPS43. Of course I could never shoot it with one hand as a pistol. It is a 2- hand gun. I was thinking fo adding a forward pistol grip and a lazer as in by post. That might be fun.
Also, I would like to completely remove the stock. if legal. Thanks for the input. I agree with you V35. Even Elmers glue should hold.0 -
The only way to legally add a vertical foregrip is to obtain ATF approval to make an AOW ($200 fee). Remember, a pistol is designed to be fired with one hand, & this gun is a pistol.
Neal0 -
nmyers, thanks. I did not consider that problem. I quess you would have to hold it by the mag well. 0 -
I bought two of these. Ergonomically, they ARE clunks, as pistols. Accuracy-wise, they are not bad. I fired over 150 rounds from each gun the first time out, with the target strings being a minimum of ten shots and some strings being 20. This was two-handed firing from a rest at 25 yards, and both guns shot consistently inside of 3 inches, with some groups being less than two inches. There was more vertical dispersion than horizontal, some groups being less than an inch wide. I attribute the vertical dispersion to the instability of trying to shoot from a 'parallelogram hold' ([8]) (for lack of a better description) while not having a buttstock. But they shoot well enough to bounce aerosol cans at 50 yards very dependably, and I partied on a propane canister at 100. I find the most comfortable position for the forward hand, is under the cooling jacket. I am going to cut one or two magazines in half, for somewhat easier shooting from a rest.
I had two 'stovepipes' of empties. There were no other failures to feed or eject. I was using Yugo '86, Chinese '90, and Bulgarian '51 ammo. The Yugo and Bulgarian both produced misfires, but the Chinese did not. I had the same problems with the same ammo in pistols, and as with the pistols, when the rounds were tried a second time, they all fired (except for one Bulgarian round, which refused to fire no matter what). If one were to use one of these guns for home defense, commercial ammo with softer (and fresher) primers would be in order, just as with regular pistols.
I tried some hip shooting today, at 50 feet. They seem to be real decently pointable for that, even without a front grip, and the relatively low recoil means one can pound in repeat shots very fast. I don't know how fast the military Tok rounds whistle from the longer barrel of the PPS, but I tried some penetration shots on hardwood that was 8 inches thick, and the rounds went all the way through and plowed the dirt after exiting[:0].
I've read some concern on some of the forums about premature bolt-opening because the bolts have been lightened by various cuts and holes, and because they are fired from the bolt being in a static position (as opposed to the bolt still having some forward inertia at the instant of cartridge ignition in the fixed firing pin design). I examined empties, and I found that many of them showed signs of a lot of pressure remaining in the chamber as the cases were travelling rearwards. The case bodies were 'rolled out' forward, leaving almost no neck. A little more, and they would have looked like 9x25 Mauser. A heavier bolt is probably in order, or maybe the use of a 7.63 Mauser equivalent load, especially if one wants to recover useable brass.
Apparently several outfits have been making these guns, using different techniques, both here and abroad. Mine were made at the Radom plant in Poland from (new) original PPS43's. An examination shows that a new rear receiver cover (which will only accept a modified semi-auto bolt) was lapped over and rivited onto a barrel shroud from which the original rear receiver section was cut away. The stocks are fixed in place by small welds which prevent pin removal, and by an enlarged head on the stock release button which then cannot be depressed. These could be restored without difficulty after obtaining an SBR permit, but I've seen internet photos of fairly massive internal welds from some manufacturers.
Would I do it again? Well, in view of other stuff that is available for the different applications, I'm trying to think of an application where these would shine the best. Maybe a dual mount on a pedestal bolted to the porch railing, for gopher control...[;)]0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
7 comments