Options for .32

[Tycho]

I put the same question to Stefano - if I don't need the additional plates (they are pretty small) as long as I don't use hot ammo, I'd rather take them off...

[deadeyedick]

Congratulations Tycho. I noticed that the trigger on your MG4 is not adjustable vertically, or rotatable like the MG2, or the MG4 on their website. Has Stefano mentioned anything about this change?

[Tycho]

The trigger is something I specified - I bought a straight trigger two years ago from Cesare, and I like it much better than the adjustable one. Don't ask me why. So now I order everything from Matchguns right away with the straight one. AFAIK the original design is still available.

[deadeyedick]

Thanks Tycho, I also prefer the fixed trigger, but didn't know it was available. I will be looking forward to hearing how it performs [ like many others ].....but in the meantime, it looks like a million bucks.

[El Impatio]

It arrived. Looks good. Will post review as soon as tested.

We are awaiting the first live fire report!
5 days, no info...how come?
Either you are too buzy firing your new gun,... or it is not up to expectations?

[Tycho]

My, aren't we in a hurry... I ordered it about 18 months ago, so what are a few days more or less... But, a) I am pretty busy, got some work to do before xmas break, and b) are the open air shooting ranges all closed - it's winter here, you know, snow and cold and so - so I have to get to a indoor range, which aren't all that plentyful around here. Probably next week. 25m season won't start until March, anyway.

[julioalperi]

TYCHO.
Jorge Llames Spain rapid fire champion (rapid fire junior world champion at 19) Uses the same trigger in his MG2 ( could be longer) you have in your MG4. It is the longest I´ve seen by far in a standard pistol. I could see it in person about 2 months ago in our province RF championship. We talked for a long while. One thing I can tell you is that he shoots RWS R50.

[Brian James]

Tyco,

I apprecaite there are not many ranges near you, but have you had a chacne to try out your MG4 yet?

Brian

[Tycho]

Well, I finally got around to testing the thing. Took me long enough, but sometimes work has to come before hobby.

Many people will be disappointed, because the MG4 actually seems to work - very well indeed. We put about 250 shots through at, at sub zero temps (usually not the favourite of Italian pistols and/or .32 ammo) - zero malfunctions of the pistol. As I used up a lot of old, differing .32 handloads, not all of them made it to the target, but that has nothing to do with the MG4 :-)

Some facts, in the order of them coming to mind: The MG4 is heavier than a MG2, but one gets used to it pretty fast, contrary to most .32 it's not exceedingly noseheavy. I shot it without the plates on the slide, mainly for optical reasons. Stefano says that they are actually good for precision and function. The recoil springs are the heaviest I've seen so far on a .32. The trigger is completely different from the MG2, needs special tools for adjustment, but I found something that resembles my favourite MG2 settings. Time will tell if the new construction holds up under the heavier recoil, and I'll do some more adjusting anyway, it's not 100% where I want it. Grip is identical to the MG2, as are the sights. Interior looks interesting, with a asymmetrical cradle and the HUGE mag tube. Cartridges can be ejected without fiddling around, unlike the late series MG2. As no bullet got stuck in the barrel despite lousy ignition in some really old handloads, and looking at the ejection speed of the empty cases (appr. Mach 2, straight to the right) I guess that Matchguns did not fall for the old "trick" of extra-tight barrels.

Shooting the MG4 is a pleasure. Recoil recovery is excellent, the pistol jumps (in my hand, no generalization intended!) as much left as up, almost no momentum felt in the wrist, the arm falls automatically back into the holding zone, sight picture stays intact throughout. Precision is pretty good (as well as I can judge this when my finger freezes after 10 secs) even at 50m - rare for a .32 (couldn't use the 25m range for the first hour). Seems to work with every ammo, from a 1.3gr handload to factory Lapua. According to Stefano, Lapua gives the best groups, for my taste it's too fast. I still like my 1.4gr N310 / 90gr HBWC, and the MG4 shoots them nicely. Cases get banged around a bit, ejection speeds are very high, I had some cases rebounding off the wall for another three meters. Interestingly, slide velocity doesn't feel to be so high, there is no "slam" into the elbow despite the very low barrel axis. The primers look very strange, half blown out of the case, probably to do with the design of the firing pin. All in all, I'm looking forward very much to the next season.

PS, disclaimer: No, I am neither a shareholder nor working on a provision of Matchguns. It just happens that this thing seems to work, and there was so much BS about Matchguns in the last few years that I don't see a problem with a good report once in a time. There is no data about long term reliability here. If you can't judge that, don't buy one. If you don't know what you're doing, don't buy one. If you have zero talent as a mechanic, don't buy one. And don't blame anybody else for your decisions.

[JulianY]

If you have zero talent as a mechanic

Sorry, Tycho but for that money I expect it to work. its like saying "hear is you new Lexus but you can expect that you will have to fix it before you drive it." Don't get me wrong, I am a fan or Cezar but I am a shooter, not a mechanic. This is the last kind of pressure i need in a match. I am waiting for reliability and then I will probably trade in my Manhurin

Julian

[Tycho]

Julian, I'm not talking about reliability in a general way. What I mean is, you have to be able to fix things. On .32's, all kind of stuff breaks, except for the Manurhin and perhaps the Hammerli 240. I've seen 280s fall apart, SP20s, Uniques, GSPs, FAS 603, Pardinis etc. Screws come loose, axles wander, housings crack, firing pins break. You have a Manurhin and you're happy with it? Never sell it, get yourself a good stash of firing pins (if you can...), and never switch to a pistol. My guess right now is that the MG4 is as reliable and strong as any other .32 on the market (and probably better than some of them, but I don't want to flame other manufacturers here), but may be a bit more complicated to service. Further, the best support herearound comes directly from the factory, but that means that I have to be able to describe a wish to them - and I know plenty of (excellent) shooters who are as clueless about their pistols as they are about the backside of Pluto...

[deadeyedick]

and I know plenty of (excellent) shooters who are as clueless about their pistols as they are about the backside of Pluto...

We must know some of the same people Tycho. All sarcasm aside, thanks for the mini review...pretty much what I expected [ and hoped for ].
Please keep us informed as the weather improves, and your usage increases.

[JulianY]

On .32's, all kind of stuff breaks, except for the Manurhin and perhaps the Hammerli 240. I've seen 280s fall apart, SP20s, Uniques, GSPs, FAS 603, Pardinis etc. Screws come loose, axles wander, housings crack, firing pins break. ...... My guess right now is that the MG4 is as reliable and strong as any other .32 on the market

My guess is you probably right, MG have been making a big effort this last year. it seems to me they will start to get results soon.

You have a Manurhin and you're happy with it? Never sell it, get yourself a good stash of firing pins (if you can...),

I love it. incredible accurate and cheaper to run that a 32 on factory ammo. however mine has a 6 inch barrel which means I need a stunted grip to fit the box. :(


Julian

[Mike M.]

It's a little worrying, though, that nobody seems to be able to make a rock-reliable .32 pistol. The .22s are good...and there are .38s and .45s that function fine. But the .32 seems to be one long tale of woe.

Might be time for someone to do a .32 upper for a 1911....

That being said, if Match Guns can get the MG4 to perform at 50 yards, they might make real inroads in NRA Bullseye matches.

[Weekend Shooter]

I'm trying to figure out if the issues on the reliability are really so problematic or if there is an issue on the rather vast array of adjustments that can be made on the gun. If you read the Italian press review, one 'defect' they point out is the amount of variability that can be introduced that can put an inexperienced shooter in a quandary. If one wants reliability, indestructibility, and out of the box use, he/she should consider finding a 1960s Beretta 70s Target or shooting practical with a 1911 or a 92 Target.

I have an MG2 and so far the only concern is ejecting an unfired bullet which seems to be a little tedious at times depending on the cartridge (our local el cheapo brand seems a little long) or that you can pull the slide back with the safety on and the hammer down.

[JamesH]

It's a little worrying, though, that nobody seems to be able to make a rock-reliable .32 pistol. The .22s are good...and there are .38s and .45s that function fine. But the .32 seems to be one long tale of woe.

Might be time for someone to do a .32 upper for a 1911....

0.32 1911 has been done before.

0.32SWL was not a good pick for a cartridge to start with, flat sided cartridges are rarely good in autos (low pressure .22s an exception.

HBWC is not necessary for accuracy, .22 works fine with round nose bullets, why not 0.32?

It would be interesting to know the history, I reckon most people would have been using 0.32 revolvers so target quality cartridges would have been available, so the pistols were built around a non-optimal cartridge.

[Tycho]

I've heard a story (attention/disclaimer: hearsay! although from a reliable source) that one of the Italian manufacturers put together a working gun some years ago in .32 ACP, using round nosed bullets. Apparently, results were fantastic, precision a dream, even at 50m. But nobody was interested, especially on the ammo manufacturer's side...

[James Way]

It would be interesting to know the history, I reckon most people would have been using 0.32 revolvers so target quality cartridges would have been available, so the pistols were built around a non-optimal cartridge.

I once had a discussion with a Belgian shooter about this. He was in the military in the '60's and said most European shooters used the S&W model 14 (formerly called the K-38 Masterpiece) for the ISSF Center Fire course at the time, because .38 wadcutter ammunition was very easy to get. The S&W model 16 was not widely used because of the difficulties in getting .32 S&W Long wadcutter cartridges. For CISM Rapid Fire, he said they used low powered 9mm guns, which he described as "a mess."

Probably in the mid '70's, Walther introduced their GSP in .32 S&W Long. The caliber had several advantages: simple blow-back mechanism, fixed barrel, accurate at 25 meters, and mild recoil. The success of the GSP .32 S&W Long in some European countries was also explained by the gun legislation at the time. People didn’t need to apply for a new permit when they had the frame of a .22 that could fit a .32 conversion unit, since the .22 and .32 wadcutter are approximately the same length. The German manufacturers are strongly influenced by the so-called “Baukastensystem,” meaning modularity, or using the same parts in different products. Audi, VW, BMW, and Mercedes all apply this principle.

Apparently, Walther was the first to see the "hole in the market," and now the round has become a standard.

[JamesH]

0.32 ACP would have been my pick, a tapered rimless case and a round nose bullet would make for much better reliability.

[Spencer]

.32 S&W Long autos unreliable?
probably more a matter of the pistols rather than the cartridge. There seem to be a lot of GSPs and P240 still working flawlessly in this calibre.

0.32 ACP would have been my pick, a tapered rimless case and a round nose bullet would make for much better reliability.

.32ACP tapered???: (0.336" at both the neck and base)

Spencer