What Happened to the SSP??
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
Forum rules
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
What Happened to the SSP??
I suppose just for the heck of it---what of anything has been heard lately regarding the SSP? It seemed like last Winter, Spring and early summer we heard long dissertations on the SSP, and now I cannot recall the last time we heard anything. So basically what's out there???
-
DHURT
-
Not SSP owner yet
There are two SSPs in my club. I have testfired one.
A bit different feel, triggerpull ok, recoil a bit "unusual". The gun had one counterweight attached. The pistol is not heavy, and I would like to have another counterweight attatched to the rail under the barrel, up front.
There are issues with the magazines, however. Rims of the rounds have to be stacked very accurately in say "semi-double-coloumn" manner to work flawlessly. A bit of distraction during charging of the magaxines, and the gun can jam.
Sights cannot be adjusted without tools, it appears. I do not favor that.
I think some R & D is still needed for this pistol to become a winner.
A bit different feel, triggerpull ok, recoil a bit "unusual". The gun had one counterweight attached. The pistol is not heavy, and I would like to have another counterweight attatched to the rail under the barrel, up front.
There are issues with the magazines, however. Rims of the rounds have to be stacked very accurately in say "semi-double-coloumn" manner to work flawlessly. A bit of distraction during charging of the magaxines, and the gun can jam.
Sights cannot be adjusted without tools, it appears. I do not favor that.
I think some R & D is still needed for this pistol to become a winner.
As a user of the Walther SSP for some time now, I can say that it is a first-rate competition pistol and compares with the best. The pneumatic buffer is an innovative recoil suppression method as compared to the 'vibration muffler' of its predecessor, the GSP Expert.
To beat the recoil, several rapid fire pistols like Benelli-MP90S, Hammerli-SP20, Pardini SP New and Walther GSP Expert have limited the barrels to 4-4.5" as they impart a slightly lesser muzzle velocity (of the order of 50-100 ft/sec lesser) compared to 6" barrels like those of Feinwerkbau AW93, Unique DES96U and Walther SSP. While the smaller barrel is one solution to the recoil problem, penalties of accuracy (though minuscule over 25m distances) are incurred. Walther SSP has addressed this issue with the pneumatic buffer. Walther has also been able to reduce the weight of the SSP (only 970 grams) as the pneumatic buffer largely takes care of the recoil. There is, thus, no need to increase the mass (and consequently lower velocity to ensure F=Ma stays constant). The location of the magazine behind the trigger balances the pistol perfectly, with the centre of gravity lying right under the trigger. Additional counterweight/s tip the nose down a tad, which is just fine for the 'rapid fire' discipline.
I have been using CCI Standard Velocity for training and the ammo has always fed smoothly. For matches, I have used CCI Pistol Match as well as Lapua, both in a class of their own.
One notable feature is the SSP's 3D adjustable grip, which my fits my hand like a glove.
All in all, the SSP is a great pistol (and looks great too).
To beat the recoil, several rapid fire pistols like Benelli-MP90S, Hammerli-SP20, Pardini SP New and Walther GSP Expert have limited the barrels to 4-4.5" as they impart a slightly lesser muzzle velocity (of the order of 50-100 ft/sec lesser) compared to 6" barrels like those of Feinwerkbau AW93, Unique DES96U and Walther SSP. While the smaller barrel is one solution to the recoil problem, penalties of accuracy (though minuscule over 25m distances) are incurred. Walther SSP has addressed this issue with the pneumatic buffer. Walther has also been able to reduce the weight of the SSP (only 970 grams) as the pneumatic buffer largely takes care of the recoil. There is, thus, no need to increase the mass (and consequently lower velocity to ensure F=Ma stays constant). The location of the magazine behind the trigger balances the pistol perfectly, with the centre of gravity lying right under the trigger. Additional counterweight/s tip the nose down a tad, which is just fine for the 'rapid fire' discipline.
I have been using CCI Standard Velocity for training and the ammo has always fed smoothly. For matches, I have used CCI Pistol Match as well as Lapua, both in a class of their own.
One notable feature is the SSP's 3D adjustable grip, which my fits my hand like a glove.
All in all, the SSP is a great pistol (and looks great too).
-
789
Dry-firing the SSP
The SSP is a bit unusual. Recoil seems to "flip" the muzzle of the gun up to the right in a strange way.
Sight adjustment with tools only, - that is not userfriendly.
Dryfiring can only be safely (to the gun) performed with chamber inserts. Another user non-friendliness.
The SSP must come of age. Then, eventually, I may consider buying one.
Strangely, how ALL .22 ISSF type autos seem to have one or more drawbacks. (Some of these drawbacks may be cured relatively easily by the factories, though.)
Sight adjustment with tools only, - that is not userfriendly.
Dryfiring can only be safely (to the gun) performed with chamber inserts. Another user non-friendliness.
The SSP must come of age. Then, eventually, I may consider buying one.
Strangely, how ALL .22 ISSF type autos seem to have one or more drawbacks. (Some of these drawbacks may be cured relatively easily by the factories, though.)
789: Your experience of a right-up flip is indeed strange, but I have to say that no such a problem occured so far, while I pushed about 2,500 rounds through its muzzle. Could it be the 3D grip issue? A grip skewed off its fore-aft axis or its vertical axis could make the muzzle horse around, I imagine. I have mine adjusted only around its lateral axis (ie, up-down only) which makes the pistol more of an extension of the forearm (very 'linear-looking'); thus, recoil is reduced further.
As for the chamber inserts for dry firing, I agree that it is an inconvenience. Regarding sight adjustments with tools, I for one prefer it, as no inadvertant clicking is possible.
As for the chamber inserts for dry firing, I agree that it is an inconvenience. Regarding sight adjustments with tools, I for one prefer it, as no inadvertant clicking is possible.
-
Guest
I'm sure there are lots of legitimate reasons (I doubt they left them off just to irritate you). I didn't realize it is so difficult for some to use a screw driver. I agree it is nice not to have to use a screw driver, but I disagree that it such a big deal.Anonymous wrote:The sight adustment screws on a Pardini SP/HP (which can be done without tools) are completely immune from inadvertent movement even during rough handling
There's just no legitimate reason for the Walther design to continue requiring tools for sight make adjustments.
-
Guest
Of course, you're right Richard and anyone who chooses a gun using this as the only or even as a primary criteria is losing sight of the big picture. However, decisions to on which gun to buy are usually made by weighing a number of factors - the design of the screws is really incidental.
However, Walther still missed the boat on this one. The best equipment is the most simple and which requires the least amount of additional equipment to maintain it.
However, Walther still missed the boat on this one. The best equipment is the most simple and which requires the least amount of additional equipment to maintain it.