Why aren't there more larger caliber pistols manufactured

File: jew-bwa-ha-ha.gif (29KB, 428x500px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 428x500px

>profit
For the same reason all American AK manufacturers us cast trunions instead of billet.

>>33276869
The Luger, the Volkquartzen .22 magnum version of that, the Mauser C96, damn near all revolvers made to accept cartridges, a lot of guns that AREN'T based on the BHP, any of the larger machinepistols.

And many many more.

it's expensive and unnecessarily complicated.

>>33276897
The pint of this is there are tons.

Most people just don't innovate beyond the tilting barrel or locking block concept if it's a true handgun.

>>33276913
>Turn down on lathe

>Bore rifling

Where's the complication?

>>33276933

implementing a locking mechanism for any cartridge bigger than .380 auto so the thing doesn't turn into an IED and blow your fucking hand off.

>>33276963
Why would that be an issue?

A solid piece of slab steels is going to be stronger than a barrel surrounded by a polymer frame

>>33277011
How strong do you think a brass cartridge casing is? Because that's what blows up if you don't hold the chamber closed long enough.

>>33277364
A Hi-Point can handle up to .45ACP with blowback operation only

Do you understand how a firearm works?

>>33277390
It's heavy and has a fuckhuge spring.

Blowback is fine, and >>33277364 is TECHNICALLY wrong but there is a point where blowback is just pointless.

You'd end up with guns the size of a MAC-10 or larger if you wanted to try shit like that.

>>33277407
So what problem would transferring the breech lock on a non-blowback solid upper present?

I guess I'm just not understanding exactly which part prohibits it

>>33277446
Nothing prohibits it, it's just a pain in the ass.

Glock has a "steel upper"
1911 has a "steel upper"
BHP has a "steel upper"
CZ has a "steel upper"
M&P has a "steel upper"
Walther has a "steel upper"

Kill yourself

>>33277464
He meant a pistol that has a sort of bolt inside an upper and not a slide.

>>33277390
It also weighs more than most machine pistols and some smaller rifles, has extremely violent and exaggerated recoil, and has a slide you can drive railroad spikes with.

Blowback actions come at the cost of size and weight once you get above .380 or 9x18. They're doable, but they're incredibly impractical if you want to keep size and weight down. Which is pretty much the design philosophy of any handgun ever.

File: NKRO MX Brown.jpg (1MB, 2400x1600px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2400x1600px

>>33276869
Recoil is very unpleasant even in small caliber direct blowback pistols, and in centerfire calibers are far too powerful for a direct blowback design. The only exceptions are pistols with extremely heavy bolts or slides, such as Uzis, vz61s and the like.

tl;dr Because then handguns would have to be extremely large and heavy to deal with blowback.

>>33277446
If what
>>33277487
says is true, it's because in order to fit a recoil mechanism capable of handling the hotter pistol rounds (9x19 and up), you'd have to make the upper absolutely ENORMOUS.

>>33277505
But how big are the recoil mechanisms in a regular 9mm pistol?

>>33277552
A browning style locking mechanism incorporates the weight of the slide and barrel and a spring to hold the two together for the first hundredth or so of a second until pressure drops.

A straight blowback pistol simply has a spring and a bolt/slide.

This means the slide must be heavy as fuck or the spring must be heavy as fuck but either way it suck, because it's gonna have a high extraction pressure.

In short, it has to be big because you'd need more weight.
This would duck your recoil impulse too, as a side note.

>>33277623
Ok, I get it now

Thanks