Dana Booth wrote in a message to Roy J. Tellason:

 DB> Roy J. Tellason wrote in a message to Dana Booth:

 DB> Not a Makarov per se, 

 RJT> No?

 DB> Several pistols shoot 9x18 Makarov; Makarov's, Hungie PA-63's,
 DB> Polish PA-83's & 93's, and even my wife's CZ-83, (Czech) among
 DB> others. The Commies called a Makarov a "PM", a
"Pistol Makarov", or
 DB> the commie translation thereof. :) A Makarov is like the pistol it
 DB> imitates, the PP; just because it shoots .32 doesn't make it a PP,
 DB> and just because it shoots 9x18 doesn't make it a Makarov. :)
 DB> However, the FEG PA-63 is quite renowned as an excellent pistol,
 DB> I'm surprised you had the trouble you did!

It was minor,  but especially annoying coming when it did,  when *she* was
trying out the gun,  after some persuasion...

It's nice to see it well thought of,  and those of my friends who I've let
try it comment on how accurate it is.  When I bought it I'd originally been
thinking about going in there and picking up a cheap .380 (Davis?  I
forget...) and it didn't take much of a nudge from the guy at the store to
persuade me to consider that one instead.  It's not a choice I've
regretted, though ammo isn't exactly common for it.

 RJT> Yes.  Shoots .380,  too,  I'm told.  I was at a range once and
 RJT> found a live round laying there on the ground,  tried it,  and
 RJT> yeah,  it did. 

 DB> It'll work, but it'll also chew up the chamber & bore really bad,
 DB> 9x17 (or .380 auto or 9mm Kurz, whatever you want to call it) is
 DB> caliber .356, or about 9mm, while 9x18 Makarov is about 9.1- mm,
 DB> slightly larger. Put them together and look at them, and you can
 DB> see the difference with the naked eye.

A difference in diameter?  Not that I'd noticed,  though I was aware of the
difference in case length.  Then there's 9x19 ("Luger") and one
longer one I can't recall.

I sure wouldn't make a habit out of using the wrong ammo in there,  anyhow,
 but didn't figure that one round would do much to damage it.

 RJT> I did look at one that was at a dealer once,  it was Russian as I
 RJT> recall,  and it wasn't made that well from what I could tell.  Not
 RJT> that I'm any kind of expert or anything like that,  it just felt
 RJT> "rough" in terms of parts moving against each other.

 DB> I know what you mean... In fact, my best "feeling" Mak is my East
 DB> German, a very well machined gun. Butt ugly, though, and of course
 DB> I have a bullshit story about how the East German cop who carried
 DB> it died, and the gun sat in his blood for awhile and corroded.
 DB> (hey, who knows?) My favorite Bulgie is a beautiful gun though, but
 DB> feels quite rough when you jack the action. I trust it completely,
 DB> though, hundreds of rounds through that gun without a fault.

Yeah,  I've put hundreds of rounds through mine,  too,  and after a
cleaning it's in good shape.  Hurts my hand to shoot that thing a lot, 
though.  I need something with a big bigger grip,  which is why I like my
Taurus.  :-)

 RJT> The one I have got slightly rough,  didn't want to fire properly, 
 RJT> and when I asked at the dealer about a smith the guy there removed
 RJT> one of the grips,  shimmed it with a thin layer of paper,  and the
 RJT> problem went away!  I don't know what that bit of the action is
 RJT> that's right underneath that grip,  but apparently it was binding
 RJT> just a bit,  or something.

 DB> That's weird, the mainspring in a PA-63 is a leaf behind the rear
 DB> mag ride. Other than that, I can only think of the mag follower
 DB> spring on the left side of the gun, both under the grip.

That might've been it,  I'm not sure.  It was up near the top of the grip. 
Just a little bit of binding there was all.

 DB> I had that happen on a CZ-52 right after I Picked it up at a show, 
 DB> but I tensioned up the follower spring and the problem went away. 
 DB> Not a similar gun, but a similar follower spring.

Which is the follower spring?  I'm not up on the names of a lot of these parts.

 RJT> Other than that minor hassle (which unfortunately had to happen
 RJT> when I had taken my lady out to the range to get her into it :-(

 DB> I hope that didn't let her down! Did you follow the old rule: if
 DB> you ever take women shooting, take a .38 revolver with you, too,
 DB> they never fail! :)

A friend of mine stopped by to visit one time,  and brought a couple of
things,  one being his 9mm Glock (I tried it and didn't care for it),  and
the other being a .38 Colt,  which she tried out and liked.  She's
ambivalent about guns,  is fairly secure that I'm not going to be the one
to go postal or anything like that,  but I haven't yet gotten her to the
point where she wants to go get a permit.

 RJT> I've also had people call it "surprisingly accurate" for what it
 RJT> is. 

 DB> 9x18 is about as strong as you can get and still keep a blowback
 DB> feed. The nice thing about blowback is that, without barrel 
 DB> movement, it's naturally accurate. It's tough to beat a good 1911
 DB> for accuracy, but damn, those fixed barrel jobs do well! :) 

OTOH,  there was one time when I was down there at the range and some guy
offered to let me try his .45,  damned if I can remember what kind it was, 
with six rounds in it.  Not only was it a nice fit for my hand,  relatively
light in terms of kick,  but I was able to make those bigger holes in my
target somewhat closer together than I'd been doing with other stuff.  I
just wish I could remember what the heck make that was!

I'll probably snag a .45 at some point,  but the next thing I want to get
my hands on is a .22 revolver,  mostly because it's so cheap to shoot and
because I have a couple of 12-yo grandkids that need an introduction to
this stuff... :-)

---