Quote:
Originally Posted by jyl
A pistol doesn’t need a slide wrapped around the barrel. Browning’s genius was such that he shaped a century of pistols, but there have been successful major caliber pistols without a heavy, bulky slide that has to wrap around the barrel to lock it up. Imagine a Walter P38 redesigned with a narrower slide, for example. With gas delay, there is even less need for slide mass.
|
Well. your question was for a different barrel, thickness, not for a different pistol design. If you want to get rid of the slide, and just keep the barrell.. You defo need it's thickness to stay what it is.
Then the question is to be rephrased " I want a .45 pistol without a slide"
Now keep in mind, that that pistol exists, it was designed , it was the Luger .45. it wasn't great else it would have been the service pistol of choice, not the 1911
The point of having that slide is mass to control the recoil and unloading/reloading mechanism.. Inertia that then translate in reliable cycling.
Without the mass you need a heavier spring and/or more complicated and finicky mechanism. It will be less tolerant for variations in ammo.
In case of the Luger he had deemed standard ball issued for the competition not good enough and he had handloaded special fast burning powder to make it work better..
It still wasn't the better gun tho.