HKPRO Forums banner

A Tale of Two P7M13's - Original H&K and Updated Model

1 reading
5.2K views 40 replies 17 participants last post by  German  
#1 · (Edited)
I've been prepping the P7M13's since earlier this year to finalize any changes needed before moving into machining. Similar to the Titanium-framed P7 run earlier this year, this started with slight modifications to the trigger guard and the addition of a picatinny rail. The factory trigger guard on the P7M series is too large to allow any practical length of a picatinny rail to mount even a compact light, so this has to be shortened to allow even a compact light such as a Surefire XSC or Streamlight TLR7.

Several 3D models were made to verify the dimensions, etc.

Image

Image


Image


I also tried 3D printing titanium and then doing post treatments with electropolishing to see if that was a route to go

Image

Image


After several iterations on the model, there were still a few issues that were intrinsic to the M13 that my model shared:

1 - Blocky grip - even with the updated checkering on the backstrap and several iterations of a mild to moderate beavertails, the grip wasn't very comfortable. Overall thickness was the same as well as the curvature of the backstrap.

Width of the original H&K is 33mm for reference.

2 - Same gas cylinder area - significant amount of metal in the gas cylinder sleeve area resulting in the same heat issues shared with the factory M13.

I spent quite a bit of time addressing the two problems above as well as the general heft of the M13.

The result was the comparison you'll see of the two models below:

Image

Image

Image


I received my custom run of 7068 aluminum earlier this year, so it's time for a prototype:
Image
 

Attachments

#14 ·
It appears you are moving this project right along . If things go as planned for you , which is the 64K question with any complex project such as this , any idea when you might be able to start a pre-production run ? That aluminum frame might also have some other properties that you are interested in ? I only mentoon this because you seem to cover all the bases in your choices of materials and finishes during this process . Keep up the good work (y)
 
#16 ·
I should have all the preproduction prototypes finished this quarter with full testing to follow then production in Q1.

The 7068 alloy is extremely strong while maintaining the light weight of aluminum. The modeling and the goal is to have a very lightweight frame that dissipates heat well. Icing on the cake is to have a better grip so you can have a M13 that’s thinner than a P7M8 with the grips on, lighter than a P7M8, and much improved heat dissipation.
 
#18 ·
Most 3D printing isn't as strong as milling or even casting. Better titanium printing is on the horizon, though and possibly the equipment and even franchises are available:
I would rather pay a bit more and have milled, until 3D printing is better.
The frame looks great and seems to address the grip issues.
I like that there is a reasonably full rail on it. There are a lot of things you can do with three teeth. I would think this could affect the heating issue, since the index finger is more likely to come in contact with the trigger guard, but I haven't found my bulk batch P7 getting hot enough to matter to me.
I am not so into the beavertail or grip checkering, but people with huge paws need the beavertail where for me, the normal P7 configuration is more than enough beavertail. Grip texturing might help improve shooting, even if it is not my bag. Any increased polishing is great, because I want shiny after the DLC or plating, the only non-cost related, downside is if there are any components that are electropolished that might get too thin.
 
#23 ·
I am really looking forward to trying this. I am Para curious, because I like the double stack without a separate polymer grip module as a concept, better. I was reading a review of the old Para 14-45 1911s that focused on the grip. The Para, double stack .45 had a grip thickness of 1.35" and generally the author of the review, who had big mitts, was fine with that, himself, but it was clear that that was too thick for many or most people. He was comparing it to the 1.27" grip of a double stack Glock 21 .45 (not sure which Gen,) that can work out for more people, but is not universally loved. Converting the 33mm thickness of original HK M13 to inches, that's 1.3" . If it can be comfortable and everything in reach, grip thickness is not inherently a bad thing.
Greater surface area on the backstrap helps manage recoil, if only you can grip/hang onto it. It's interesting on the 1911, how the manual safety changed and evolved into a comfortable thumb rest. That sort of relates to this, a little.
The Para was another pistol that deserves another chance to be improved on, it seems to me. There are so many brilliant guns that just need a little more love.
 
#24 ·
I am really looking forward to trying this. I am Para curious, because I like the double stack without a separate polymer grip module as a concept, better. I was reading a review of the old Para 14-45 1911s that focused on the grip. The Para, double stack .45 had a grip thickness of 1.35" and generally the author of the review, who had big mitts, was fine with that, himself, but it was clear that that was too thick for many or most people. He was comparing it to the 1.27" grip of a double stack Glock 21 .45 (not sure which Gen,) that can work out for more people, but is not universally loved. Converting the 33mm thickness of original HK M13 to inches, that's 1.3" . If it can be comfortable and everything in reach, grip thickness is not inherently a bad thing.
Greater surface area on the backstrap helps manage recoil, if only you can grip/hang onto it. It's interesting on the 1911, how the manual safety changed and evolved into a comfortable thumb rest. That sort of relates to this, a little.
The Para was another pistol that deserves another chance to be improved on, it seems to me. There are so many brilliant guns that just need a little more love.
Not to threadjack, but your post made me recall my thought experiment on what I'd consider the perfect carry pistol. And just to explain why this is relevant to a P7Pro thread - Upon hearing of Brett's "other designs" he's kicking around, it got my gears turning...

Basically a SAO P7-style squeeze cocker, but where squeezing the grip cocked a hammer (internal or external), and defeats the FP safety - yielding a 1911-like SA trigger pull and reset (using a sliding trigger instead of a pivoting trigger). Releasing the squeeze cocker would lower the hammer to half cock and reenable the FP safety. The gun would use some OEM's existing "stack and a half" design mags, to give a ~13 to 15 round capacity while keeping the grip width to ~1". Probably an aluminum frame, but polymer would be OK too.

I know some guys reading this will be disgusted by this abomination! It's like when Homer Simpson was given creative oversight of the car company, and the end product was "The Homer."

Image
 
#27 ·
The P7 is famously the best pistol for a gunfighter, the fastest into action from uncocked and unlocked. Some of its advantage was due to it being born in an era when going cocked and locked was against U.S. military regulations, and other militaries rules and forbidden by many law enforcement agencies. When the rules changed and cocked and locked was more the rule than exception, then the P7 lost some of its thunder. So many guns, cocked and locked, resulted in the firing pin safety being imposed on the industry, although I think today a pistol could be about as safe without one. Firing pin safeties are part of the lower popularity of 1911s since that excellent trigger gets somewhat compromised. The Caraville Double Ace seems to bring the hand too far down the grip and would make handling recoil and muzzle lift more difficult, but it makes it possible for a 1911 to get into the fight, uncocked and unlocked, as fast as a P7.
I have my own ideas, as we all do, but the squeeze cock mechanism of the P7 is complicated and opens a can of worms to mess with in anything but superficial ways. The future of triggers is probably separating them completely from the mechanical operation of the gun, and making the release of the firing pin electronic, with a solenoid or motor. They are doing this in airsoft, mostly. Then you can have any trigger you want, or even just ask your phone to release the firing pin. Questions about reliability seem to be slowing down the development of electronic triggers.
Now, people have done a few things to try to improve the P7 trigger, which is one of the best striker triggers as it is, but a little "Mushy." Usually this has been limited to a couple of kinds of overtravel stops. The safest was a screw in the frame behind the trigger, preventing it from going further back than necessary. But, some eminent armorers would put a stop in the spring, a controversial method that (In Glocks, not the P7,) was associated with the trigger not resetting and allegations that uncontrolled automatic fire could result. Maybe Brett has seen some trigger jobs on P7s.
 
#28 ·
While the P7 trigger is definitely good, and way ahead of its time, it does have "mush" to it. I'm definitely working on trigger improvements as part of the process. There are ways to maintain the safety of the P7 and get a better trigger pull. Overtravel stops can be put into the trigger mechanism itself vs the screw in the back as well.
Image
Image
 
#33 ·
That's been the goal. I wanted to keep the original pistols alive and show that they can be maintained for those that want to shoot them. However, to truly keep the P7 platform alive it has to be updated. In order to make a modern P7 that's competitive in the world of the P365 X Macro, G43X, etc it needs to:

  • Increase magazine capacity - that's why I'm starting the new P7 iterations based of the M13's. (along with decreasing the size as shown above)
  • Deal with the heat associated with the gas retarded blowback system
  • Deal with the weight - 7068 aluminum deals with this and the above nicely
  • Use modern materials, metallurgy, and finishes to minimize the wear prone parts and elongate the service life and intervals between cleaning - I'll have many more announcements regarding that as the M13's near release.