In the 1970’s West German police used a mish-mash of handguns. While some still used the Walther PP in .7.65/.32 ACP, others used 9mm Parabellum in the P1 (an alloy-framed P-38,) The P2, (the expensive but excellent Sig P210) or the P3 (Astra 600.) In 1976 a set of specifications was set out for a new police service pistol. It was to be a compact weapon chambered in 9mm with a magazine holding eight rounds, DA/SA operation and an external de-cocking lever.

At the end of testing three guns were identified as suitable and approved for purchase. The bulk of sales went to the Sig P225, which was given the designation the P-6. Unable to produce these guns in the quantities needed, Sig allied with, and later acquired, J.P. Sauer and Sohns, forming the Sig-Sauer company. Over the course of production some 40,000 P6s were produced, and the gun remained in service with German police agencies until 2000.

The P6 featured an alloy frame with a steel slide, and weighing in at around 29oz. it made for a pretty handy service weapon without being too large for concealed carry. For police use plastic grips replaced the wood grips of the P225. Ergonomics are good, and all of the controls are easily reached by a person with average-sized hands. The gun is very easy to field-strip; simply lock back the slide, rotate the lever above the trigger downward 90 degrees, release the slide and slip it off the front of the gun.

I have a sentimental attachment to the P6, so when the first police trade-ins entered the US I was quite disappointed that I could not afford one before they were all snapped up. Recently a friend, having forgotten that I wanted one, sold his off and I missed out again. Linda observed my disappointment and immediately went online and found one for me. We picked it up today and I did a little ‘getting acquainted’ shooting.

This particular gun was made in May of 1992, but you wouldn’t know to look at it. There is very little holster-wear, and everything is right and tight. The gun feels excellent in my hand and points naturally. The standard sights are good, a nice blocky front sight with a recessed white dot, and a deep, square rear aperture with a white post underneath. The trigger is very good for a service pistol; I have heard some characterize it as ‘heavy,’ and I can only assume they don’t regularly shoot double-action revolvers. More importantly to me the DA pull is smooth and doesn’t stack. There is some take-up in the single-action trigger, needed to deactivate the firing-pin safety, but the trigger breaks very crisply after that. Reset is not short but is positive and easy to use in rapid-fire and double-taps.

If I had to pick one word to describe this gun it would be ‘smooth.’ Everything moves like greased glass, from the slide to the trigger to the de-cocking lever. Even inserting a magazine is conspicuously slick. Smoooooth.

I adore this gun, and expect it will be seeing a lot of range time in the near future. The gun came with two magazines, and I’ll be picking up a couple more. I’ll be making a holster or two and a mag pouch for this gun, and if it continues to be as reliable as this first outing I fully expect I’ll EDC it when conditions permit.

Michael Tinker Pearce, 12 August 2020

If you like what you see here, please consider clicking the link above and supporting me on Patreon.

In the wake of WW2 the Italians were seeking a replacement for their aging .380 ACP Beretta M1934 pistols, and of course who would they turn to but Beretta? By 1951 the new pistol was ready. It was the company’s first locked-breech pistol, chambered in the more powerful 9mm Parabellum. It was adopted by the Italian Navy, the Carabinieri and other police agencies; the army retained their M1934s until the double-action, high-capacity Model 92 was introduced.`

The gun entered production in 1953 with an alloy frame, but this was soon found to lack the durability needed in a military arm, and it was replaced with a steel frame. Like its predecessor it was a hammer-fired single-action design. It borrowed the hinged locking-block and open-topped slide of the Walther P38, and like that gun carried eight cartridges in it’s single-stack magazine. Moving the recoil springs from the sides of the slide to under the barrel allowed the new gun to be slimmer than the Walther. This necessitated a full-length slide which resulted in a handier, better-balanced weapon. Like the M1934 the magazine floor-plate had a hooked finger extension, which made the gun comfortable and secure even for those with larger hands.

The new pistol garnered interest from other nations, and Egypt’s army ordered their own unique variant of the gun. This had a slightly longer barrel, high-profile sights, a different, simpler grip and a heel-magazine release. It is believed around fifty-thousand guns of this configuration were produced for Egypt before Maadi licensed the design from Beretta and began producing the Helwan in Egypt. Interestingly the Helwan includes none of the modifications requested by the army for their model. The ‘Egyptian model,’ despite being produced in large numbers, has never been officially imported, so they are rare in the United States.

Iraq also produced their own version of this gun, the Tariq, and additionally the gun was used by Israel, Nigeria, Yemen, Libya, Thailand, Tunisia as well as being used by British police organizations. A civilian version known as the M951 Brigadier was also produced for several decades, though in the 1970s and 80s it was eclipsed by it’s descendant, the Model 92. Versions in .30 Luger were produced for countries where private ownership of guns in ‘military calibers’ was prohibited.

The Brigadier was famously used in Don Pendleton’s long running series of Executioner books, where the main character Mack Bolan used a .44 Automag and a silenced Beretta to mow down improbably large numbers of mafia Dons and Soldiers.

The M1951 achieved a legendary reputation for reliability in the deserts of the Middle East, and as the Tariq it remains in production, and service, to this day. Recently a large number of Italian police trade-in M1951s have been imported from Italy, selling for prices under $300. Having owned both the Helwan and an Egyptian Contract M1951 I scooped one up, and have been giving it a good wringing out at the range.

My gun arrived in quite good condition with only minor holster wear. It came with a single magazine, but my Helwan magazines work just fine. The gun is very comfortable in the hand, and for me it points naturally. The sights are… well, they aren’t wonderful. Comparable to GI sights on a 1911; usable but far from ideal. The trigger has a little free-play and significant over-travel, but it’s crisp. I was surprised at how easy it was to double-tap with this gun, but the second shot did tend to hit rather high. It would still be on target though, and I expect I’ll improve with practice. Recoil with standard-pressure loads is mild, and after a slight tweak to the magazine lips it feeds hollow-points flawlessly out of all three of the magazines that I had on-hand.

Speaking of ammunition I have been advised to stick to standard-pressure ammo, and I see no reason not to. This may or may not be important for the Beretta, but it is vital in Helwans; two shots with +P ammo peened the locking lugs and rendered the gun non-functional. Apparently Maadi’s metallurgy is not up to standard.

This old Beretta is a real pleasure to shoot, and box after box of ammo disappeared downrange; after a couple of hundred rounds I found myself wishing I’d brought more.

Having the magazine release on the grip is odd, but it actually works pretty well. To change the magazine draw a fresh magazine, bring your left hand to the grip and hit the button with your thumb. The spent mag falls out and your hand is right there to slap the fresh one in. With very little training it’s about as fast as a conventionally located button, and even a person with small hands doesn’t need to change their strong-hand grip. Awkward as hell for a southpaw, of course; these are very much a right-handed gun.

OK, last but not least let’s address the elephant in the room; that weird cross-bolt safety. It’s a strange feature for a service pistol and seems out of place, but for a right-handed person, specifically me, it’s surprisingly workable. When I assume a firing grip it’s very easy to pop it in with the joint of my thumb. Putting it back on requires a second hand, or at least a serious shift of my grip. Overall though it works surprisingly well.

Yes, it’s obsolete. Yes, it could use better sights. Yes, there are lighter, better, more modern guns that hold more rounds. But I would not feel abused if this was my only option; it’s a fine (if unconventional) design and still effective after all these years. Maybe Mack Bolan was on to something…

Michael Tinker Pearce, 7 August 2020

If you like what you read here, please consider clicking the link above and supporting me on Patreon

The British officer corps was decimated in WW1, and there was a rush to replace the fallen. The Webley .455, while well regarded, took too much training for candidates to become proficient and a lighter, easier to learn alternative was sought. This resulted in the design of a new, smaller-framed revolver chambered in 380/200 Revolver (usually known in America as 38-200.)

This cartridge used the .38 S&W case, but with a long, heavy 200gr. bullet launched at around 625 fps. The long, heavy-for-caliber bullet was somewhat unstable, and in testing on cadavars and animal corpses it tended to tumble post-impact, creating greater wounding effect and allowing the low-velocity bullet to deposit all of it’s energy (173 ft./lbs) in the target. The British army found this acceptable, and the weapons lighter weight and modest recoil made it easier to train with.

Over the years this story got muddied, with some insisting that penetration, rather than a tumbling bullet, was the goal. A friend of mine was curious, and sent me a box of Matt’s Bullets 38/200 ammunition. I ordered a block of Clear Ballistics FBI-spec gel to put this to the test. But there was a problem… my .38 S&W revolvers are too lightly built for this cartridge, and firing these loads from them would be too likely to damage them.

In normal times I’d just call around and find a buddy with a Webley, Enfield or S&W Victory chambered appropriately and have them come by, but these are not normal times so I was stymied. Then it occurred to me to try something. The bullet diameter of 380/200 is only a few thousandths larger than .357. I ran two of the Matt’s bullet loads through a .38 Special resizing die, and the fit perfectly in the cylinder of my .357 Magnum Astra Police revolver. With it’s 3″ barrel the bullet would be a bit slower than from a service-length gun, but not a great deal, and it was better than nothing. I decided to give it a try.

My terminally messy workshop provided a good place for the test. I did not bother with four layers of denim as the bullet is not intended to expand. I fired two shots, yielding an average velocity of 585 fps. and 153 ft./lbs of energy at ten feet from the muzzle, with an extreme spread of 19 fps. The first shot entered the the block and hooked left, exiting the block at about 13″ of penetration. The bullet hit the backstop sideways and skittered off into the nether realms of the shop at very low velocity. The second bullet also hooked left, but was retained in the block at a depth of 13-1/4″. The bullet came to rest backwards. The wound tracks indicated that the bullets did indeed tumble, just as intended.

The wound channels, while not spectacular, were notably larger than bullet diameter and produced more damage than normal solid-non-expanding bullets would have. The low energy rounds did not produce a great deal of damage, but more worrisome is the pronounced curve to the left that each bullet performed, which might conceivably turn a good hit into a bad one.

Still, gel is not flesh and bone and while it gives us a general indicator of the bullet’s performance in tissue it is not a direct analogue. Given a choice between factory .38 S&W ammunition and these rounds I’d pick these in a heartbeat.

I should also note this is a very unscientific test- the bullets are being squeezed by the smaller bore, and service guns have longer barrels and might have a different rifling twist that could affect performance. When things are more settled I hope to replicate this test with a Webley revolver.

So how obsolete is it? If the shooter does their job the ammunition will probably suffice, and for service guns in .38 S&W I think it represents a good choice. Bear in mind that the British did not abandon this load for any perceived lack of effectiveness, but rather because they were concerned that the soft lead bullet would be seen as a violation of the Geneva Convention. That being said modern calibers with modern bullets are a better choice, and much to be preferred if that option is available.

Michael Tinker Pearce, 29 July 2020

If you like what you read here, consider clicking the link above and supporting me on Patreon.