Why no 9mm Guardian?

[hells.saints]

I understand the gun would have to be a bit beefed up over the size of a 380 or 32 NAA Guardian, but I think it would be pretty cool. Any thoughts?

[G50AE]

Welcome to the forum hells.saints.  A 9mm Guardian would then necessitate a .40S&W/.357SIG Guardian, just to be "tactical". 

[Kevin55]

There are very few blowback 9mm pistols.  It requires a heavy spring and slide.

Most likely, they would need to go to a locked breech design. Then it is head to head competition with KelTec, Ruger, Kahr, glock,...  Tactical Tupperware is going to be much lighter than stainless steel.

Going head to head with Seecamp seems much more sense. Scaling up to the 380 reaches the peak for blowback design.

When the Colt Mustang 380 was the top pocket pistol, which is locked breach, many wanted it in 9mm.  Highly respected gun smiths said no way.

[grayelky]

When the Seecamp came on the market, it was the smallest, lightest, center fire semi-auto on the market. Poly guns did not exist. There also was no competion in its class, if you discount the .25 ACP, which most did. The Guardian was, I think, the first gun to give it any competition in the market. [I may not be as correct as I think I am, and if not, someone who knows for a fact, PLEASE jump in!] It has since developed a following for good reason. The market has evolved a good bit since Gustav Glock began making full sized duty guns out of "plastic". There is currently pretty stiff competition in the small, back up, or off duty carry market in 9 mm. I just recently acquired a (used) Kimber Solo, which is consistently difficult to locate. There are a couple more that are in the Solo size, but even more money, IF they can be found. For NAA to be successful, they will have to bring something to market no one else has been able to do, and at a competitive price. In part, this will mean coming up with a completely new design, or a way to build something similar at a lower price. Why? NAA currently owns the market in their niche. They cannot meet demand, doing something they are very skilled at, and require no new investment in research, design, engineering or development. All of this would require a good bit of money to be spent, all to go head-to-head with companies who have more engineers and designers on payroll than NAA has employees. Granted, if they came up with a new design that worked as it should, without a hitch nor hiccup, was light, pointed like a 6th finger and had the recoil of .32, with the power of a 9mm, it would be worth the gamble. IF.

You asked why no 9mm Guardian, and you asked for my thoughts. Now you know what I think.

Next.......

[Kevin55]

Review of the sub compact 9mm pistols.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/07/chris-dumm/a-reader-asks-whats-a-good-9mm-subcompact/

Glock 42 vs Kahr,  9mm vs 380
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/daniel-zimmerman/shootingthebull410-glock-42-vs-kahr-pm9-yes-pm9/

[TwoGunJayne]

Why no 9mm Guardian

As is, the Guardian is below the threshold requiring a "locked breech" action and resultant increase in cost.

Blowback guns (.380 and below, roughly) are simpler and cheaper to make, hence the massive flood of guns in that niche that are crawling all over the market.

To "9mm" the Guardian, it would need a redesign to locked breech unless the slide were made so absolutely massive that you can forget about concealment. There have been 9mm blowback SMGs all over the place. They were also very large with very high bolt weight, weight that is much required by any increase in energy over .380 acp.

So to summarize my thoughts, the 9mm subcompact market is currently a very tough place to play. There's very stiff competition in the market now in this niche. 20 years ago, 'twas not so. Now, you're going up against Kimber, Keltec, Sig, Colt, Smith, Ruger, so on and so forth. I'd hate to be a small company thinking I had to go up against Ruger. They probably throw away more defective frames during production than NAA ships complete, more or less.

Kind of like the little kid versus the big kid on the playground, the little kid must do something intelligent and creative. 

[cfsharry]

The latest production numbers I have found show NAA producing a little over 40,000 guns in 2011.  Only a little over 800 were Guardians.  All the rest were revolvers. 
I imagine the numbers were equal to or better than that in 2012 and 2013.  I would also imagine the mix to be about the same. 
I am almost surprised they produce the Guardian at all and can't see them ever moving into 9mm territory.  I think a .32acp Mini, (which many here have been agitating for), is more likely but will not hold my breath for that one either.
grayelky,
What are your thoughts on the Solo Carry now that you have one and, hopefully, have had a chance to shoot it? 

[Uncle_Lee]

.32 ACP Mini

[MR_22]

A 9mm blowback Guardian is not something I want to shoot. My Guardian 380 hurts enough. I think the NAA would have to redesign the Guardian for a 9mm.

[MR_22]

.32 ACP Mini

I would prefer a .25NAA Mini.

[TwoGunJayne]

This reminds me about a recent post I made about properly sizing a concealment piece and people trying to put a .45 +P+ into something that weighs less than a Cracker Jack prize.

[Uncle_Lee]

.32 ACP Mini

I would prefer a .25NAA Mini.

It would cost too much to shoot.
And it is a bottle neck like the .17 HMR.

[MR_22]

I would prefer a .25NAA Mini.

It would cost too much to shoot.
And it is a bottle neck like the .17 HMR.

I already have a bunch of ammo. But you're probably right about using a necked-down cartridge in a revolver. Good point. I wonder if retaining clips would work, like my Cobra 9mm derringer, to hold the rounds from backing out; or perhaps moonclips. Either of those solutions might solve the problem with a .25NAA or even .32NAA revolver.

[bud]

I  agree with Mr 22 on his post #1604! I also agree with uncle lee on his desire of a .32 acp.

[TwoGunJayne]

Obviously, we need a moonclip Sidewinder in .32 acp with a .25 NAA option. Maybe a caliber conversion sleeve of some kind?

[grayelky]

.....grayelky,
What are your thoughts on the Solo Carry now that you have one and, hopefully, have had a chance to shoot it?

I have less than 30-40 rounds fired, with only a dozen or so HP. It had less felt recoil than I was anticipating, otherwise, it shot okay. Really not enough trigger time yet. So far, I have no doubt I will have a new regular, CC gun. It is currently at the holster maker, being used as a "mold" to make a couple of holsters. It may be a week or so before I get it back. (I have a used one in the shop, if you happen to be interested.)

[Javier C.]

Just quick skimmed the thread, but noted that the title is perhaps a bit misleading.

NAA does make a "9mm" Guardian.  The 9mmX17mm cartridge, also designated .380 ACP, is already an offering.  The 9mmX19mm, Parabellum or Luger cartridge, is the bull in the Guardian chinashop. 

I wouldn't want to shoot a full power 9X19 round in such a small pistol or revolver frame.  Too much bite to the web of the hand if the handgun frame is diminutive, such as the Guardians have.

However, to each his or her own acceptable performance limitations.

[Taxi]

I think a manual method of locking/cycling might be appropriate for a compact pistol such as the Guardian, I've come up with a possible method as an example, see below. Because for straight blowback operation the 9x17mm pistol would need a heavier slide to function safely with 9x19mm which would increase the size of the pistol, with the .380acp sized Guardian you could have two gas ports from the area in front of the chamber which would correspond with grooves in the slide as a gas delay but it might not be sufficient.

Other than that, incorporate an actual locking mechanism for a semi auto pistol although to keep the gun a similar size you may need a substantial redesign in regards the available space for it perhaps, and the barrel doesn't move whatsoever so it would have to be something like the Remington R51's probably.

A manual locking mechanism may take up less space, below is a link about the Semmerling Lm4 .45acp manual action covert pistol.

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/05/the-semmerling-lm-4-pistol-sleek-strange-secretive-sought-2651986.html

The Semmerling is manually operated by pushing the slide forward to cycle the gun, but it has a solid rear like a Schwarzlose blow forward pistol which is unlike a Guardian. A manual action could be locked when you pull the trigger as per the Semmerling, and cycled by a moveable trigger guard in the manner used by the pistol shown in the link below.

http://www.forgottenweapons.com/ole-krags-experimental-pistol-made-by-norinco/#comments

So you could do it one handed, below is an exploded diagram of the Guardian.

http://northamericanarms.com/parts-32

Potential manual locking/cycling method:

Attach the front of a trigger guard to the underside of the bit in the slide which compresses the spring via a cut out on the underside of the frame, then lower the rear section of this split trigger guard, so these pieces become one when touching "above, below" to allow the front part to pass the rear one.

The pin for the trigger would now be attached to it, the functioning of the trigger would be the same on the left hand side, however this pin would now protrude through the right hand side of the frame via hole in it. A part similar to no.27 would be welded to this protruding end, on the outside of the right hand side of the frame angled so when the trigger was pulled it would push up a modified/enlarged slide release button, there's room between the rear of the mag well and the hammer area for it, thus engaging the slide. Which would hold the slide forward via the modification to it, therefore locking the gun while the trigger was depressed i.e. during firing.

That kinda works in theory with minimal changes, so long as the modified slide release/locking lug has engaged with the slide prior to the firing pin striking the primer, which would be achieved via the length of trigger pull and/or the angle of the piece which actions the modified slide release. And if 9mm Luger cartridges fit inside .380acp magazines and there's enough room when the slide is open between the breech and the slide for them to cycle. If not well that's the first modification to the Guardian required for 9mm Parabellum operation, which increases it's size straight away.

You would want the slide to be the size of the .32acp model on a manually actioned version, to keep it as small as possible in relation to it losing the capability of semi automatic functioning. And the recoil spring/s would only need to offer sufficient resistance to drive the slide back and chamber a round, while allowing you to pull the slide back with your finger/s.

(I thought the slide release was to release the slide from being held open, not to remove the actual slide, so you would have to redesign that aspect for sure, don't want the slide falling off he he!)

[TwoGunJayne]

Manual action might be feasible.

The only problem with going to gas operation or roller lock delay is you've probably just made it into a $900-$1100 pistol at the economy of scale pertinent to NAA. Cost, you know. Some don't care, but it's a 100% deal-breaker to many. Plus, now you're going head to head with the biggest boys in the industry.

Don't forget that if NAA is moving only 800 or so Guardians a year, then it's going to take a loooooooooooooong time to recoup some retooling. The more that can be re-used/re-purposed the better. With the big boys, the parts cost almost nothing each because they would order 100,000 at a time... or ten times that... or more.

The smaller the business, the worse the buying power disadvantage hurts, kills profitability, and drives up prices. Buying a spring or screw at 5 to 15 pieces an order versus a 10 year plan for 10 million of a part is night and day.

Night and day.

That said, I want three 9mm Guardians and .32 acp minis, so I can sell a pair of each to Uncle Lee.

[Taxi]

I think it would be feasible, might sell better in say .40 S&W if you were going to do it.

Compensate for having to cycle it manually, by having it be more powerful for less weight/size than a semi automatic model of the same capacity.

"Kind of like the little kid versus the big kid on the playground, the little kid must do something intelligent and creative"

I'm glad I found the modify function I've already been promoted to gun fumbler again, otherwise I would have been on bullseye for bullshit already for the incessant additions to my few posts, mind you I've never been macabre Two gun

"Have they not made him one yet, tut, he he!"

[ikoiko]

There used to be an English chap on the forum that delighted in unusual design discussions. Your posts have reminded me of his.

[TwoGunJayne]

There used to be an English chap on the forum that delighted in unusual design discussions. Your posts have reminded me of his.

Now with 65% Less Lager! Over twice the coherency of the competition!

[Taxi]

He he, hello! Again

[Kevin55]

The whole "this is a great 380, now make it a 9mm" has kicked around for 25 years or more.  Back then everyone wanted the Colt Mustang in 9mm.  Rec.guns was flooded with threads.

You can probably find threads with this search.  McDougal was the premier Mustang gunsmith back then and questions about going to 9mm were never ending.
http://www.google.com/#q=colt+mustang+mcdougall+9mm

[Kevin55]

Rather than all the engineering, NAA could boost sales buy paying to have the Black Widow and Pug go through the California gun safety tests.  There is spent up demand in Kommiefornia.  Now, we only can buy the 1-1/8 22lr or 1-1/8 22mag.

[TwoGunJayne]

.380 was pretty much always a blowback pistol cartridge. 9mm went on to many other things.

9mm is above the line for blowback and tiny. This is why 9mm single stack subcompacts are so expensive.

Just sayin'.

I agree. Everyone wants to turn .380 into 9mm, but with the .380 package and price. It doesn't really work that way. Does it?

[heyjoe]

Welcome back Taxi

[Taxi]

Thanks heyjoe Interesting subject this isn't it, the suitability of blowback or short recoil operating methods specifically, for semi automatic .380acp - 9mm Luger calibre handguns.

Without a locking mechanism a cartridge upon firing will always blow out of the chamber against the slide, backwards i.e. Blowback. Now to resist this motion you use spring resistance in conjunction with weight, in order to delay the cartridge from blowing backwards out of the chamber completely until the bullet has left the barrel and therefore the pressure within it has dropped. At which point, what I will describe as recoil takes over, an ongoing momentum which continues to push the firearm rearwards because it fired a projectile forwards from a static position.

The momentum imparted rearwards i.e. blowback, recoil, depends on the amount of forward impetus created via the powder charge and projectile weight upon firing. These things have to be taken into account in order to create an automatic mechanism, using said forces. As oppose a manual mechanism, which locks the cartridge in the chamber until the blowback/recoil sequences have dissipated so if it was unlocked nothing happens.

Some stats:

Models: Colt, Naa, magazine capacity 6 calibre .380acp

Mustang:
Action: Short recoil
Barrel length: 2.75 in.
Overall length: 5.5 in.
Weight (oz) : 12.5 (Pocketlite), 11.8 (XSP)

Guardian:
Action: Blowback
Barrel Length: 2.49"
Overall Length: 4.75"
Weight: 18.72 oz
Height: 3.53"
Width: 0.930"

The Mustang is 3.9" high, and 1.06" wide so overall it's larger than a Guardian.

Overall weights of some other unloaded 9x19mm pistols of the compact variety:

P290: 20.5 ounces
G 26: 21.7 oz
Nano: 17.7 oz. 
Cm9: 14oz.
PF9: 12.7 oz.

The Mustang in .380acp is a locked design, were as the Guardian is a blowback. The old Mustang was around the weight of the Guardian, but the new Mustang is lighter than it. I looked at some compact sized 9x19mm locked action pistols and most of them are similar in weight to the Guardian. The Keltec seemed light, the weights shown in the stats aren't individual slide weights however. The Keltec seems a similar weight to the Mustang in .380acp so maybe it's slide weight is the minimum you need for a locked 9mm Luger. The locking mechanisms are all short recoil designs I think, If some operate quicker than others that would perhaps effect the weight of slide required.

Anyone own a Keltec PF9 and any of the other 9x19mm pistols maybe a comparison of slide weights and locking mechanisms, springs etc might be interesting, particularly a newer Mustang model.

Says on Keltecs website the PF9 can accept +P ammo, but not a lot of it...

[G50AE]

Rather than all the engineering, NAA could boost sales buy paying to have the Black Widow and Pug go through the California gun safety tests.  There is spent up demand in Kommiefornia.  Now, we only can buy the 1-1/8 22lr or 1-1/8 22mag.

Or a .32ACP Mini. 

[Taxi]

Since this thread kinda makes reference to it, I've drawn this basic picture representing a Guardian sized/style of pistol. To illustrate an example of a automatic locking mechanism, through stages 1-3 which may work in this type of fixed barrel design for general interest.



Stage 1, shows the bolt locked, the locking bar sits behind the bolt as the bar protrudes from it's recess in the frame. The slide is fully forward pressing against the bolts rear, with the locking bar pushed into it's uppermost position by two angled surfaces at either side of it within the slide.

Stage 2, shows the slide recoiling upon firing, at this point the bar starts to lower into the frame recesses via it's supporting surfaces within the slide moving rearwards.

Stage 3, shows the slide ready to return, the angled surfaces within the slide will contact the bar forcing it upwards within the recesses so it sits behind the bolt again when the slide is fully forward.

For the purposes of illustration the frame of this action, was drawn in the shape of a short tuning fork, with the recoil springs guide rod being the longest section extending from it's middle. The locking bar, is a round steel bar which sits freely inside the cut outs for it on either side of the frame. The hammer would sit behind the locking bar between the angled surfaces within the slide.

The actual action if it works, would probably fit inside the .380 Guardian in the video below overall, with some modifications.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBVemLe9-ic

If you lay a pen on a table, and put two fingers behind it at either end, then run a ruler at an angle into it's middle, the pen rides up the ruler. So the pen is the locking bar, and the ruler is the angled surfaces within the slide.

All good! Sure there's a way

[Taxi]

Knocked this picture up, think I got all the original parts in, plus 37 - locking bar, 38 bolt, other than that the slide release is now in front of the trigger "I extended the frame to fit it in"  it could go on either side presumably, there's spurs on the slide to engage the locking bar, as the original picture'ish.

Fits anyway, more or less, so if recoil moves the slide it might work in theory, with some tweaking.

Current theory he he 

The firing pin, extractor go into the bolt now probably, it's not exactly to scale etc.

Hmmm, well... It's ok, bit crude... But it's given me a less crude notion based on it's basic format.

[Taxi]

The drawing isn't "exact" for ease of illustration, but this uses a locking block with a lever pinned through it, which could also retain the firing pin, well it does here anyway.

Might be better to use two levers, but one illustrates the principle.

The levers lugs sit half in the bolt and half in the recesses, they take the strain.

"The bolt would require a cut out in it's side for the levers lug to fit into...

The levers hook engages the stud in the slide, and the levers lug fits into the recess in the frame, upon firing the slide pushes the hook back i.e. down, which frees its lug from the frame unlocking it. The pair then move back together etc.

Well we have established a locking method would be required for a 9mm Guardian anyway he he.

And because it has a fixed barrel, one has to think of another way to achieve a locking mechanism etc...

[Taxi]

I like steel guns myself, I think a 9mm Guardian would be good, put fat rubber grips on it for comfort, it's only for close range really isn't it in a hurry, with a locking mechanism you could perhaps make it lighter than the .380acp model not sure.

More umph, in 9x19mm mind you .380acp probably isn't healthy.

A tilty Mp44 type action might work, if you use the slide as the piston rod sort of thing, as would a lever delay kind of as above in relation to the famas but using the slide again, or my original sort of falling bar lark other than that I'm stumped in regards automatic mechanisms currently.

[Taxi]

I'm sure the slide would move, without the barrel moving via recoil upon firing, while the bolt remained static...

If the slide didn't offer to much resistance i.e. weight, and the springs resistance was appropriate, accordingly.

Maybe a combination of springs, like currently, but the middle one would be shorter, so as to only be engaged by the slide after the slides initial movement i.e. So as to offer less resistance to the rearward movement initially.

Little help?? He he 

"If it doesn't you could use gas, perhaps"



Example of a stubby gas piston, attached to the front of the slide, which would fit into a gas plug inside a barrel extension, with a port from the barrel through to the plug clearly...

They'll be ways!

Hmmm... Maybe you could make the slide out of good Aluminum, if the bolt/locking-mech/frame/barrel were steel.

Opposite way round to making the frame out of aluminium or polymer for weight reduction.