| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lahti L-35 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Husqvarna recall edit
Weren't the Husqvarnas recalled and replaced by Browning m/07 pistols as an emergency measure before the Glock was adopted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.181.101.118 (talk • contribs)
Article factual accuracy edit
I just changed a small part of the article because the Lahti is actually very easy to field strip and clean: just push the take-down-lever down - and then the slide, bolt and barrel comes right off the frame, after which one can take apart the whole system very easily into its main parts. I own a Lahti, so I know, and you will also find disassembly videos on youtube (e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcIdyjMgeTw ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.11.5.68 (talk) 23:02, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
- That is not according to the source. I am keeping what is generally agreed upon by reliable sources. --Molestash (talk) 01:43, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- I removed the claim about the pistol being impossible to field strip. The source is simply wrong. See for example ([1] "This is also one of the easiest pistols of that era to disassemble for routine maintenance and put back together after it. The pistol breaks into just four (five if magazine included) parts in routine maintenance disassembly."), and the video about the Lahti on IanMcCollum's Forgotten Weapons YouTube channel ([2], disassembly at 4:55). The Lahti has a big disassembly lever in the same place as the Luger --Jxxy (talk) 04:09, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Article factual history edit
Also the cracking was in the receiver (barrel extension), adjacent to the accelerator, not in the bolt.
I think that a small 50th anniversary batch of pistols was produced in Finland
The other weakness that I have heard of but not seen is for the bolt stop/ recoil spring mount to shear off the frame allowing the bolt to come free out of the back of the receiver.
The use of an accelerator is unusual but not unique in semi auto pistols, designs with a browning type slide don't need an accelerator as the slide comprises most of the recoiling mass, pistols with the slide attached to the barrel like the lahti, vary, some use unlocking with considerable pressure in the breech to achieve reliable operation, e.g. mauser 96, the lahti assumes no remaining gas pressure. Peter kekkenon (see gunwriters.fi)suggested that it was the cool burning powder giving a slower fall in breech pressure rather than higher peak pressure which was the problem with SMG ammunition in the lahti.
an old guns review article showed a photo of a round receivered prototype which was later used in the winter war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.106.142.221 (talk • contribs)
WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 edit
Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 17:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Similarity to Luger design edit
This pistol bares a striking resemblance to the German Luger P08 pistol. Is there any connection between the two? 68.35.112.217 (talk) 06:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
No there is not. Aimo Lahti liked the Luger's ergonomics so he mirrored them. It would also help a man issued the Luger in the Finnish army to switch over to the Lahti because it used the same familiar Luger features. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.51.57.78 (talk) 19:15, 24 March 2013 (UTC)