Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Powder Keg' started by gun freak, Jul 10, 2002.
is the feg pa 63 worth $100???:hmmm:
Great gun for the price, EXCEPT changing the recoil spring is absolutely necessary (not a "good idea," NECESSARY).
I cannot emphasize this enough. The stock springs in five models I have shot were just unbearable/uncontrollable. In all five cases, the makarov.com spring fixed the problem.
i will have my PA 63 friday i hope its a good gun!! i really like that two tone look!! also a Q would my stock makarov spring be an up-grade for the PA 63??? also how can i tell what year? amd where? my gun was made??? thanks!!
All of the PA-63s were made at the main FEG facility near Budapest. Good luck on the year; there is a pattern to the serial #s, but no one knows what it is!
I have two PA-63s. One has better fit and finish than some Bulgarian mil surp Maks; the other defintely does not. I would say that the Mak is the "better" pistol, except that the PA-63 is a $100 pistol that's finish can take some serious wear. I believe that they are slightly lighter, too close to call.
Look I agree with Klaus--If you have to up grade it-- then buy a Mak. I own a PA-63 and I like it, but the Mak is a better weapon.
Time you spend changing recoil spring and cost of spring and hammer spring you could afford a Mak. Pa 63 could have come with all of the modifications, but then it wouldn't be a $100 dollar gun. I haven't changed anything on mine.
The recoil spring from makarov.com is pretty cheap, and it works. Quite a few people replace the recoil springs on mil surp Maks in order to make the hotter 100-105 gr loads more comfortable.
In the end, I still paid less for my modified PA-63s than a Bulgarian Mak. If I had to do it over again, I would have bought a Mak, instead of another PA-63. I only did it in the first place because the mags are not compatible between the various 9x18 pistols. It seems like the Warsaw Pact might have thought of that...
The PA-63 is not an ideal first pistol. The Makarov isn't exactly ideal either, but it is much better in virtually every respect. The PA-63 really excels as a second (or third or whatever) 9x18 pistol in a collection, or as a spare gun for someone who carries. The size, weight, and finish of the PA-63 means that you can stick it in your shorts, front pocket, or cargo pocket and you are good to go. I wouldn't do that to an EG Mak, becuase they have collector's interest. I don't exaclty worry about my car keys scratching a PA-63. After you have moved on to bigger and/or better things, you still have a perfectly reliable stash gun.
My point is that with a little effort and some modifications, you can make a PA-63 every bit as good as any Mak. At that point, it will definitely have cost you more than a Bulgarian mil surp. However, I'd like to know where some folks are shopping for Bulgarians, because I seem to be the only person who keeps seeing some REAL DOGS among the cheaper specimens. Seriously, I have seen some pretty rough surplus Maks: burrs, uneven wear at contact points, awful triggers, etc. The PA-63s seem to be in better condition as a group, since they were basically never used (spent quite a few years riding in holsters, though).
Maks are better guns as a group. However, I suspect that a lot of Mak owners who put down PA-63s have never even shot one. Fine. Keeps the prices down for everyone else...
Nice avatar, FEG <G>
Just dropping by to say hi...
OK GOT MY PA 63 it cleaned up real nice!! MY Q?? is is the stock spring from my mak-an up grade from stock PA 63 spring?? ALSO!!! how would i change the hammer spring??? thanks again ALL--i really like the two tone look!!!
Check out earlier posts by JPM.
I have to admit--THAT IS THE LARGEST AVITAR I HAVE SEEN YET.
Thank you for your kind reply
Regarding old springs (and this is offered purely as information, with no criticism or flame intended), the major enemies of springs (and anything made of steel) is use, abuse, and neglect. Every thing will wear out eventually, and give springs enough use and they too will wear out. The use of over-pressure ammunition will accelerate this wear and shorten the service life of a spring, and this is what I mean by the word â€˜abuseâ€™. If a spring is neglected and allowed to rust, this too will shorten its service life.
In the absence of any of these three elements a spring will last virtually forever. I have a number of pocket pistols made before 1930 (and a few made before 1910) that still have their original springs. These springs are essentially like new, because the pistols have been fired little if at all.
That said, there are times it is wise to replace all the springs in an old firearm (and especially a milsurp firearm). If one purchases an old firearm with the intent of shooting it a lot itâ€™s a good idea to replace all he springs to avoid any potential for malfunctions or damage to the firearm due to worn springs. If one purchases an old firearm with the intent to use it for self-defense Iâ€™d strongly recommend replacing all the springs with new springs to avoid the occurrence of a malfunction at the worst possible moment.
In terms of the PA 63, its variations, and its use by the Hungarian military and police, this is frankly a muddle not helped by FEGâ€™s penchant for refurbishing police/military pistols to varying degrees and marketing them under a host of different names. These reworked police/military pistols may be found mixed in with new production intended for the commercial market, so one may find PA 63 pistols made yesterday or in 1963 (when PA 63 production began).
According to Janeâ€™s â€œInfantry Weaponsâ€ the PA 63 in 9x18 Makarov was the standard sidearm of the Hungarian military and police. Also according to Janeâ€™s, the AP 9 was the same pistol but chambered for the 7,65 Browning Short (.32 ACP) and the Browning 9 mm Short (.380 ACP) and intended for commercial sale. I suspect Janeâ€™s may have this backwards, as Iâ€™ve seen a number of AP 9 pistols chambered for the 9x18 Makarov with Hungarian police/military markings.
But be all that as it may, the PA 63 has been imported into the US and sold under a host of different names including the PPH, PA 63, AP 9, PMK, and PMK II. The first PA 63â€™s imported into the US were imported by InterArms and were marked and sold as Model PPH pistols. PA 63â€™s imported and sold by Century have had the model designations PA 63 and AP 9. KBI has imported and sold the pistol as the PA 63. InterArms imported and sold the pistol as the PMK II (in a steel frame variation).
In terms of quality of manufacture, IMO there isnâ€™t much difference between a FEG PA 63 and a Makarov. Both are well made and reliable pistols. The larger size of the Makarov pistol is an advantage for the purchaser who simply wants a range pistol for recreational shooting, as this larger size makes the Makarov pistol less unpleasant to shoot. Conversely, the smaller size of the PA 63 (and more so in the case of the yet smaller FEG SMC) is an advantage to the purchaser who buys a pistol to carry concealed.
My advice to the folks who ask, â€œShould I buy a Makarov or a PA 63?â€ has always been â€œBuy one of each.â€
GREAT INFO THANKS!!! and yes the mags are very sharp!! cut my fingers loadin it--Grrrrr Also the # on mine is 0508 does that make it an early one? and it came from century import---THANKS!!! Paul
FEG, I don't shoot my PA 63 much.....what are the symptoms of needing a new recoil spring?
I like mine fine, 'cept it hammers the base of my thumb. Flat out HURTS to shoot it & accuracy suffers accordingly. Otherwise, I like it.
I had one potentially serious problem with mine. I went to a gun show and was going to trade it towards a CZ 52. The guy offerred me $80....I figured fair enuf, I want the CZ. Then he discovered that the safety was not working, hammer would fall while safed. It was news to me! (Yes, BAD on my part!....fool me once.....)
The guy I got it from was also at the show...he didn't miss a beat, took it back and called me the next day to come get it. He said that the left grip was defective and blocking full action of the safety/decock lever. Made it right for free.
BTW, mines not a dual-tone. It has a black Teflon finish and has had the trigger ligthtened up.
What do you mean hammer would fall while safed.
With the safety on and weapon cocked...pull the trigger and it would (dry) fire.
The stock spring hurt my hand in the web/thumb area. The stronger spring eliminated the problem. Sounds like you would benefit too.
The safety on a PA-63 is of the decocking type. When engaged the hammer falls, but is blocked from striking the firing pin assembly. These safeties can eventually fail, but are not inherently unsafe. Try it with a chambered round at the range to make sure yours is working properly. (Standard safety precautions apply, of course).
Maybe I should check my PA 63. I don't think I can cock the hammer with decocked engaged.
According to my manual (and it is true of every one I have handled) neither trigger nor hammer will move (normally) when the safety is engaged.
yep, that's how it works now.
I'll get that recoil spring and post a range report.
I changed the reciol spring and the main spring. Still a lot of recoil, but quite manageable. Thanks for tthe tip!
Decocker functioned properly as well.