Security guard drops gun, worker shot in leg

St. Louis Post-Dispatch ^ | 2/03/2011 | Staff

[Lees Swrd]

I actually got to handle one of those to say the least it was roughly made it looked like it was made the day before but man it was cheap looking.

[MasterGunner01]

Pre-war and early war Type 94’s are well finished, but late war pistols are really crude. The design itself is defective, IMHO.

Other writers have said the exposed sear bar is is not a serious design flaw because other pistols have exposed sear bars (the P.08 Luger does, for example). However, even though several other designs share the same feature (exposed sear bar), none of them will fire if the bar is pushed on a loaded chamber. Other pistols with exposed sear bars have theirs much better protected.

At one time I had a Type 14 Nambu with the enlarged trigger guard. It was of early 1943 manufacture. The pistol, though well balanced, had several flaws: 1) springs tended to weaken easily, 2) firing pin was fragile and was prone to breakage, 3) the firing pin had two different pin diameters (not good for spares), 4) safety was awkward and prone to breakage, 5) fresh 8x22mm ammo was difficult to find, was underpowered, and was very expensive when found.

Conclusion: Nambus are good for a collection, but they are not reliable shooting sidearms.

[MasterGunner01]

“. . . none of them will fire if the bar is pushed on a loaded chamber.”

Disclaimer: This is not 100 percent true. If you fiddle enough with the pistols that have exposed sear bars (such as the P.08 Luger), you can get them to fire accidentally with out touching the trigger. However, this is intentionally attempting to get the pistol to fire under such conditions.

In the case of the Type 94, the sear bar is so exposed it can be manipulated easily to cause an accidental discharge.