[JE223]

Recently, I have been contacted by an interested party(s) regarding gelatin testing the 7.62x25mm handgun in ballistic gelatin.

Among other things, the query concerned what bullet would I recommend in the way of JHPs and would it be a good load for CCW.

What are your opinions of testing a cartridge such as a hot 7.62x25mm with a 85 or 100gr Hornady XTP bullet? I have no idea if the 85gr will hold together past 1000 ft/sec, because that is as fast as I have shot it into gelatin (out of a .32NAA pistol), and have not had the chance to work with the 100gr offering.

Does anyone carry such a handgun for CCW? I have never owned anything from the ComBloc, not because I don't like the guns, but for reasons I will keep to myself. Is this a popular gun for 'non-gun people'?

Thank you,

JE223

[Justin]

Nope.

CZ52: Bad trigger, bad sights, possibility of overpenetration, and a decent chance that the magazines will self-disassemble partway through a magazine.

The CZ52 is a really fun range blaster, but for a concealed carry pistol, get something made by a modern manufacturer.

[weregunner]

To add to the moderators comment. There are better pistols and revolvers out there than the CZ52. Handloading self defense ammo is a bad idea. In court either a zealous D.A. or a money grubbing lawyer can use the case of one "brewing" up loads more deadly factory loads for the same thing. Then there is proving that the load used in defense can be replicated in court for to prove how the ammo behaved and its characteristics should they be called into question. Defense lawyer or D.A. will want to do more tests with exactly the brand used in the case. Replicating the tests can take many rounds. Hopefully with the same lot number as the defense rounds used in the actual shooting. Trail of evidence can be followed or created. With self loads this cannot be accomplished. Similar gun and exact ammo are what is allowed in testing or retesting. Soft nose or hollowpoint ammo for the 7.62 caliber is a good idea if not used for self defense.Varmint or small game hunting can be accomplished under the right conditions. Carlos the Jackel, the terrorist used a CZ52 to gun down to French policemen who had armor vest on. He used armor piercing ammo. Civilians for the most part have no reason for armor piercing ammo in defense scenarios. The rounds are more than likely going to go through the intended target and will have enough energy to hurt or kill someone else. Liability. Have seen numerous cases here at this forum where killing bystanders or causing great harm is routinely laughed off. Not good. The criminal element may wear body armor. In most cases, no they will not. So do what you will, but be warned that there are consequences.

[denfoote]

As a range gun it's fantastic.
It's days as a carry pistol have long since faded into the mist's of history!!

[JE223]

weregunner et all,

Thank you for the advice. However, I refuse to back down on 'controversial' research, just because it might step on the occasional toe. In my case, I have conducted about 100 individual ballistic gelatin tests, many of which involved personally-owned guns and the ammunition that I now carry in them for CCW or hunting. And I post these results free for all people to use on the internet.

My ship is sunk, were the issues that you make mention of (valid issues all, IMO) to arise in a legal action involving me as the defendant. There is nothing like the mention of optimizing the destructive potential of a bullet (pretty much the definition of Terminal ballistics) to turn the blood of Joe the Juror cold as ice.

But, I published the data to the internet (www.brassfetcher.com) and I answer emails to whomever asks me a question regarding wound ballistics, because if I can help, it is the right thing to do. My decision on that had alot to do with helping fellow gun owners and alot to do with scientific freedom. Remember how the dark ages came to Europe? The 'powers that were' scared the people away from critical thinking and public discourse. For something as silly as a bullet that 'could' shoot through armor, I think I will continue, at my own risk.

What sorts of betters guns are available?

Thank you all.

[grimjaw]

I agree with the others that the CZ52 is a poor choice for a CCW. I don't know about the cartridge, though, and I'd be interested to see what the performance would be like on ballistic gelatin. It would give some modern factual evidence to the overpenetration concern that is cited with that round.

jm

[grendelbane]

So far as I know, the 2 commonly available pistols chambered for the 7.62 Tok are the VZ52 and the Tokarev. Both have some good features, and some poor ones. I have enjoyed owning and shooting both. Neither one is a good choice, if other designs are available. That refers to the gun, not the cartridge.

Now, the cartridge is indeed interesting. I would enjoy seeing any experimentation with this cartridge. I don't think that it will prove to be the answer, but what do I know, anyway? Experimentation and research are good.

When I was shooting a Tokarev, I thought it was a nice, slim design. With a better safety and a good holster, it might indeed make a nice CCW.

Of course, it would need better ammunition than what is currently available.

[merpho]

I use my CZ52 as my carry weapon using 100 gr Hornady XTP from Reeds Research. They cost about $20 for 50 rounds. I think this provides us with a good defense load without the liability of handloading. My gun, 2 loaded clips and custom holster weigh 2 lbs, 15 oz. For the price the CZ52 is hard to beat. The surplus ammo functions well and is cheap enough that I can shoot 200 rounds at the range without feeling broke.

[earplug]

Friend had a Tok. I liked the pistol. Flat, short butt, big sights, easy to carry, Would be a decent automobile pistol due to low cost and good power to shoot though other cars.
If the 7.62x25 is soo bad why the interest in the new FN round?
Over penetration worries keep the vest wearing people happy.

[CornCod]

Really, I have a CZ-52 and the only disadvantage in my mind for CCW carry is that its too big for that role. Its a military holster pistol. However, if I could conceal one of these on my person well I would carry it.

[JE223]

Would you mind shooting that 100gr XTP load into a jug of water? I am asking on behalf of the many interested people on THR (no pressure here :) ).

To do it right, completely fill a half gallon -waxed cardboard- OJ jug with room temperature water. Pull apart the polyester stuffing from an old pillow, and pack that into a long cardboard box to catch the bullet. Long and narrow is best. Place the jug at least 4" in front of the box and let it fly.

The recovered diameter of your bullet will give most of the information that has been in question on this thread.

Thank you,

JE223

[RyanM]

If someone were forced by poverty to stay in the extreme low end of the price range, there are worse choices than the CZ-52. Especially one that's been tuned a bit and has decent magazines. If I were in that position, I think I would trust a CZ-52 more than a Hi-Point or Lorcin or something.

On ammo, the XTP line tends to hold together fairly well, though they may not perform at their best.

Sierra 90 gr JHPs expand well at .32 H&R velocities, so they would probably be a poor choice.

The Rainier .32 caliber 100 gr PHPs look like they may do very well. One reviewer on Midway USA said that in water jugs, he got no expansion at 800 fps and 1000 fps, and "normal" expansion at 1300 fps. 100 gr @ 1300 fps sounds like a reasonable starting load to me.

Speer .32 100 gr JHPs look interesting, but I have no idea how they perform.

Power Pistol is a very good powder for that caliber from what I've read; gives good velocity and accuracy without too much pressure.

[PotatoJudge]

I'm more curious about the 60grn gold dot load. Gold dots seem to be pretty good about opening up, and with enough speed might penetrate enough despite their weight. Possible end result: respectable expanded diameter and depth of penetration. The only reason I consider this load at all is because gold dots tend to open up easier than XTPs, and because they don't make a 100 or 110 grn 308 gold dot.
(For the record, I'm a 158 grn and 230 grn guy generally, not a "light superfast" "temporary cavity" "hydrostatic shock" them to death kind of guy- but I do see how this round could work, and it's the only GD load out there)

[roscoe]

CornCod, do you carry the pistol with one in the chamber? People don't seem to trust the condition 1 carry for teh CZ52, but if it is safe to carry with hammer down, it would be pretty useful.

[RyanM]

I'm more curious about the 60grn gold dot load.

Someone already did tests of 60 gr Gold Dots at 1270 fps through a KT P32 that was modified to take a wildcat cartridge. The gelatin results are no longer up, but the Gold Dot fragmented into one large bullet piece and 6 petal bits, and penetrated very shallowly. Most likely, putting the same bullet at the 2000 fps+ which the 7.62x25mm is capable of, will result in complete fragmentation and penetration less than 5".

Ease of "opening up" is not an issue at all with 7.62x25mm using .32 mag bullets.

[Manedwolf]

I would definitely like to see the ballistic results of the S&B 7.62x25 Tok that's most readily available, as it seems to be the best-quality noncorrosive out there. Prvi Partisan and Winchester White Box Metric also, perhaps. While you're at it, I don't trust MagSafe's quality at all, but they have a Tok Defender round that I'd like to see the results of in gelatin!

I really don't see the point of a JHP, though. The thing is known as a fast penetrator, with the bullet travelling at near rifle velocities, so I don't know if a JHP would even hold together or be effective...it is worth a shot, though. No pun intended.

I also find it somewhat amusing that people automatically jump to assuming that the author is talking about the CZ-52, which is hardly what I think of when I think of that round. Yes, it's cheap. But with its overly complicated roller-locking design, it's just a curiousity and range toy. The TOKAREV pistol, on the other hand, the original deal, either the Russian or Polish Radom versions of the TT-33, (no idea about the Chinese clones) are true, simple, and very slender Browning-design autos. If you don't mind a single-action pistol that you really shouldn't carry chambered even with its afterthought-for-import safety, it's a solid, simple weapon with a hell of a caliber for penetration of vehicle metal and anything up to level III body armor, should a criminal happen to be wearing it. The only drawback I can see is that the flash is likely to ruin your night vision.

Yes, I wish someone would make a new doublestack in the caliber, but the TT-33 is a decent pistol even if you wanted to carry it for some reason. The CZ? No, that's just for fun at the range.

I would be very interested in seeing what the aforementioned brands out of a TT-33 would do.

If you want to actually carry the round, I'd suggest this pistol, no CZ.

http://www.hlebooks.com/tokarev/Tt33.jpg

[roscoe]

The CZ52 should not be carried just because of the roller design? And I thought the TT could not handle the heavier loads for the CZ52?

By the way, I would love to see the results of the gelatin test.

I do agree about the slimness of the TT being nice, and I love the Art Deco styling of the TT, but I don't really get why the CZ52 is not a better pistol in terms of the mechanics and strength. The CZ52, if in good shape, is reported to be one of the most accurate autoloaders out there because of the recoil mechanism. Plus, it does actually have a safety.

[JE223]

http://www.brassfetcher.com/prem32acp.html for what a 60gr Gold Dot looks like at 1237 ft/sec. Underwhelming, but I did push it at least 200 ft/sec faster than it was designed for.

Manedwolf, thanks for the info regarding the guns ... I'm thinking what I would like to do then is to have someone meet me at a range, with their Tokarev or CZ. They seem like nice guns, but, I don't want to invest much more money than what I have in gelatin powder, etc. in a test like this.

FWIW, a 85gr 7.62mm FMJ at 1600 ft/sec will penetrate to 33" in ballistic gelatin. This will vary slightly, of course, for the nose profile and if the bullet tumbles. A more blunt nose will give maybe an inch less here-or-there.

[Michael Zeleny]

The Tokarev pistol stands among the greatest fighting handguns of all time. Its design is a genuine improvement on the Browning tilting barrel, short recoil locked breech pattern. Among its several advanced features is the removable firing mechanism group that comprises the hammer, hammer spring, sear, sear spring, disconnector, and two machined steel cartridge guide ribs. This integration of the hammer action into a separate unit is echoed in the SIG P210 (http://larvatus.livejournal.com/33732.html), arguably the ultimate derivation of the original Browning design. The P210 omits Tokarev's no less ingenious separation of the cartridge feed guide from the magazine. Unaccountably, this advanced feature has not been duplicated in any other handgun.

By contrast, the VZ-52 excels mainly as a plaything. Clark Magnuson has demonstrated (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=49169) with his overload tests that its reputation for strength is undeserved. The Czech sidearm remains untested in, and arguably unfit for, armed conflict.

Now that bottleneck cartridges like 5.7x28mm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.7_x_28_mm_cartridge) and .357 SIG (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.357_SIG) are once again in favor for military and constabulary applications, the 7.62x25mm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62_x_25_mm_TT) could not be far behind. Fitted with a secure holster, with an empty chamber or with its hammer resting at the half-cock notch over a loaded round, the Tokarev pistol is an excellent choice for concealed carry.

[The_Shootist]

I think my model Zastava Model 70 (.32ACP), built in Serbia is modeled on the Tok design. I frequently use it as a "beater" or truck gun. At close range its accurate enough and (being built like a tank) eats all the hotter loads that I would hesitate to put through my P-32.

I'm a little leery of cocked and locked carry but thats probably paranoia. Works in that mode just fine.

For $ 99 I guess its a Com-Bloc Saturday Night Special :evil:

[Manedwolf]

Now that bottleneck cartridges like 5.7x28mm and .357 SIG are once again in favor for military and constabulary applications, the 7.62x25mm could not be far behind. Fitted with a secure holster, with an empty chamber or with its hammer resting at the half-cock notch over a loaded round, the Tokarev pistol is an excellent choice for concealed carry.

The only concern I'd had there was that I'd heard that due to the Tok's (floating?) firing pin design, if chambered, if the pistol is dropped, the pin CAN travel forward with enough inertial force against the primer to fire the round. Is that true?

But yes, just from a historical perspective. The Tok was in wars, from the "Great Patriotic War" to Vietnam, and showed itself to be effective under combat conditions. I don't think the CZ was ever in combat.

Also...ever try to reload a CZ quickly, with that goofy Euro wire loop heel mag release? The Tok is a standard grip button drop-and-slap reload familiar to anyone who's ever touched just about any modern auto pistol.

In a post-disaster scenario where I had to be out and couldn't be carrying a rifle, such as in waiting in a line somewhere, I would DEFINITELY have the Tok somewhere on me in addition to a .45. It's a slender and easy to conceal package that can deliver a round that'll go right through vehicle metal, windshields, and even level II body armor, if a BG happened to be wearing it.

I would really like to see what various rounds do out of it in some new tests.

[Michael Zeleny]

The only concern I'd had there was that I'd heard that due to the Tok's (floating?) firing pin design, if chambered, if the pistol is dropped, the pin CAN travel forward with enough inertial force against the primer to fire the round. Is that true?You are thinking of the Makarov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makarov_PM) pistol. The Tokarev employs a firing pin spring (http://alpharubicon.com/leo/tokarev213.htm).

[roscoe]

A lot of new information for me about the CZ52 and the TT. I still want a 7.62 firearm - too bad the Tokarevs are so much more expensive and hard to find than the CZ52.

[Michael Zeleny]

I still want a 7.62 firearm - too bad the Tokarevs are so much more expensive and hard to find than the CZ52.The classiest firearm in that caliber is doubtless the Mauser C96. Yes, 7.63x25mm Mauser is dimensionally and ballistically equivalent to 7.62x25mm Tokarev, rumors to the contrary notwithstanding. Anyone who doubts the strength of this old warhorse would do well to consider its capacity to endure battering by 9x25mm Mauser Export, a proleptic equal if not better of .357 S&W Magnum.

[silverlance]

funny thing.. i was just shooting the vz52 (aka cz52) earlier today.

so it's unfit for battle? well, given a choice between the vz and either of my p228s, I'd of course take the p228. the 9mm EMFG rounds I use will punch through light cover without excessive overpentration. 13 / 15 rounds, night sights, da /sa, all these make the p228 a better choice as a defensive handgun over the vz52.

after all, the vz52 suffers from a very stiff trigger (I PHYSICALLY cannot shoot more than two boxes of x25 without having to stop.. my finger gets so tired it ceases to be capable of squeezing), narrow sights, low magazine capacity, slower magazine mechanism, heavy overall weight, and a hyper velocity small diameter bullet.

that said -

I shot two bowling pins at 150 METERS today with it using 1950s surplus romanian corrosive ammo, blew the heck out of a 1 gal jug of water (it exploded), and swapped magazines just as fast as the guy using the 1911 next to me (once you get used to it, you can do it just as easily as the release button mechanism... the trick is to insert the magazine in at an angle (tilted towards your body), then use the spine of the magazine to push back the heel release.

I test the safety each time I go, and I have never had the vz52s safety fail on me. The decocker works great, and the gun is so slim that if i taped it to my chest under a thick sweater there's a very godo chance no one would notice.

in essence, I would not feel horribly underequipped with a vz52 and a good supply of ammuntion. I've also NEVER had a jam with it, which is more than can be said for nearly every other gun i've ever owned.

[Michael Zeleny]

in essence, I would not feel horribly underequipped with a vz52 and a good supply of ammuntion. I've also NEVER had a jam with it, which is more than can be said for nearly every other gun i've ever owned.Bottleneck cartridges tend to feed better than tapered types like 9mm Luger, and much better than straight wall types like .45 ACP. The shortcomings of the VZ-52 pertain to atrocious tolerances, poor ergonomics, inadequate safety, and extreme fragility. Its bore specs are extremely inconsistent (http://www.gunboards.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=85973). Its trigger is not only stiff, but punishing with harsh slap on the rebound. Its decocker cannot be trusted to lower the hammer safely; its firing pin is guaranteed to fracture from dry firing; and its chamber is given to catastrophic failure with marginal overloads. It is a fun toy, but far from an adequate combat arm.

[JE223]

To try to keep this one on-topic, I will answer some of my own questions, with my opinions:

What are your opinions of testing a cartridge such as a hot 7.62x25mm with a 85 or 100gr Hornady XTP bullet?


... I've done things with modified .32ACP and .25ACP loads, hoping to draw the attention of a large manfacturer to the fact that there might be a market for effective factory loads in those calibers. If not that, then at least such a bullet is achievable by easy modification to current bullet designs. That is kind of my idea with the 7.62x25mm, as well.

Does anyone carry such a handgun for CCW? Is this a popular gun for 'non-gun people'?


When I think 'non gun-person', I think of 'person who is realistic enough to know that they may one day be responsible for their safety, but don't share my enthusiasm with guns as a hobby'. These same people, IMO are drawn to handguns in the lower-price category, ala CZ 7.62x25mm, etc.

Thank you.

[roscoe]

I would love to see more people chime in on the CZ52. Everything I had read up to this point had seemed to indicate that it was well-respected, if a little too complex. The roller lock mechanism was regarded as one reason it was accurate and relatively smooth recoiling, for such a high-velocity round. It seems to me that, aside from the decocker, which could probably be ignored, the real new issue is the weak chamber.

Clark's posts were the first where I had read about the chamber problem, and there are a fair number of people experimenting with the pistol. I had considered purchasing one for a truck gun, but this has made me reconsider.

[Michael Zeleny]

The accuracy of my VZ-52 is mediocre, about equal to my Seventies Browning Hi-Power. The measurements posted on gunboards (http://www.gunboards.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=85973) suggest typical Eastern Block quality control issues.

[Novus Collectus]

This is my opinion of people's opinions who are too critical of the CZ52:

-The gun is built like a tank and I don't care what anyone says about the chamber walls. I'll get into this later on in the post.
-My two CZs are tight as far as this gun novice can tell, but mine are in great shape for the most part.
-I have no problem with the trigger pull, but that could be because mine are in pretty good shape, or maybe because I'm not a weak wuss. I can, and have fired a few hundred rounds in a session and it is not my finger that hurts the most. Maybe I'm just used to it.
-The only times I have ever had problems firing them was when I used the 9mm drop in barrel and when I used some ancient surplus ammo. Using S&B ammo in the 7.62x25 I have never, ever had a problem with feed or ejection.


Now the problems people discussed.

-The chamer walls crap is bogus. The Czheck military ammo was loaded to fire over 1,600 feet per second and they took that abuse for years. The S&B ammo shoots at around 1,500 FPS and some of that Romanian and Russian surplus ammo I have heard only shoots at around 1,200-1,300 FPS so the TT has not seen nearly as powerful ammo to be truly compared as far as ruggedness goes.
-The tolerances may be partly due to some crappily made examples, but since they fired some powerful ammo in them for decades, many issued ones are going to loosen up I would think.
-The few kabooms I have heard about were most likely due not to slightly hot loads, but some VERY hot loads such as sub machine gun ammo getting mixed up with some surplus ammo. Also there has been some very suspect combloc ammo that has caused kabooms and failures that may have been loaded hot due to lack of quality control, or maybe the way the chemicals reacted the pressure of the burning powder was many times normal.
-"complex mechanism"?????? I am no gunsmith, but it seems straightforward to me and only as complex as a Browning locking system in a 1911.
-I have never heard of a good condition magazine coming apart in the middle of shooting, and I have never had that problem with any of mine, even the ones in poor condition. Hell, I can't even imagine how one could come apart in the well.
-The people who claim that most criminals, muggers or robbers don't wear armor and so there is no real need for such a powerful round, well they don't live in the Washington DC area. Sure it may be a true statement to say most criminals don't wear bulletproof armor, but there are many cases in the area paper involving a police shooting, an armed robbery/hostage situation, invasion and even muggings wear the criminal was wearing, or suspected of wearing body armor.

There are some things I do agree with however.

-Of my two guns, one will slightly dimple a primer when using the decocking lever, but it does not fire an primed, empty case. Enough to make me worry though and not use it on that gun.
-The grip is too thin for my big hand which lead to some discomfort. Some Hogue slip-on grips helped a lot.
-No matter how practiced one might be with loading the magazine, it is still awkward enough to be difficult to load in a stressful situation compared to something like an 1911A1.
-Over penetration may be a problem, but this hooey about if you reload your own softpoints or use special soft point ammo would set you up for a lawyer claiming you intended to kill is just an overreaction IMO. I would worry more about hitting someone with an overpenetration using any round much more than I would worry about the easily countrered and probably rare lawyer making such a ridiculous claim.....I say easily countered because both sides get to speak in a trial and using "special ammo" or homemade ammo utilizing soft point ammo is for public safety purposes and all pointing out that the special ammo prevents over-penetration was intended to save innocent lives. If someone's lawyer didn't bring that up, then it wouldn't matter what bullets were used because the person is screwed with a lawyer like that.
-The gun is a little too large and big I suspect for CC, but if I was in an open carry state and I wore a gun, I would be perfectly fine wearing one.
-The firing pin does break easily they say, but there are aftermarket makes and some designes that totally prevents this.
-With my one CZ I would carry cocked with the safety on, but I would not be completely comfortable. The big problem with carrying with the hammer down is that, on my pistols and my hand at least, the hammer is a bitch to cock with just the thumb.


Back to the topic. I would love to see the test results of the round in ballistic gellatin. I also would like to see a gellatin test with a human skull under a kevlar helmet.
The Box of Truth guys shot some pistol rounds at some Kevlar helmets and the only one to penetrate was the 7.62x25 round and it blew up the milk jug filled with water that was underneath, but that may not mean it still had enough power to penetrate the skull after going through the helmet.

[Michael Zeleny]

The Czheck military ammo was loaded to fire over 1,600 feet per second and they took that abuse for years. The S&B ammo shoots at around 1,500 FPS and some of that Romanian and Russian surplus ammo I have heard only shoots at around 1,200-1,300 FPS so the TT has not seen nearly as powerful ammo to be truly compared as far as ruggedness goes.The Czech military ammo throwing its bullets at 1,600 feet per second appears to be an urban legend. Here (http://members.nuvox.net/~on.melchar/tokarev/) is the most comprehensive 7.62x25mm ammunition survey available online. Draw your own conclusions. It remains that the only known test of VZ-52 found it wanting in strength in comparison to the Tokarev TT-33 and the Mauser C96.

[PotatoJudge]

So instead of 1500 fps it got bumped up to 1600 with urban rounding? Doesn't stand out among internet rumors. Of course, other surplus ammo chronoed to 1550fps, so who's to say another batch of Czech ammo wasn't hotter? I've seen load data ranging from 1200 fps max to 1600 for 85-90grn bullets. One of the loads listed as "too hot" is 6.3 grns Unique with an 85 grn FMJ @ 1382 fps. Makarov.com has a load of 6.6 grn Unique for a 90-93 grn jacketed bullet @1500 fps- the "sierra accuracy load."
I just don't know who's internet load data to trust with my fingers anymore!

[gunny1022]

CZ 52 roller system weak? Same system used in the MG42 in 8 X 57 at 1200 RPM. Bad workmanship? The Czechs have been the standard for quality gunsmithing for centuries. 7.62 X 25 not an effective defense stopper cartridge? Tell that to the WWII Nazis and Korean War GIs. Accurate? Most accounts show it to be the most accurate military pistol ever made. Would I take one to a gunfight? Damn right!

[Tortuga12]

I have to agree that the roller system doesn't seem all that complex to me. No links, bushings, tilting barrels, etc. I find it very easy to strip!
The trigger on my gun is fine, too! About 5 lbs., I'd guess. No trigger slap, either. Mine is an unissued '53, maybe this is a problem with rearsenaled guns? My decocker works fine, too. Oh, and my other handgun is a High Standard Supermatic Citation, so I knows a good trigger when I sees it!
Why is it that we get so caught up on this gun vs. that when it comes to self defense? Any gun is better than no gun, and almost any gun is better than a Lorcin or Jennings. Shot placement and a good dose of common sense would seem to be the most important considerations if something bad were to take place in a home.

P.S. Oh, wait, I remember why! Because it's fun!

[Manedwolf]

As far as the round goes in another test, one of the recent Military Surplus special issues put out by Guns and Ammo mentioned the effectiveness of the round against the older style US steel pot helmet. It's in the article on the Nagant pistol.

The little Nagant revolver only put a dent in the helmet, but the 7.62x25 round from a Tok put a perfectly round hole in the helmet, blew a cavity through a melon inside, and dented the OTHER side of the helmet.

Good round.

[Michael Zeleny]

Bad workmanship? The Czechs have been the standard for quality gunsmithing for centuries.Whose standard for quality gunsmithing did they set?Accurate? Most accounts show it to be the most accurate military pistol ever made.Which accounts would that be?

[jon_in_wv]

Here is one account. This weekend I fired two three shot groups with my cz52 that measured 2 1/4 inches at 50 yards. I used czech and russian surplus ammo and while the point of impact changed the groups were the same. The 7.62x25 is capable of awesome accuracy in the cz52. While shooting two weeks ago I noticed that the casing from one of the Czech rounds had split along the length of the casing, there was no bulge at all and the gun never missed a beat. I wouldn't compare my 53 year old CZ to a modern gun for carry but that doesn't mean we have mothing to learn about the ammo? I would love to see a modern gun chambered for this ammo. Its flat shooting, powerful, and penetrates well. It would be a great small game round and I would love to see a modern gun made using this type of lockwork and ammo.

By the way, there were witnesses to my groups and I will post pics of the groups on my thread about my CZ but you'll still have to trust me on that. I had a hard time believing it when I shot them.

[jon_in_wv]

On another note, this thread was started because someone was posing a question about the merits of doing some gelatin testing with the 7.62 from a pistol chambered for it. Personally, I would love to see some good gelatin testing with the 7.62 from a CZ or a Tokarev. It would be really cool if they threw in some of the other military rounds like the .45, 9mm, 9x18, etc.. and compared thier effectiveness against flak jackets, body armor, heavy clothing, metal, glass, etc.......And also loaded them using some quality hollowpoints to see how that would perform. I would be interested to see what an 85gr XTP or gold dot would do at 1500fps.

By the way. I happen to like my CZ52 very much. I traded a "modern" 9mm for it and I don't regret it one bit.

[roscoe]

Michael, I am not saying your are wrong, but the report you cite:
The Czech military ammo throwing its bullets at 1,600 feet per second appears to be an urban legend. Here is the most comprehensive 7.62x25mm ammunition survey available online. Draw your own conclusions. It remains that the only known test of VZ-52 found it wanting in strength in comparison to the Tokarev TT-33 and the Mauser C96.
states that the CZ52 is stronger than the Tokarev, in the section entitled "dangerous surplus warning". Also, where the barrel burst from the bad Bulgarian ammo, the barrel burst at the top, not the bottom.

This is a quote from that report (referencing the overloaded Bulgarian ammo):
"This ammunition will destroy weaker designs such as the TT-33 or the C-96. Fortunately, the incidents reported to date only involve use with the stronger CZ-52 pistols and no serious injuries have resulted from its use."

I personally would love to see this issue resolved. I really want a 7.62x25 pistol, but am waiting to see which way to go.

[epijunkie67]

I must have gotten a bad gun. :(

I bought my cz52 at a gunshow a few years ago. It's reliable but it couldn't hit the braod side of a barn from the inside. :banghead:

I get 6" groups at 7 yards on an indoor range with no wind using slow aimed fire! It looks like a shotgun pattern. I keep reading all these accounts about how accurate they are and wonder "How?". Guess mine's just been shot out or something.

[tinygnat219]

Does anyone carry such a handgun for CCW? I have never owned anything from the ComBloc, not because I don't like the guns, but for reasons I will keep to myself. Is this a popular gun for 'non-gun people'?

Thank you,

JE223

JE223,

I hope to God no one uses this as a CCW. Don't get me wrong, it's a neat pistol for historical purposes and I own two of them. Here's why I don't like them for Conceal and Carry (no opinions were harmed in the making of this post):

First off, the SD ammo choices are basically limited to FMJ, which moving at 1650 fps, tends to overpenetrate.
Second, the plaform is huge, it cannot be easily concealed.
Third, how does one carry this SA safely? It can't be carried "Cocked and Locked" like the 1911. The Safety is effectively a de-cocker, which puts the hammer down. One has to recock the hammer in order to bring the pistol back on line. In the heat of battle, the shooter might panic and not be able to bring it up on time.
Fourth, it seems that because of the price, the pistol is deemed a "bargain" and at 120-150 bucks, it's not bad. However, one would be better off waiting a paycheck or two and purchase a used police handgun.
Fifth, Reliability. For the life of me, I can't bet my life on a 50 year old former Communist pistol that fires mostly surplus FMJ ammunition, with crappy sites, and no way to carry it in Condition One.

That's my opinion... that's all.

[Justin]

-I have never heard of a good condition magazine coming apart in the middle of shooting, and I have never had that problem with any of mine, even the ones in poor condition. Hell, I can't even imagine how one could come apart in the well.

I have. On more than one occassion. The magazine base plate comes loose while the gun is in mid-recoil. Then the spring, follower, and remaining ammunition all follow suit, leaving nothing but the body of the magazine in the gun.

[robert garner]

Silverlance's experience most resembles mine.
I enjoy a pistol that reliably hits at 100 yrds!
Why is the CZ52 harder to carry / conceal than the 1911?
My ONLY caveat is that I get right at 10% failure to fire with the surplus ammo I use. A better quality ammo and I would not be adverse to carrying this for seld defense! Then tho I am comfortable with the j-frame S&W, and the Makarov, which I seem to carry daily.
Please do the test on the ammo/gelitin I would love to see this round appreciated as I feel it deserves.
robert
:cool:

[R.W.Dale]

This is a quote from that report (referencing the overloaded Bulgarian ammo):
"This ammunition will destroy weaker designs such as the TT-33 or the C-96. Fortunately, the incidents reported to date only involve use with the stronger CZ-52 pistols and no serious injuries have resulted from its use."

I personally would love to see this issue resolved. I really want a 7.62x25 pistol, but am waiting to see which way to go.


My take on it is that the TT-33 is the stronger of the two guns, I breifly owned a CZ52 as well as a Norinco 54-1. In my handloading endeavors I quickly noticed that even the weakest most anemic 7.62x25 loads would cycle the CZ while only the stiffest top shelf loadings would cycle the Norinco's action. In short my CZ was beating itself and my wrist to death with even moderate loads. After just a few trips to the range the roller wear on the CZ's barrel and slide was becoming very pronunced. Wheras the Norinco just seems to digest everything without so much as a hiccup.

The Norinco also wins in the accuracy dpt by a long shot.

I think that most of the people who are writing the sappy CZ52 love stories are just assuming that because the CZ's roller delayed blowback machanism is diffrent therefore it must be stronger.

CZ 52 roller system weak? Same system used in the MG42 in 8 X 57 at 1200 RPM

PLEASE that's like saying that a Chevette and a Subaru WRX both have the same engine just because they both have 4 cylinders

[Novus Collectus]

My take on it is that the TT-33 is the stronger of the two guns, I breifly owned a CZ52 as well as a Norinco 54-1. In my handloading endeavors I quickly noticed that even the weakest most anemic 7.62x25 loads would cycle the CZ while only the stiffest top shelf loadings would cycle the Norinco's action. In short my CZ was beating itself and my wrist to death with even moderate loads. After just a few trips to the range the roller wear on the CZ's barrel and slide was becoming very pronunced I am no gunsmith, but it sounds to me like the main spring was shot. I know with mine it is stiff to pull back the slide for the first round and I have to grip it good between my fingers to prevent it from slipping out of them.

If you had an after market barrel in it, then they often use soft metal for the roller bearings and they come out of round rather easy I hear.

[Novus Collectus]

I have. On more than one occassion. The magazine base plate comes loose while the gun is in mid-recoil. Then the spring, follower, and remaining ammunition all follow suit, leaving nothing but the body of the magazine in the gun. Ok, I can see that happening, but I have never had this problem myself....at least not yet.

[R.W.Dale]

Nope my handgun was all original except for the new return spring that I installed thinking the samething you did.

[R.W.Dale]

Here is an interesting thread from a couple of years ago on this subject.

http://www.gunboards.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=96939

[AJAX22]

You guys must be getting some bum pistols.. I have two cz 52's and I dearly love them. I would prefer it if they were double action, or had a colt style safty, also it would be nice if it was a double stack magazine that had a standard button release.

However, since I paid 120 bucks apice for them, and they are absolutly beautifull, fantasticly acurate, and as yet I cannot detect wear in them, some slight design flaws can be overlooked.

I trust mine implicitly. and we have a good relationship.

ymmv

[Michael Zeleny]

Michael, I am not saying your are wrong, but the report you cite:
The Czech military ammo throwing its bullets at 1,600 feet per second appears to be an urban legend. Here is the most comprehensive 7.62x25mm ammunition survey available online. Draw your own conclusions. It remains that the only known test of VZ-52 found it wanting in strength in comparison to the Tokarev TT-33 and the Mauser C96.states that the CZ52 is stronger than the Tokarev, in the section entitled "dangerous surplus warning". Also, where the barrel burst from the bad Bulgarian ammo, the barrel burst at the top, not the bottom.

This is a quote from that report (referencing the overloaded Bulgarian ammo):
"This ammunition will destroy weaker designs such as the TT-33 or the C-96. Fortunately, the incidents reported to date only involve use with the stronger CZ-52 pistols and no serious injuries have resulted from its use."I cited the report for its measurement of ballistics, not for its conclusory musings utterly unsupported by evidence. Likewise as regards Clark Magnuson's experiments at overloading the 7.62x25mm round. To repeat myself, I know of no evidence that supports the theory that the VZ-52 is stronger than the Mauser C-96 and/or the Tokarev TT-33. My personal experience with all three handgun types has led me to conclude that its quality is far inferior to the German and Soviet products.

[Michael Zeleny]

-The few kabooms I have heard about were most likely due not to slightly hot loads, but some VERY hot loads such as sub machine gun ammo getting mixed up with some surplus ammo. Also there has been some very suspect combloc ammo that has caused kabooms and failures that may have been loaded hot due to lack of quality control, or maybe the way the chemicals reacted the pressure of the burning powder was many times normal.Your hypotheses are of no consequence in considering the published results of Clark Magnuson's measurements, calculations, and experiments at overloading the VZ-52. If you want to be taken seriously, try supporting them with findings of fact.

[Michael Zeleny]

This weekend I fired two three shot groups with my cz52 that measured 2 1/4 inches at 50 yards.Three shot groups are statistically inconclusive. It takes between five and six shot groups to get a rough idea of mechanical accuracy. As described here (http://larvatus.livejournal.com/33732.html), military tests typically specify ten shot groups.

[JE223]

OK. I will test out this cartridge in ballistic gelatin.

What I need :

1. A pistol in 7.62x25mm, hopefully the more common, cheaper kind that doesn't explode. It would be best to met me at a public range in my area (N. FL) for the test.

2. The reloading dies or the handloaded bullets. I would prefer to load these myself. I'm currently looking to shoot the Hornady 85gr and 100gr XTP bullets, so I would need those loaded over a sensible maximum charge.

3. Assurance that these tests would benefit someone :) . IE, I have tried from the beginning to test bullets that were commonly available to the 'average gun owner'. After all, the best ammo in the world is of no use to you, if it is not in your gun and the best way to get this to happen is to evaluate the stuff that can be bought 24/7 from the major retailers. Basically, I would like to know if the 7.62x25mm is your only gun, or that of someone that you know.

Thank you very much for the assistance so far.

JE223

[confed sailor]

wow, i guess i found a couple (3) good ones too.

parts replaced:
-machined firing pin
-new hardened aftermarket rollers
-Wolff spring set

tuning performed:
-stoned the sear surfaces (very very lightly)
-lighter sear spring
-liberal coat of NeoLube (graphite in isopropanol)

it shoots well, from a rest with my handloads it shoots "minute of person" @100 yds, and much better closer, naturally :neener:

i have another rechambered for 9mm largo, and its a shooter too.

I will admit the decocker scares the heck outa me, i.e. i dont use it. As for being overcomplicated, yes thats alot of machining. However, it strips down easier than a 1911 imho, and for reassembly its not nearly as aggravating as the little darn link thingy on a 1911.

oh and one more thing; Mike Z, calm down, your posts are starting to sound a bit petulant.:neener:

[Novus Collectus]

Your hypotheses are of no consequence in considering the published results of Clark Magnuson's measurements, calculations, and experiments at overloading the VZ-52. If you want to be taken seriously, try supporting them with findings of fact.Pardon me? Hey, just because you see a low post count, don't think I'm a newbie by any means.
A hypothesis doesn't have findings of fact for if it did, it would be more than a hypothesis. If you will notice in my post I specifically clalrified it was nothing more than personal experience when I said "I have heard".
If I said it was a fact, then I would have at least been stronger in my declaration! The assumptions were mostly not my own, but from what I read by other people. The sub machine gun ammo was one of the suspicions.
There was a lot of discussion and posting of links about the CZ52 kabooms over on TheFiringLine nearly two years ago.

I have not read this Clark Magnuson's publication and on first hearing of it I am suspect. He no doubt has worked hard on it and is obviously much more learned about firearms and such than I am, but people like him have been wrong about their conclusions before.

[jon_in_wv]

First of all Mike Z. Saying the shooting two 2 1/4 inch groups back to back at 50 yards with a handgun is NOT indicitive of the accuracy of the weapon that fired it is silly and shows that you simply have a agenda here that has NOTHING to do with what the topic of this thread is supposed to be. What has ANYTHING you have posted have to do with with the propect of gelatin testing the 7.62 using the Tokarev or the CZ52?? You have successfully hijacked this thread and used it to bash anyone who has an opinion differing from your own. You say you don't have to take anyone seriously unless they can back up what they say but I haven't heard what qualifications you have that allow you to treat others as if thier opinions are so inferior to your own? You only site a few sources for your info. What expertise or experience do you have with the 7.62 and the CZ or Tokarev? Apparantly you can tell me that my CZ is not mechanically accurate without even firing it, you must have some expertise that we should hear about. Personally I think we should respect someones opinions unless I have some reason to discount it. Then it up to ME to provide info and ask them to provide some to back up what they said. Everyone isn't obligated to impress you just to speak thier mind.

[Michael Zeleny]

What expertise or experience do you have with the 7.62 and the CZ or Tokarev? Apparantly you can tell me that my CZ is not mechanically accurate without even firing it, you must have some expertise that we should hear about.I am fully qualified to cite credible findings of fact. So is everyone else. In this thread, I have referenced measurements taken and experiments performed by other shooters. I reserve my personal opinions for personal acquaintances. When I see strangers purvey personal opinions in lieu of findings of fact, I point out their probative shortcomings. I make no claims about equipment owned and operated by anyone else. If your VZ-52 has a SAAMI-spec bore and chamber, you are welcome to publish their measurements. Likewise for statistically representative groups that you shoot out of it. But please bear in mind that your publications will not and cannot negate the published observations to the contrary, which I cited above.

[merpho]

I went to the site you suggested. I do not pretent to know who Clark is but all he says about the CZ 52 is a merasurement of our walls and then realizes that has no bearing on the gun or its users. Am I missing something? Until I see something factual I will continue to use and shoot my CZ 52 happily.

[roscoe]

It would be nice of Clark to post so we can get the straight dope. He describes some CZ/VZ52 failures and it would be nice to know where they failed. Like I said, the only one I have seen online failed at the top of the chamber, and there have been a lot of people firing these things, some of them with pretty hot loads, like the .223 Timbs.

[JE223]

Looks like this one is going off-topic. My original question was about gelatin testing... not sure people are looking at the thread to follow an arguement between a few people.

[Deer Hunter]

I've been waiting for results on this round. I'd love to own a CZ52, and I can't wait to see some gel tests. Go for it.

[Justin]

I certainly won't dispute the accuracy of the gun. The examples that I've shot have all been uniformly accurate weapons, and flat-shooting enough to make hitting a target at distances out to 100 yards easy.

My problems lie with the mechanical and interface issues inherent to the weapon: faulty decockers, magazine construction, ergonomics, poor sights, and weak recoil springs that cause the roller-locking mechanism to batter itself apart.

Now, some of these issues can be alleviated through the installation of aftermarket parts or some basic gunsmithing. But it doesn't change the fact that all of these make the CZ52 a poor choice for a defensive or carry weapon.

I find Clark's arguments for why the gun is inherently weak to be dubious at best. Clark has made a name for himself on teh intertubes as the guy who loads stuff hot enough to cause catastrophic failure.

Quite frankly, I find his results to be both blatantly obvious (if you load ammunition past SAAMI spec you can cause a weapon to catastrophically fail) and utterly useless other than as an academic curiosity.

No one in their right mind would carry a gun loaded with ammuniton past SAAMI specifications which makes his argument moot.

But failure with extremely hot rounds that test the mechanical envelope of the weapon are hardly useful for the average person who will be shooting these pistols with either surplus ammunition (including submachinegun stuff) or the commercially available loads from manufacturers such as S&B.

As I've stated before, the CZ52 is a fun blaster to take to the range, but it is a historical relic, and offers no advantages over a modern pistol chambered in a cartridge that is readily available.

[roscoe]

Looks like this one is going off-topic. My original question was about gelatin testing... not sure people are looking at the thread to follow an arguement between a few people.
True enough, and I sure hope you do some gelatin testing, and that you include some of the commercially available ammo like the new Wolf hollowpoints, and the softpoint and hollowpoint stuff Reed loads, so we can know what we might have available if we don't handload.

But it sure has been an interesting airing of opinions on the CZ52. I still really want a 7.62x25 pistol, so it has been worth reading for me, even if there was a bit of pedantry.

[Cosmoline]

I really don't see the point of a JHP, though. The thing is known as a fast penetrator, with the bullet travelling at near rifle velocities, so I don't know if a JHP would even hold together or be effective...it is worth a shot, though. No pun intended.

It's a fast round, but not that fast. Sometimes folks get into jacket separation problems driving .312" handgun bullets into the 2,000 fps+ range out of actual rifles. But a bullet such as the XTP or Sportmaster should be fine out of a 7.62 Tok pistol.

[Justin]

And back to the original topic (thanks, Roscoe!) I would be interested to see the results of testing with ballistic gelatin.

[jon_in_wv]

I would love to see what some gold dots would do at that velocity. I would also like to see a comparison of the performance of the 7.62 and other com bloc ammo vs the american counterparts.

[silverlance]

The CZ-52 has its own place as a defensive firearm.

It fires an armor-piercing, high-velocity round with incredible accuracy over distances usually associated with rifles.

The CZ-52 is not a gun you would want to carry regularly as for most purposes there is no need to carry such a firearm. My p228 will do most of those jobs better than the CZ-52 can.

HOWEVER.

There may come a day when the bad guys will come wearing body armor, kevlar vests, and accompanied by light armor.

Suddenly, the p228 will be an inadequate weapon - and the CZ-52 will have its day. Buy a CZ-52 and a box or two of x25 today ensures that should that day come you will have a rifle velocity cartridge in a handgun package. And, at less than $250 for both the gun and 1224 rounds of ammunition, how can you go wrong?

Remember, the same logic that argues that the 7.62x25 is unecessary because "bad guys don't wear armor" is the same logic that argues that "you don't need more than 10 rounds to defend yourself".

[McCall911]

I'm interested too, JE223. (Great site, BTW. I check there regularly. Keep up the good work.)

It's your baby, so cook up the Jello and blast away!

:D

[Manedwolf]

The CZ-52 has its own place as a defensive firearm.

It fires an armor-piercing, high-velocity round with incredible accuracy over distances usually associated with rifles.

So does the TT-33, the Browning-design semiauto. Did you not read the rest of the thread? :)


There may come a day when the bad guys will come wearing body armor, kevlar vests, and accompanied by light armor.

Suddenly, the p228 will be an inadequate weapon - and the CZ-52 will have its day.

Doubtful. The TT-33, maybe, and its Norinco clone that's still being made NEW. A fifty-year-old never-combat-proven range toy, no. And if it got that bad with criminals, that's what rifles are for. Or .223 pistols.

Expecting that the CZ-52 will "have its day" is a fantasy like people who think NASA might refly 1960's tech space capsules, haul them out of museums and send them up. No. It's not going to happen. So much has been learned in those fifty years. Just take it for what it is...it's a lot of fun at the range. Period. It's never going to be your pocket armored-criminal blaster.

[Carl N. Brown]

CZ52 is a pistol that was made in limited numbers
in 1952-1954, and has been dumped on the market
at rock-bottom prices. I have one which I use to
generate empty S&B casings to reload for my C96.

It is not a carry for primary self defense weapon.
It is a fun, historical range piece. Mine came with
holster with cleaning rod, two magazines. One magazine
was almost pristine, the other had been used as a
takedown tool and the floorplate was not only bent
but was too easily detached.

Unit-level repair kits for the CZ52 were rumored to be
several sets of grips, the U springs that attach the
grips, and some firing pins. Hardly anything else breaks.

In firing at a 3/8" swinging steel target I do notice
the 7.62x25 S&B leaves shallow craters, where .38 spl,
9x19mm and 45 ACP leave lead and copper smears.
I still feel S&B and most East European 7.62x25 Military
surplus ammo is too hot for the C96 Mauser pistol.

I notice we have drifted from 7.62x25mm pistol AND
gelatin testing to discussion of the 7.62x25mm cartridge
and value of -- quite frankly antique military -- pistols
for self defense.

[Michael Zeleny]

I still feel S&B and most East European 7.62x25 Military
surplus ammo is too hot for the C96 Mauser pistol.How do you feel about the dimensionally, functionally, and metallurgically similar C-96 Mauser pistols withstanding the ballistics of 9x25mm Mauser Export?I notice we have drifted from 7.62x25mm pistol AND
gelatin testing to discussion of the 7.62x25mm cartridge
and value of -- quite frankly antique military -- pistols
for self defense.Tokarev TT-33 pistols are still used in combat. I cannot conceive of a coherent criterion of antiquity that would apply to them, but not to the their ancestral design, the M1911.

[JE223]

Thanks all for the nice replies and for keeping it on-topic. The problem of getting a hold of such a gun and the reloading equipment still stands.... I have plenty of gelatin powder now (thanks to a fellow THR member who donated), but still need the launcher and the 'launchee' for the test.

[Novus Collectus]

JE223,

If you do this test, then try shooting some Quality Cartridge 7.62x25 110 grn, round nose soft points in the gelatin to see if they expand properly.
I would send you some for testing, but I only have a few left and I plan on keeping them loaded in the CZ52 I would use for home defense.
Maybe try shooting some .223 Timbs in gelatin as well. (Quality Cartridge makes them too (http://www.qual-cart.com/)). If I still have some of those left, then I'd gladly send you some for the test. (The .223 Timbs I have are only for the CZ52 and would have feeding problems in the TT they say).

I chronoed them once and I forget exactly what I got and I didn't write it down since it was just done out of curiousity, but I vaguely remember getting about 1300 FPS for the 110 grn and over about 2000 FPS for the Timbs. It was a pain geting a reading on the Timbs because of the muzzle blast from maybe having chronometer too close so I have no idea how accurate that is even if my memory really is correct.

[JE223]

I can test at least 5 different cartridges per pistol block. Problem is, I cannot throw the bullets fast enough to get them to expand, much less hit the block at the proper attitude to function. I need a gun and have no plans to spend $300+ dollars on a gelatin test that doesn't benefit me and lots of other people in a profound way.

I spent $325 of my money on the .50BMG Hornady test and Spider Firearms lent the equipment and one day of their time to get the test done, the cost of which I could only estimate in the low 1000USD vicinity. But, we came together to do the test because we both saw the value of public-sector knowledge of the terminal ballistic capability of such a weapons platform. This is kind of the case here, but I need THR members help to do it.

Thank you,

JE223

[R.W.Dale]

. The problem of getting a hold of such a gun and the reloading equipment still stands....

I'm going to reccomend just using fatory ammo for this test, Handloading for 7.62x25 can be a very specalized process quite diffrent from loading other handgun rounds. Largely due to the very tight throat relitive to the bore each handgun is almost a complete individual in this respect.

Here is a good topic with some great info on this subject.
http://www.gunboards.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=85884

some others

http://www.gunboards.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=165988
http://www.gunboards.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=160703
http://www.gunboards.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=89905

If you were closer I would gladly lend you my 54-1 Norinco

[JohnKSa]

It remains that the only known test of VZ-52 found it wanting in strength in comparison to the Tokarev TT-33 and the Mauser C96.I don't doubt Clark's results a bit, but it's important not to read more into them than what's there. They tell you about when a gun will FAIL due to overpressure rounds. They don't necessarily tell you about the durability of a gun when used with ammunition that's within its design specifications. He has explicitly stated that he used overpressure handloads to get these pistols to fail and that he fires very few rounds through his test guns for obvious reasons. The result is that the application of his testing results don't really relate to anything a normal user is likely to encounter as he acknowledges in some quotes below.

Here are some comments from Clark's posts about the CZ52 and how his testing relates to normal use of the pistol:
Yes the CZ52 is fine as far as I know with factory ammo.
All this talk is over some academic strength hierarchy that only matters to a few people.This has nothing to do with your CZ52.
You are ok.
You can shoot factory ammo and book loads.

Ok, here's what I'm talking about. If you take a typical lever rifle in .45-70 and shoot a bunch of really hot loads (not overloads) it will eventually shoot loose. It won't blow up, but things will start to loosen up. Parts will start to rattle and eventually you'll probably get some breakage.

Now, let's do the same test with a hypothetical bolt rifle in the same caliber and ammunition with very thin chamber walls that are, nonetheless constructed to tolerate normal operating pressures. The bolt won't shoot loose if the metallurgy is good--regardless of the amount of use. However, the thin chamber walls mean that if you start intentionally overloading the two guns, the bolt gun will certainly blow up first.

What would such an experiment teach us? Well, first of all, it would tell you that if you like all your appendages in their current configurations and wish your senses to keep operating normally, it's not wise to overload a gun with thin chamber walls. It would also teach us that the point at which a gun fails catastrophically from overloads is not necessarily a good measure of its durability when it is being used with ammunition that is within its design specifications.

For more understanding of the difference between catastrophic failure vs normal use durability, look at Clark's comparison of the .40S&W to the 10mm. He has found that he can overload the .40S&W to dramatically higher pressures and performance than he can the 10mm due to differences in the case design. Guess what sort of a practical application that has to real life? None. If you shoot loads in your .40S&W that far exceed 10mm performance, Clark's testing showing it's not likely to blow up will be a small consolation when the gun beats itself to death in relatively short order due to excessive slide velocity and tremendously exaggerated recoil. Clark admits that he has to "compose himself" after every shot with his test pistol in .40S&W.

As far as the roller locking action causing problems, to date the only problems I have heard of regarding the roller locking action had to do with aftermarket rollers that were not hardened properly. How do you feel about the dimensionally, functionally, and metallurgically similar C-96 Mauser pistols withstanding the ballistics of 9x25mm Mauser Export?I don't have any information to suggest that the comparison is relevant. As a counterexample to the implication of your comment, it's interesting to note that Beretta sells a .40S&W version of their 92 series pistol but does not sell (and recommends against converting to) a .357SIG model. While the two rounds are very similar in dimension and the guns would also be dimensionally and metallurgically identical, Beretta will not endorse the .357SIG's use in a converted Beretta .40S&W pistol citing unacceptably decreased service life as the reason.

As far as the ammunition difference between the .30 Mauser and the 7.62x25 goes, even assuming that the hot Czech ammo is a weblegend, there's clearly a 200fps or so difference between the typical loadings in this caliber. The 7.62x25 is typically around and above 1500fps while the .30 Mauser is typically closer to 1300fps. That SBP loading of the 30 Mauser in the link you provided is by far the hottest I've ever seen.

Here's what Clark has to say about the difference.
"The 30 Mauser and the 7.62x25mm Tokarev are the same [or so close to the same dimentionally, that the difference is lost in the tolerances] except for the pressures.

Tokarev ammo from Russia is at 30 Mauser pressures, but Tokarev ammo from Poland, Bulgaria, Rumainia, China, Austria, and the Czecks is 42kcup." Elsewhere he quotes Accurate Arms pressure measurements: "...Russian ammo was
significantly below this pressure averaging 31,000 C.U.P" Anyway you cut it, 11KCUP is a significant difference, and one that should not be ignored.

To throw another monkey wrench into the works, here's a quote from Mike Irwin posted some time ago on this forum:
Witnessed.
With my own two eyes.
Ammo coming out of sealed boxes with Czech markings.
Velocity out of the CZ was roughly 1660 fps. across the chronograph. The owner and several other shooters, myself included, put about 150 rounds of the Czech ammo through several 52s.
Another shooter brought out his TT-30 and loaded up with the same ammo.
2 magazines later, the gun was ruined with the barrel split and bulged the slide.
Since then I've also heard of at least two other cases of the same thing happening with TTs using Czech ammo.

[Novus Collectus]

I have a great deal of respect for Mike Irwin and his word.
I probably learned more about guns from his posts over on TFL in just a few months than I learned in my life up to that point.

[jon_in_wv]

Personally, I woiuld rather have a TT-33 than a CZ52. Guess which one is cheaper though? Guess which one I have. Hmmmm. I'm sure if its russian couterparts are stronger, it doesn't mean that the CZ isn't strong snough. It is extremely accurate and has been very reliable. Also to be realistic, neither gun is a good replacement for a more modern firearm. I think its more viable to see what can be done with the ammo. I wouldn't be against converting a 9mm 1911 to 7.62x25 if the conversion was possible.

[mashaffer]

I would be very interested in tests of the Tok round. You could simulate with light loads under the prospective bullets fired from 7.62x54R or .303 brit rifles if those were handy. I would think that a 90-110 grain HP or wide SP could be a very handy pill out of a T-33.

Sucessful tests might encourage me to get a Tok. and break out the Corbin tools to make up some FPs.

mike

[Novus Collectus]

I would be very interested in tests of the Tok round. You could simulate with light loads under the prospective bullets fired from 7.62x54R or .303 brit rifles if those were handy. I would think that a 90-110 grain HP or wide SP could be a very handy pill out of a T-33.
Quality Cartirdge has a loading of 110 grain SP in a 7.62x25 that is designed to be fired out of a CZ52.

[Shaughn Leayme]

I have some 1952 head stamped Czech ball for the 7.62x25 and it chronographed at an average of 1650 over 3 different machines that were at the range that day, one of which was an oehler being used by a rep for a custom commercial reloader.

I have talked to several former Czech armourer's and they said the greatest failing of the CZ52 was the magazines as they dropped floor plates and would eventually get battered out of shape due to the rounds moving under recoil inside the magazine. The firing pins were prone to breakage due to dry firing, which wasn't a concern in service, since they practiced with real ammunition.

The concern with pins and crappy trigger pull has been addressed by quality aftermarket parts.

Want to blow up any TT-33 russian or variant or the M96 mauser pistol, fire Czech service ball in them and shortly, you will have scrap metal.

The forte of the 7.62 TT round and variants is penetration, it was intended to function in a cold climate, where multiple layers and compositions of clothing would be worn in the winter and any bullet fired in anger would need to negotiate those multiple layers as well as any equipment that might be carried on the outside of body in the attempt to get to where one lived (so to speak)

The size makes it hard to conceal? it's the same size and weight more or less of the 1911 I carry on a regular basis. The sights are small, but then original sights on 1911's weren't all that great either. The heel type magazine release leaves alot to be desired, but practice can overcome it to a degree. trigger pull on mine is down to 4 lbs (courtesy of one of the Czech armourers).

It would not be my first choice for CCW, but I have carried it a time or two, when my 1911 was having work done and I didn't feel under gunned in the least.

Look forward to ballistic testing.

[JE223]

I still need a gun to do the tests.

[JE223]

Here is my 'deal' on this thread. Someone in FL or GA who is willing to get together with me, at a public range, and wants to shoot their 7.62x25mm pistol into a block of ballistic gelatin, please reply.

I can tell that many people would like to see the results of this test, and I would like to see it as well. But, I can't justify buying another pistol at this time.

If you would like to help out your fellow THR members on this one, please let us know.

Thank you,

JE223

[Smitty 308]

I just gotta pile on. I'll keep my story short and hope it doesn't contribute to thread drift. But I would really like to see some penitration tests on the the Tok round.
A couple of years ago it was qualification day for our dept. at the police range. We carry Baretta 92f's with 9mm ball. We also were wearing IIA body armor. There was some discussion about IIA vs.IIIA so we took a IIA vest that was near expiration date and mounted it on a target hangar and ran it out to 15 yards. This was a post qualification, unoficial "extra ammo burn up and body armor test" I fired first. I had brought my Polish 1949 Tok and some S&B ammo. Everyone was kidding me about using a C&R weapon with that small looking round.
I fired nine rounds. One in the tube and eight in the mag. All nine rounds penetrated the front trauma plate, and both front and back kevlar layers.
When we hauled the vest back to the firing line and dug out the slugs, no one said a word.
The next dept. order for body armor was for IIIA.
I only shoot S&B in that gun. I love my Tok and my Tok loves me.
Thanks for letting me share.:)

[Novus Collectus]

I have heard that the only way to properly test a vest is against clay or something like it because the way the Kevlar (and similar materials) works, it needs something behind it.

[Smitty 308]

You are probably right. I have read that wax dummies are used and when viewing pics of vests that have been tested there is always some kind of support for the vest visible.
Our test was not scientifically proper. We had a vest that was about to go out of service date and got the ok from our Chief to see what would happen to our level IIA protection if it came into contact with projectiles. If we had asked for a proper test we would still be bogged down in red tape, defining standards, and protecting against liability. It was a spur of the moment "what if" test, nothing more.
I am not an expert on body armor. Our force wears what is issued. I could be wrong but I don't believe ballistic, kevlar needs a backstop to work properly. But if it does need support that is great because it means our vests will perform better than in the test. My original point was that the penetration of S&B 7.62x25 surprised folks and helped convince our Chief to spend the extra $$ for IIIA vests.
There is a ton of info on the subject of body armor. See link below.
Not trying to hijack the thread just wanted to pass on what I thought was an interesting anecdote on the Tok round's penetration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletproof_vest

[Shaughn Leayme]

IIRC most manufacturer's of soft body armour list the 7.62x25 as a Class IIIA cartridge and recommend that level.

What makes the 7.62 so lethal is the small cross section of the bullet aided by high velocity and jacket design, internal composition can enhance the ability, but isn't always needed, when talking about soft armour, hard armour requires a slightly different approach.

Kevlar and other weaves of similar ballistic fabric, rely on the interwoven mesh to trap and entangle the bullet, but a bullet with a small cross section, can actually push itself between the strands and when driven at high velocity, penetrate many more layers than a larger bullet.

Tip design can also facilitate armour penetration, since if the weave of the fabric can be pushed aside by a sharp almost ice pick style tip, the bulk of the bullet will follow.

Reason why they make vest's for institutions that are stab resistant, a regular issue vest (II, IIA, IIIA) without hard armour inserts will not stop an ice pick or improvised stabbing weapon, because it has a small enough cross section to slide between the fibres and push them aside without getting tangled.

As far as the improvised test's, I imagine even on a suitable testing backstop (clay is used to determine blunt force trauma depth) that the 7.62X25 round would have penetrated the front of the vest. Casting a ballistic gelatin torso using thin pieces of balsa wood for the skeletal structure and then dressing it up in old clothes and a ballistic vest is a way to do some basic tests, but when facing a 7.62x25, with the potential of some of it (surplus) actually having shaped tungsten penetrators and the hyper velocity loadings (Czech ball for example), even a class IIIA vest is only somewhat comforting.

[Odd Job]

@ JE223

I would also like to see the 7.62 x 25 results in gel.

[Keith Wheeler]

If you do this experiment, please do post the results. I've seen the real world effects of a 7.62x25, it'd be interesting to see the "academic" results.

The only concern I'd had there was that I'd heard that due to the Tok's (floating?) firing pin design, if chambered, if the pistol is dropped, the pin CAN travel forward with enough inertial force against the primer to fire the round. Is that true?


I do not know whether it was a TT or CZ that caused the "results" I dealt with, but it was supposedly a dropped pistol that led to the incident.

[JE223]

Here is my 'deal' on this thread. Someone in FL or GA who is willing to get together with me, at a public range, and wants to shoot their 7.62x25mm pistol into a block of ballistic gelatin, please reply.

I can tell that many people would like to see the results of this test, and I would like to see it as well. But, I can't justify buying another pistol at this time.

If you would like to help out your fellow THR members on this one, please let us know.

Thank you,

JE223

[Cellar Dweller]

Second, the plaform is huge, it cannot be easily concealed.
http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/3789/dsc01330ag9.th.jpg (http://img137.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc01330ag9.jpg)
Left to right: Beretta 92FS, Browning Hi-Power, TT-33, CZ-52, Sistema Colt. 4 of the 5 have equally bad combat sights.
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/1688/dsc01328ui8.th.jpg (http://img149.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc01328ui8.jpg)
The tape measure agrees, the CZ-52 is SHORTER than the "as-JMB-intended" 1911.

Bianchi #19 holster (leather) designed for the 1911 also fits the BHP and TT-33 perfectly; the rear of the CZ-52 doesn't fit the retention strap - needs about 1/4" more. A generic 1911-style nylon holster would probably fit.

Too cold to run outside for the calipers plus I have Hogues...slide and frame width of the singlestacks is basically equivalent.

JE223: I had plans to make it to FL in time for New Year's Eve but it likely won't happen. If it does, I'll shoot you a PM and pack my dies...

[JE223]

Cellar Dweller,

Thank you for the offer. I hope you can make it down to FL.

[JE223]

A fellow THR member has offered to lend me a 7.62x25mm handgun to do this test with. If all goes through, look for it around the first of next year.

JE223

[McCall911]

Great! I'll be looking forward to it.

If I were a betting sort of fella, I'd say that this 7.62 Tokarev pill would do 8 to 12 inches, if it does not pass all the way through the gelatin block.

[jon_in_wv]

Looking forward to it also.

[JE223]

I just got the reloading dies for 7.62x25mm in the mail, and the CZ-52 being used for the test is currently in transit to my location.

The gelatin block is setting up in a refrigerator... look for the first test sometime next week.

Thank you,

JE223

[Zero_DgZ]

I really don't understand the whole "you shouldn't use handloads because the DA will say you were trying to make them more deadly and use it against you" thing.

If deadly force is justified and you used it, what does it matter how dead the BG is? You get penalty points for making him "too dead?" I'd certainly argue that if I didn't want to make him dead I wouldn't have shot him. And that being the case, I could have been "more deadly" by using a bigger gun/more bullets anyway.

It strikes me as paranoia.

[McCall911]

I really don't understand the whole "you shouldn't use handloads because the DA will say you were trying to make them more deadly and use it against you" thing.

If deadly force is justified and you used it, what does it matter how dead the BG is? You get penalty points for making him "too dead?" I'd certainly argue that if I didn't want to make him dead I wouldn't have shot him. And that being the case, I could have been "more deadly" by using a bigger gun/more bullets anyway.

As they used to tell me at work, "There you go again, trying to inject logic and sense into this situation!"
Well said, Zero, but IMO sometimes the criminal justice and judicial system doesn't behave logically or sensibly.

[JE223]

"Take care of your 1st priority first." Great, if not simple, advice IMO.

If I might weigh in on the 'no handloads for self-defense' idea: in some calibers you should use handloads, as there are no factory made rounds that are effective. Case in point, the .32ACP is a big disappointment out of a 'mousegun' length barrel. I have posted a how-to here before about making effective bullets out of a 85gr XTP and the accompanying load data.

If you use those in self-defense, you may be in trouble. If I use those in self-defense, the ratchet of trouble will be moved up a few notches - because I originated the idea and then tested it in gelatin. I can't imagine a worse case for a legal defense in that area, but in the overall big picture, as long as the shooting was justified you will probably be in good shape legally (and morally).

JE223

[Tortuga12]

If a test does occur, what about the hollow point ammo available from Wolf? Also, can anyone reccommend a good open carry holster? My work may be taking me to New Orleans soon, I just don't have the funds at the moment to get a CZ 85, and my High Standard is probably the worst choice for defense imaginable.

[JE223]

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=2966425#post2966425

Please thank JohnKSa, as he provided the ammunition and the gun for this gelatin test.

Thank you,

JE223

[JohnKSa]

Heck, I did the easy part--especially since Tom (www.tomsgunshop.com) handled the shipping for me.

[jon_in_wv]

Recently I did some informal wetpack tests and I fired one 9mm FMJ round as a control and I fired one 7.62x25 from my cz52 for comparison. The 9mm FMJ penetrated the whole stack, approx 14 inches, and struck the dry catalog I had as a backstop. Apparantly it penetrated a little bit and bounced off not to be found. The 7.62 on the other hand penetrated with a slightly more impressive "wound" channel and blasted straight through the catalog leaving a hole I could put two fingers through. The bullet continued into the ground and was not recovered. The 7.62 is no joke. given a choice between the two I don't think I wouild feel undergunned with the 7.62. Then again I never did when I carried the 9mm FMJ when I was in the Marine Corps either.