Do you like the Tokarev or CZ-52 better?


PDA






000Buck
March 16, 2007, 05:06 PM
Which 7.62x25 pistol do you like better and why? My recent 7.62x25 ocd has prompted me to post my first poll. Thanks

If you enjoyed reading about "Do you like the Tokarev or CZ-52 better?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Travis McGee
March 16, 2007, 07:25 PM
CZ by a mile. My old Toke didn't even have a safety. If you had a round chambered, the rear of the firing pin protruded, with the front of the pin resting on the primer. Drop that gun, it's gonna go off. Very unsafe pistol IMO, as opposed to the CZ which to me is a darn good pistol for about $200. As far as the round, it's a hot little smoker with great penetration.

Claude Clay
March 16, 2007, 07:38 PM
Love mine & have a 9mm bbl for it also..... in 7.62 it shoots to point of aim at 100 yards, the 8" steel plate gets hit 6 out of 8 easy. That said, be REAL careful using the de-cocker. I knew about the potential for it to fire itself & in less than a thousand rounds, mine has twice. Safely, both times in the dirt 10 feet in front of me. DO NOT de-cock on a live round. These 50+ year old guns are not ment for carry. But they sure are fun to play w/. Shoot at dusk & the flame w/ the older ( unfortunatly corrosive) ammo is incredable. As is the bigga bang .

Big Gay Al
March 17, 2007, 05:27 AM
As long as you do it carefully, there's no reason to not use the de-cocker. I do, but I also have my thumb on the hammer, and I let it down slowly.

But maybe that's just me?

GW
March 17, 2007, 05:29 AM
CZ-52
Its just a better gun..

ZeSpectre
March 17, 2007, 10:26 AM
If somebody updated the CZ-52 design, and by update I mean an ambi-safety, a better mag release, and a decocker you could trust, I bet they'd sell like hotcakes!

atblis
March 17, 2007, 12:06 PM
When you read my following sentiments, don't think that I totally hate them. At $89.99 they were an awesome deal, and despite all the shortcomings are amusing. Just don't kid yourself, and make them into something they are not.

The Tokarev is a better pistol, but unfortunately relatively rare and more expensive.

I must be alone in thinking the CZ52 is a total POS. I've never had so many things break on a single pistol. I also question how safe they are to shoot, but I haven't heard of too many KBs.

1 The trigger sucks
2 The safety/decocker thingy is in an awkward location. I can't fire more than a couple shots without partially engaging it.
3 The decocker has a bad habit of doing more than simply decocking.
4 The magazines are crappy. I have many of them, and they do lovely things like spontaneously dissassemble themselves.
5 The sights are way too small.
6 They eat firing pins like candy.
7 Supposing something does go wrong, they are on the short list of pistols that will fail catastrophically before the brass gives. They are not strong.
8 They're ugly. (subjective I suppose)
9 Shoot em enough and usually the frame starts to crumble.

The metallurgy is pretty bad. Some things are much too brittle (and I don't mean just the firing pins). The design isn't too horrible, I think it is the inconsistent metallurgy that does this pistol in.

7.62x25 is a very very fun round, but the CZ52 is probably the suckiest pistol I've ever owned (well actually the RG10 is but...).

Anybody wonder why Accurate Arms downloaded the 7.62x25 data?

I know, I know. You have one, and it has been a fantastic pistol and I am just making stuff up. Don't let me keep you from shooting/buying them. Just for the love of god wear safety glasses and don't pay too much!

telecaster1981
March 17, 2007, 12:27 PM
Maybe you need a PPSH-41!!! Come to think of it...SO DO I!!!

I think I'd try to lay hands on both the Tok and the CZ. My CZ52 has been great (well, I've worked on it a bit) but we'll see how long that lasts I guess. Seems like people either love them or hate them. The local gun shop has some sort of TT-33 type pistol (interarms?) for less than $200...and I'm thinking REALLY hard about it!

atblis
March 17, 2007, 12:35 PM
A PPSH I would like. That is probably at the top of my list of subguns I wish I had (Forget the MP5).

I think there are some real inconsistency in the metallurgy. Some of the 52s seem to be decent, others...

000Buck
March 17, 2007, 06:50 PM
I would love to have a PPSH semiauto if someone made a good one. Military Gun Supply is supposedly coming out with one but it could be :barf: I am not sure who is making it for them or where they are getting the receivers.

I am suprised by the results so far. I thought the Tokarev would have gotten more votes seeing as it is more pleasing to the eye for most people and doesnt have the firing pin problem or anything like that as far as I know. They have both been good guns for me. I didnt know about the metal problems on some of the CZs, thats good to know.

Big Gay Al
March 17, 2007, 08:27 PM
As one friend of mine describes the basic CZ, they're so ugly, you love them.

As for the firing pin problem, you can get a much better made firing pin through Makarov.com. Or at least you could.

Yes, the sights are small, but they can be replace too. IF you really want to.

Dave Markowitz
March 17, 2007, 08:44 PM
I prefer the feel of the CZ-52. The Tok has all the ergonomics of a carpenter's square.

old_ironsights
March 17, 2007, 10:42 PM
The Tokarev seems to have done just fine by numerous Eastern Bloc and various Asian countries, eh, since 1930? Light, thin and ultimately rugged, reliable and - for modern western shooters - ultimately concealable.

The 52 was a late-comer in 1952, only in Czechoslovakia and then re-called in 1982. Thicker, heavier and much more mechanically complicated than a Tok.


http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b130/martynoland/TokCase001.jpg

Nomad, 2nd
March 17, 2007, 10:54 PM
Have both, like both, like the Tok. better.
-A Browning Rip off...

AndyC
March 18, 2007, 01:35 AM
Tokarev, any day.

RON in PA
March 18, 2007, 05:43 AM
Tokarev is superior IMHO. I find the CZ-52 to be more violent in action, prone to trigger slap, prone to having pins work their way out and having magazines that don't activate the slide hold-open. These faults observed on two CZ-52s. I am of the opinion that the CZ-52 exists only as a Czech way of thumbing their noses at the Soviets and expressing national pride. The Tokarev has better sights and is more comfortable to shoot in my experience. The grip angle is all wrong, but I notice that if shot two-handed you don't notice this. It's really hard to beat a Browning design derivation.

nathan
March 18, 2007, 01:43 PM
I voted TT33. I have two Cz 52s and one Norinco 54 -1 all in tok caliber. I like both designs but I shoot pretty good one handed using the norc 54. Its slim and fast handling and i can empty a full mag on a target 7 yds with very tight groups. 10 - 15 yds two handed hold weaver stand is also very easy. I will use the norc as my car gun loaded with FNM brand Hollow points.
You should get the Romanian tt 33s right now bec thay are in excellent condition . BTW the triggers on these are quite light and crisp after few hundred rounds, be extra careful like any gun. Always condition self not to get trigger inside trigger guard once gun is drawn but only when target is in sight.
Oh the recoil is nothing but like 9 mm in steroids AKA .357 sig.

Mortech
March 18, 2007, 02:35 PM
I much prefer my TT-33 over the CZ-52 , it ranks right up there with my Ruger as my favorite fun to plink with pistol .

tinygnat219
March 18, 2007, 11:56 PM
CZ-52 all the way. Haven't fired the Tokarev TT33 yet, it's on the way. I like the CZ-52. It's a great design, accurate, and SWEET shooting pistol. Besides, where else can you take on an attacker in front of you and to the side of you? Mine throws the brass out with such force, it would probably knock someone out trying to "flank" you on the right.

Seriously, why won't any manufacturer make a "modern" polymer pistol for this round? It would sell unbeleivably well!

atblis
March 19, 2007, 12:15 AM
I'd buy a modern pistol chambered in it. Something like a Witness would be awesom. 18 rounds of that.

However, I suspect the manufacturers don't want to touch it because of the corrosive surplus ammo of questionable quality floating around.

ZeSpectre
March 19, 2007, 12:28 AM
oh man, 18 rounds of 7.62x25 in a polymer frame...drooooolllll :)

plexreticle
March 19, 2007, 12:32 AM
I like the CZ52 better as a shooter.

karlsgunbunker
March 19, 2007, 01:35 AM
I like my CZ-52, but I LOVE my Toks

My CZ-52
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a269/karlsgunbunker/CZ-52-01.jpg
Polish TT-33
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a269/karlsgunbunker/TT-33-01.jpg
Romy One
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a269/karlsgunbunker/RomTok1-02.jpg
Romy Two
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a269/karlsgunbunker/RomTok2-01.jpg

VA27
March 19, 2007, 02:28 AM
The Tok is on my "next to get" list.

nathan
March 19, 2007, 03:03 AM
Word in the milsurp community says, more of the Romanian Tokarevs are coming in country. It appears they have a whole arsenal of these, the fact is their police are issued with such weapon. That means they trust the power of the Tok round.
For a CCW holder the TT 33 or Cz 2 is just perfect for a car gun, cheap but pwerful. Gives a wallop of power.

makarovnik
March 19, 2007, 04:12 AM
I like both because I like the 7.62x25. I prefer the tokarev because it's smaller, slimmer and way better looking. CZ52's are okay but they are ugly IMHO. My Tok is Polish and has a decent safety but it only blocks the trigger, not the firing pin. The original safety for the tt30 Russian tokarev is the half-cock feature. I know we're not supposed to use the half-cock on a 1911 style pistol but that's how many Russians carried the Tok. You can get way more aftermarket stuff for the CZ52 which is an advantage. If you spend some bucks you can get some nice CZ52's from makarov.com that are hard chromed and have aftermarket grips. Just make sure to check your decocker, firing pin and rollercams as these can be problem areas.

roscoe
March 19, 2007, 04:29 AM
The TT is far more handsome - any pistol in Art Deco is just cool. I do worry about a TT getting damaged from the hot ammo, though.

Rod B
December 10, 2007, 08:03 PM
I'm some what late in posting on this, however I have just become the owner of a Russian Tokarev TT33.

It came with two mags, holster , lanyard & cleaning rod.

It is in excellent condition. I maybe paid a little too much ($295.00) but I am very pleased with my latest purchase.:)



Here's my newest aquisition.:)

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y178/rodblackburn/My%20guns/P3050025.jpg

DMK
December 10, 2007, 08:41 PM
I like the Tokarev better. Much easier to field strip. Points better. Better sights. Feels better in the hand.

Fun range guns, but I wouldn't want to carry either.

I don't have a pic of my Polish Tok, but Rod's Russian is way nicer anyway.

Here's my CZs
http://mysite.verizon.net/dmk0210/myarms/CZ52s.JPG

Big Gay Al
December 10, 2007, 10:11 PM
Nice Tok. Most that come into the USA have to have a safety installed, per BATFE rules. WHat sort of hoops did you have to go through in Canada to get that?

Rod B
December 11, 2007, 12:12 AM
No problem getting them. As long as you have the required paperwork & a PAL (possession & aquisition licence)

All guns in Canada have to be registered. This can result in a waiting time of a few days to a couple of weeks before you can take possession.

The stupid part of this is that most guns aquired by criminals are never registered.The government doesn't seem to realize criminals do not obey rules & regulations.:D:banghead:

Big Gay Al
December 13, 2007, 10:29 AM
Word in the milsurp community says, more of the Romanian Tokarevs are coming in country. It appears they have a whole arsenal of these, the fact is their police are issued with such weapon. That means they trust the power of the Tok round.
For a CCW holder the TT 33 or Cz 2 is just perfect for a car gun, cheap but pwerful. Gives a wallop of power.A number of people I know, prefer them (CZ-52/TT33) for Winter carry, here in Michigan. They're more likely to get through all the layers of clothing we wear for the weather here.

For myself, I'm TRYING to find a FMJ 10mm load. ;)

Joe Demko
December 13, 2007, 11:57 AM
Never owned a CZ but a few guys at the gunclub have them. They've had various issues with theirs. Broken firing pins and junkeriffic magazines, mainly. I wanted a something in 7.62x25 and chose the TT-33 after hearing about their problems.

tinygnat219
December 13, 2007, 12:33 PM
I've had 4 CZ-52s, not a problem with any of them. I gave one to my Brother-in-Law for his birthday, sold one to a good friend, traded another for something else, and my last is staying in the safe.

I have 2 TT-33s. GREAT little guns. Solid, simple, and fun to shoot. I have a Romanian, and a Russian. I wouldn't carry these as the design's on the "ancient" side and there are much better modern pistols out there. However, if I were to go back in time. These guns are coming with me!

Big Gay Al
December 13, 2007, 07:22 PM
The US Army said the same thing about the 1911, and it's still a very popular design among many of us pistol packers. And that design is older than the TT33!

My only real problem with the TT33 is the lack of a manual safety. Of course, current BATFE rules say any that get imported today have to be retrofitted. Which I think is a shame. It's like taking a work of Shakespeare, or Mark Twain, and putting in politically correct language.

But maybe that's just me. ;)

tinygnat219
December 13, 2007, 10:40 PM
Big Gay Al,

Why does this feel wierd writing to you? :D

Yeah, I can understand that the 1911 is an older design, then again I don't carry a 1911 for the same reason: It's not for me. The TT-33 is a fun pistol to shoot, and I can see it's light years ahead of the pistol it replaced (1895 Nagant). If I had nothing else, I might carry it. But then again, I don't get in the habit of carrying old guns when there is better stuff out there today.

Big Gay Al
December 14, 2007, 06:12 PM
It shouldn't feel writing responding to my message. I'm a firearms enthusiast, like most other people on this forum. ;)

Newer does not always mean better. And "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." ;)

I prefer the 1911 design because it has worked just fine for nearly 100 years. It's what I've grown used to. If I wanted a pistol that worked like a Glock, I'd buy a Colt or S&W revolver. ;)

And strangely enough, there are many NEW guns that look a lot like the 1911. ;)

Shrinkmd
January 6, 2008, 06:06 PM
I am about to order one, and I'm wondering how much ammo and spare parts are good to keep around? After all, they aren't making any more, and you can't ship it back to CZ-USA for servicing! How many rounds do people think the barrel is good for? Springs? Frame itself?

Considering how economical the ammo is, and I'm not afraid of the corrosive bogeyman, I can see it being a fun range gun.

atblis
January 6, 2008, 11:04 PM
They are amusing. High quality they are not. Make sure you wear safety glasses while shooting them (applies to all gun really).

I'd buy a few if you plan on shooting thousands of rounds. They're still under $200 (used to be what, like $89). I'd also stock up on ammo now.

Firing pins are a good thing to have.

The CZ that we know of here is not the same CZ that made the 52. There are multiple entities allowed to use the CZ name as they were all originally state run factories. CZ Uhersky Brod is the CZ that makes the Cz75. CZ Strakonice was the maker of the 52.

jon_in_wv
January 7, 2008, 12:57 AM
I voted for the CZ52. It hard not to when mine has been so ridiculously accurate. On my first outing I loaded three rounds of Romanian ammo followed by three rounds of Czech ammo. At fifty yards, off a sandbag, the two rounds had different points of impact but both shot identical groups of 2 and 1/4 inches. The czech ammo was about two inches high and Romanian about four inches low.

If you enjoyed reading about "Do you like the Tokarev or CZ-52 better?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!