I also attached an image I found out on the intarweb that I can't take credit for, but someone laid down several pistols side by side as a comparison. CZ52 was one of them.
I think the official dimensions are posted at surplusrifle.com and other websites.
October 30, 2007, 07:30 PM
????? If you are looking for a concealed carry piece, there are much better choices. Can you use a CZ-52 for CC, sure, you can use sledge hammer also. Just my opinion. If you mist have a milsurp for CC them look at the PA-63's, The very nice CZ 82, the CZ 70 and even the Maks. The CC-52 is a better truck gun than in the waist band. A fun gun to have, especially if you also have the 9MM barrel, but it would not be on my short list for CC.
October 30, 2007, 08:25 PM
Nope, got my CCW pieces, a PPK and 1911. I was looking at the CZ52 based more on power and price.
After getting my PPK, though, and shooting a few other little guns, I just find I shoot and like the little guys better.
Thanks grimjaw, the CZ82 was the other gun I as considering.
October 30, 2007, 11:30 PM
My 2 cents:
Get a CZ 52! They're cheap and accurate and more powerful than a .45. $119 for 1224 rounds, too. I have two of them and they can be tack drivers.
October 31, 2007, 10:09 AM
Link on that ammo? For that price, I may.
October 31, 2007, 10:13 AM
www.aimsurplus.com, check under "Ammo" It's about 12 cents a shot, probably the best deal going outside of a .22 right now.
October 31, 2007, 10:51 AM
After buying a CZ52 I can honestly say I'd pass if given the choice again, even if it was cheap. Here's the range report (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=308935) from mine.
I don't consider it a very practical gun, more of a range toy, and I enjoy the TT-33 much more. Maybe it's a better choice for someone who likes to tinker, because the stock parts (rollers, firing pins) on some of these pistols aren't very durable. Just my unhumble opinion. If you get a chance to try before you buy, I recommend that.
October 31, 2007, 04:14 PM
I don't dislike my cz-52, it's sure firing and mechanically accurate even if the sights are off, plus it only cost a small amount of money to update the consumables. However, I do like it less after handling a TT-33. I may never sell the cz-52 due to it's novelty but it is a useless pistol in my hands.
October 31, 2007, 04:39 PM
After buying a CZ52 I can honestly say I'd pass if given the choice again, even if it was cheap.
I hate to agree, but I have to. Mine had some kind of issue where after a couple of rounds, the safety would be halfway on - or something like that. It would get heavier as I worked my way through the mag.
I had a trigger job done - "Actions By T" - to see if things improved, but they did not.
Then the slide cracked.
Cool mechanism, but not worth it after all...
October 31, 2007, 07:34 PM
I LOVE my CZ-52....but it took some time and money to gain my affection. As issued, the edges of EVERYTHING are sharp. Painful sharp. The trigger was heavy, it misfired on all surplus (ran fine with my handloads, though) and I couldn't shoot it for crap.
But, there is something neat about the roller-locking and I decided to try to make it better. Wolff 18lb recoil and new hammer spring, extended slide release, hardened rollers, H&R firing pin, ghost-ring rear sight, new grips and a thorough de-fanging of the entire pistol with files and sandpaper resulted in a real gem!
The pistol now feels SO much better in the hand, doesn't rub or bite at all. Accurate and MUCH easier for me to hit with the ghost-ring vs. the tiny rear sight. Trigger much improved and the function nearly 100% with the affordable surplus ammo. Only the very occasional 'click' on a stubborn cartridge that needs a second hit to fire.
So, the finished pistol is a fine one. The stock pistol needs a LOT of work to be acceptable...at least by me. If you like to tinker, the CZ-52 is for you! If you want to shoot it out of the box and do nothing to it....like the others have said, you will probably be happier with something else.
October 31, 2007, 07:42 PM
I have two of them, but I only shoot one of them. (A detail strip isn't all that easy).
My big complaint is with trigger slap. I've had surgery on my trigger finger, and the butcher screwed up the nerves, which has resulted in the finger being very sensitive. When I fire the gun, it feels like the trigger is hitting me back. I have tried it with a full glove on and it helps (Uncle Mike's gloves with the open fingers obviously don't help).
October 31, 2007, 10:45 PM
Here's the link for the ammo. I'm on my 3rd can.
Seriously, CZ 52s are the most under-appreciated pistols ever. It's my only semi-auto; all the rest are revolvers, which I generally prefer. But, if I were allowed only one pistol, I'd pick the CZ 52. Accuracy, price and power. The sights could be better but, if you replaced the sights and the lousy firing pin, it'd still be cheaper than anything else around. Get a chrome one from Classic Arms ($200.)
What kind of ammo were you shooting when it happened?
October 31, 2007, 11:45 PM
My buddy bought one so I picked one up with him just to share ammo and be shooting the same guns and while I dont regret getting one, I'd not do it again. For the price its hard not to have one but I dont really see a use for it other than a range toy. Havent price checked the TT-33 lately but they are a lot nicer to shoot if a person is just looking to shoot 7.62x25.
November 1, 2007, 01:01 AM
Ya, seen Oleg's post, its what got me back into the 52 mindframe. Beautiful pic.
For me, its still a toss up. I wouldnt mind the extra few bucks that the 52 would save me, but a few years down the road, it seems like I wont notice the extra money I spent on the 82. And no matter how I cut it, 9mm Mak is available locally newly manufactured, even though currently the 762x25 suplus has the online price advantage. Although, I remember plentiful cheap 8mm at one time too, so decently priced new manufacture may havfe the advantage there.
Its close enough I may well flip a coin.
November 1, 2007, 01:05 AM
It's a full size pistol. That's really all you can say about it. They are fairly light for their dimensions, IMO.
chris in va
November 1, 2007, 01:26 AM
I wasn't impressed. Sights were way off vertically, the frame has sharp edges and the surplus ammo was really out of spec. Several times a round wouldn't eject because the case was too big.
If you enjoyed reading about "CZ52 Size" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!