CZ-52 vs. TT-33

Which 7.62x25?

  • CZ-52

    Votes: 149 64.8%

  • TT-33

    Votes: 81 35.2%
  • Total voters
    230
Status
Not open for further replies.
I am fortunate enough to own both. Both are fun to shoot, though the (Soviet Russian) TT33 is more entertaining to field strip but easier to clean. The CZ52 is more pointable than the TT33 , but less comfortable in recoil and seems to have more muzzle lift. Mags and parts seem to be cheaper and more easily come by for the CZ52, but the TT33 is a Browning knock-off and most parts aren't all that difficult to modify or make.

I have put a fair amount of ammo thru the pair and have not had any problems, even with the TT33 showing every bit of it's 60-odd years. (I didn't vote cause I like them both about the same.)

KC
 
I have been overloading Glocks for some time.
If you count brass problems, the big stock Glocks [not 9 mm] have them in spades:
1) primer pierced
2) case bulge
3) case blows a hole
4) case head fails

These are not due to the weakness of the design [like a CZ52], but rather due to the feed ramp intrusion into the chamber causing poor case support.

My thought is that the Glock company want no jams with any ammo and any recoil spring. The worst result of this is my Stock Glock 20 [10 mm] barrel gets a case bulge with a 1% overload of LONGSHOT. Hodgdon has since withdrawn most of the 2002 Basic Handloader's Guide LONGSHOT loads.

The guy that coined the term "Kaboom" has no quotes from me about overloads, but does quote some of my measurements of the case support I made scribing on brass with a needle on his web site:
http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/glock/gz-glock-kb.html

What I have found is that by TIG welding up the feed ramp on a Glock 22 [40 S&W], the most famous kaboomer pistol, I can shoot loads of
1) 98% extra Power Pistol .. primer falls out
2) 100% extra LONGSHOT .... case head separates
3) 146% extra 800X ... can hold no more powder and kicks like a mule
attachment.php

Can you see where the chamber supports better with new metal?



What does it all mean?
1) The CZ52 is a weak pistol, the steel of the pistol fails with wimpy overloads. No TIG welding the feed ramp will help this gun.
2) 10 mm and 40 S&W Glocks have poor case support and the brass fails with wimpy overloads.
 
Hey Clark,

when you shoot pistols with your thermonuclear handloads, do you have a ransom rest surrounded by an armor plated box or something? How do you shoot them without becoming part of history?

Just my .02 ( and just curious),
LeonCarr
 
I used to use trigger strings [a real pain with Glock triggers that have a safety in the middle of the trigger] and the pistol strapped to a board with rubber bands. It turns out that enough rubber bands can hold down a pistol through some terrific recoil.

Once I found out how to calculate strength, how to spot a case bulge, and how to not pinch jacketed bullets, I hold guns by hand. I have not blown up any guns in years.

With the CZ52s I have blown up, the operator was not hurt [me], but anyone standing to the right could get an extractor through the head. Of course even with a strong gun, like a Tokarev, a blown case head can send pieces of the extractor to the right at lethal speeds.
attachment.php

The case on the right has a case bulge [least overload], the one the middle has blown a hole [more overload], and the one on the left has a case head failure [most overloaded]. These days I quit when I see the one one the right. The one on the left blew the extractor out of the gun. I would advise anyone who ever sees a case bulge like the one on the right to decrease the powder charge, not increase it.

I have always experimented alone, except once, and the guys I was with knew about my experiments and stayed where they couldn't be hit with Shrapnel.


These days with semi automatic pistols, I wear hearing protection, eye protection, a glove, and a towel over the slide to catch the empty case. I have not blown up a gun in years. It took a few years until I caught on to the wild card of pinched bullets. All I needed to know was in the Ackley book, but I had to learn it myself the hard way.
 
Clark,

Thank you for your response. I saw in an article once the fixture that Ruger uses when they fire proof loads in their handguns. Looks like an overengineered file cabinet with a ransom rest inside. Open drawer, insert gun, fire, repeat.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr
 
Did not mean to get off thread, but I guess you could fire Toks and CZ-52s in that fixture too :).

Just my .02,
LeonCarr
 
It was a joke, Clark.
Boards and Rubber Bands to test overheated cartridges? Dayum.

Interesting how all three blows cases lost the primers. I've seen that before a few times, but I've seen more blow outs that left the primer in the pocket. Your overheated loads must be seriously and extremely exessive.

What I don't understand is the drive that cats like you have in doing this sort of thing... Hopping the loads up to the point of catastrophic failures. Unless you actually work for Glock, why bother? It's an expensive venture with the potential to lose more than just a Glock. Even if your 30 feet away, some bits of metal can fly out just like shrappenell from a grenade.

All this being said, I repeat what I said before... all the CZ-52 blow outs that I have seen were the results of similar efforts to Clark's and not with factory or surplus ammunition. I seem to remember a joint selling replacement 52 barrels. I don't know if they were aftermarket or just surplus. So I am not saying it doesn't happen. But I still think the 52 is the better pistol. The one Tok blow out that I saw (only one) caused the detonations of several of the rounds in the magazine. The hand of whoever fired it must have been mangled. It was one of the most ugly KBs I have ever seen.
 
How did I get into overloading guns?

I was a consulting engineer who blew up switching power supplies then improved the design to make them stronger.
I designed the power supplies as best as I could and then tested them. I found the fast way was to give a 100 Watt power supply an increasing overload until something blew up at 200 Watts. Then fix that spot so it is stronger, and increase the power even higher and find the next blow up at 300 Watts. This was a serious short cut to getting a reliable design.

Get a dozen electrical engineers in a room reviewing my 100 Watt power supply design, and pretty soon they are arguing over some complicated stress analysis calculation. If I can say, "It runs all day at 400 Watts!", that really cuts through the BS.

So with all that money and little time, I would drive down to the gun show and buy a whole bunch of guns.
How was I going to enjoy all those guns?
Destructive testing!
I learned allot real fast, like not everything in the load books is true, it really cuts through the BS.

I had some help.
1) My father designed guns and showed me how to calculate stress in break top revolvers and my 45/70 handi rifle.
2) I found a gunsmith [a REAL gunsmith Randy Ketchum of Lynwood Guns] who has done allot of experimental projects with guns.
3) My brother has worked as a machinist, and he showed me how to operate my lathe and milling machine.
4) I had incentive to develop a lighter more powerful carry gun. After testing the 22 LR cartridge on chickens, I decided I wanted more power, but wanted to keep the weight down.
5) There was a retired mechanical engineering professor on rec.guns who critiqued my 45/70 handi rifle stress analysis.
 
"Mike,
try to find some sort of source data. That is engineering talk for the lab notes or raw calculations. I think you will find as I have that there are a dozen books that talk about the CZ52s great strength, based on some assumptions about Czech ammo, that all turns out to be a house of cards. None of the authors can back any of it up with source data."


Clark,

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.
 
Personally, I'd get the CZ. Every kid needs a roller-lock delayed blowback pistol. Also, the grip angle on the Tokarev is way too straight for anything resembling natural pointability.
 
One of my CZ52s survived a 124 gr 9mm round fired with a 7.62x25mm barrel.
It put a hole in the target and left most of the bullet jacket in the chamber.
I must supervise grown men loading guns more carefully, and don't try this at home.
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • cz52wrongammo.jpg
    cz52wrongammo.jpg
    24.6 KB · Views: 1,752
Dang! Wish I had that much disposable income!

Then I could go buy handguns and do my best to destroy them.

BTW, love my CZ-52, and my 1600fps handloads. Just don't like chasing that Starline brass halfway across the range. ;)
 
Clark,

I posted this on another board, but the thread was locked.

Could you respond to it here?

There are a couple of ways a gun can fail.

It can blow up.

It can wear out.

The stronger locking arrangement of the CZ-52 means it should last longer with hotter ammo than the Tokarev as long as one doesn't load the ammo hot enough to rupture the chamber walls.

Furthermore, there is more to safety than simply ensuring the gun doesn't blow up.

If the action opens too quickly, that can cause a dangerous situation. The CZ-52 locking arrangement should ensure that the action stays closed longer than the Tokarev with hot ammo, again assuming that the ammunition isn't loaded so hot that it actually blows the gun into pieces.

In other words, the fact that the yield strength of the CZ-52 chamber is lower than that of the Tok doesn't mean that the Tok is a better pistol. It simply means that it has a thicker chamber wall. The CZ is still safer than the Tok with hot loads (as long as the loads aren't so hot that they can rupture the chamber.)

I guess what I'm saying is that the test doesn't really provide any information that's useful in the real world unless you plan to shoot proof loads.

The pics I've seen of CZ-52 blowups,show the slides fractured at the locking roller cutouts (just what you'd expect). I've not seen a pic of a CZ with a blown out chamber (other than what Clark posted).
Click to expand...

Clark,

I'm not sure that the electronic example holds true here. What leads to electronic failure is thermal problems. All the parts get hot, if one gets too hot, it fails before the others. So, if you get them all hotter, the one that gets the hottest still probably fails first, but faster.

When you shoot a gun, it eventually wears out. However, even a heavily used gun isn't likely to blow up from normal pressure ammo. Springs relax, pivots wallow out, levers bend or break, metal wears at friction points and the fit gets sloppy. But, it's EXTREMELY rare to have a gun blow up just because it's been shot a lot.

So, when you overload a round and blow out the chamber, what are you really finding out about the gun? You certainly don't know what's going to wear out first. I think you don't really know a whole lot more about it than you did before...

Here's what you know:
1. If you overload this gun enough, the chamber will blow out. (That's any gun, and you knew that before you started.)

2. You know the pressure (or can estimate the pressure) that it takes to blow out the chamber--ok, but unless you intend to shoot ammo that approaches that pressure that's not going to be an issue.

Here's a consideration that may have been missed in all this. The Tok, when fired with hot loads, is just going to unlock faster which will beat the pistol to death and maybe cause a case blowout. The CZ locking arrangement is going to hold the action closed, preventing a case blowout, but putting extra stress on the chamber by not relieving the pressure by prematurely opening.

What do you think?

John
 
Mike,
http://www.ldaint.org/technotes5.htm
If the shear strength of lead is 250 psi and the .308 cylinder is sheared out of the bullet:

Area of lead sheared = C x L = pi x diameter x L = 3.14 x .308" x .6" = .58 sq. in

F = Shear Force / area or rear of bullet = 250 psi / .58 sq. in = 431 pounds

chamber Pressure required = F/ A = 431 pounds x pi x r squared =
431 pounds / 3.14 x [.308/2]~2 = 5790 psi

My Quikload program plots pressure vs 9 mm bullet position, and the peak in pressure is about 1" of bullet travel at 30 kpsi and falls to 5 kpsi when the bullet exits at 5"


ok, it says 400 psi under some circumstances, which would put the chamber pressure required up to nearly 10 kpsi.

John,
The yield limit is higher than the fatigue limit, but in steel the fatigue limit is not zero. In all applications the solution must be found empirically, and involves the shape, surface finish, heat treat, alloy, etc.

In Aluminum you might be right, the gun would wear out from stress cycles, but in steel guns it is more like 100,000 cycles and it fails at 25% of yield strength.

The problem with CZ52s is that we already AT yield strength. There is no waiting for 100,00 cycles, we are there. That is the only pistol that I have tested that yield the first time. SN.jpg
 
Clark,

If what you are saying is true, then:

1. CZ-52s should be blowing up left and right.

2. Virtually every CZ-52 is going to fail eventually by blowing up, not wearing out.

Clearly (1.) is not true. It doesn't seem that (2.) is true, given that these guns have been around for 50+ years.

It seems to me that there is a disconnect between your numbers and the reality of the situation.

Any ideas on how to reconcile the two? I'm at a loss...

Here's another question.

You say that normal pressures in the CZ-52 are already virtually at the yield strength of the chamber.

If that's true, then how is it possible that swaging/shearing a 9mm bullet doesn't blow out the chamber. So it doesn't take as much pressure as it might seem, it's still going to take a lot more pressure than NOT swaging/shearing a 9mm bullet. Why doesn't that extra pressure blow out the chamber if we're already virtually at the yield strength of the chamber? Your numbers seem to indicate that firing a 9mm in the 7.62x25 chamber actually generated LESS pressure than firing a 9mm in a 9mm chamber would. Is that really what you're saying???

Also, what about Mike's experience where a CZ-52 easily withstood the use of ammo that destroyed a Tok with just a few rounds.

:confused: :confused:

John
 
John,
Sorry, I got too brief.
I mean ~65 kpsi is where the brass flows, and all other pistols can do it [that I have tested] except the CZ52.

The pressure we expect for CZ52 ammo is 42k cup, so there must be some safety margin, because none of mine have blown up with factory ammo.

The Tokarev has more safety margin, because it can go all the way to brass flowing like normal pistols.

The CZ52 does not blow up with factory 42 kcup ammo, it blows up with handloaded overloads at something less than 65 kpsi. Not a brass failure, but a steel failure. That is unusual. Especially unusual seeing how there are a dozen books out there saying how strong the CZ52 is.

This has nothing to do with your CZ52.
You are ok.
You can shoot factory ammo and book loads.
Don't worry about it.

The point I made is a complicated one having to do with inconsequential words in load books.

It has to do with some tests I do on pistols that are not important to you.

I have overloaded to see what happens:
25 acp: 20's Ruby, 1908 Colt
32 acp: Kel-Tec P32
32 S&W: Iver Johnson break top revolvers
32 Colt Long: Colt Pocket Positive, Colt Police Positive
32-20: Colt New Army
7.62x25mm: CZ52, Tokarev
380: Berretta 1934, Husq 1907
9x19mm: Kel-Tec P11, Star M43, Glock 19, Tokarev
9x23mm: Star Super B, Tokarev
38 Sp: S&W model 60, Colt Agent, Colt Police Positive, RG
357 mag: modified [S&W model 60, Colt Agent, Colt Police Positive, RG]
38 S&W: Iver Johnson break top revolvers pre and post 1898
357 Sig: Kel-Tec P357, Glock 22
40 S&W: Kel-Tec P40, GLock 22
10 mm: Glock 20
10.4mm: 1880's Revolver, cut down 44 sp brass, and 44 mag load
45 acp: Republic Patriot, Colt Commander, Para Ord P10
45 Colt: Stevens OEM .410 break action
.223: Ruger #1
.243: 1938 Turkish Mauser
257 Roberts Ackley Improved: VZ24 Mauser
7.62x54R: M91/30
7.92x57mm: 1903 Turkish Mauser
45/70: NEF Handi Rifle
.410: Stevens OEM .410 break action
452/70 Wildcat: 91/30 Action pre WW2

If you are not interested in overloading tests and strength calculations, this has nothing to do with you.
 
Clark,

So...what, in your opinion, do the results of your testing say about the durability of the two pistols (Tok & CZ).

Can you draw any conclusions about which one is going to last longer under normal usage based on your tests?

John
 
Clark,

You can't use the shear strength of lead to determine what a jacketed bullet will do in a gun barrel, especially in a situation where there are non planar (is that the right word) pressures being exerted on the object.

You damn well know that.

You also know that shear is not instantaneous, and that while the bullet is shearing the pressure can continue to rise dramatically.

If what you're saying is true, then no firearm should ever fail with an overload as the lead in the bullet would simply shear.

Blowing the nose out of a jacketed 9mm round takes an impressive amount of pressure.

Again, I would lay good money that chamber pressure in that handgun could easily have hit 80kpsi before the bullet failed.
 
Mike, I am pretty sure that what happened in my photo is shear force on lead. Cylindrical co ordinates are just as good as planar co ordinates for calculating shear.

This lead leaving the jacket has never happened to me before.

Like Ackley 40 years earlier, I have found that bullets are willing to swage down to a smaller diameter.

1) When I put a .452" 230 gr. FMJ in a .410 chamber, it swages down getting into the .410 barrel, and then swages again down to .385" in the choke.

2) When I put a 200 gr. .323" 8 mm FMJ in a .303 with turned neck, the bullet swages down with no increase in pressure.

Maybe if I got bonded 9 mm bullets, I could get the bullet to swage down in the 7.62x25mm chamber.
 
John,
I don't know about reliability.
I know overloading is a short cut to finding out how strong things are.
When CZ52s wear out, I don't think it will be barrel fatigue.
It may be the clip that holds the grips on is the first thing to go.

I have been shooting some loads that would blow up a CZ52 in a 380. Not as hot as my Tokarevs, but more powder than a 357 mag for the same bullet. I think the M1903 looks like a Tokarev.

bm1903.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
CZ-52 Vs. TT-33
Replies
6
Views
2K
LeibstandarteAdH
L
L
  • Locked
cz 52 and TT 33 owners out there
Replies
14
Views
1K
Oldnoob
O
X
  • Locked
cz-52 vs tt-33
2 3
Replies
57
Views
3K
Shadow 7D
S
K
  • Locked
TT-33 Questions
2
Replies
26
Views
4K
makarovnik
M
K
  • Locked
Thinking about picking up a Tokarev TT-33
Replies
11
Views
970
Teapot
T
Back
Top