1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

cz-52 vs tt-33

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by xxxleafybugxxx, Aug 17, 2012.

  1. xxxleafybugxxx

    xxxleafybugxxx Well-Known Member

    Im sure its been asked, but I want to know wha t you guys think. I have a cz already but the tt-33 can be had for about 200. Seeing as I got the cz for dirt cheap, and love it (besides the safety issue it has) I sure would like another pistol chambered in an amazing calibersuch as this
  2. mgmorden

    mgmorden Well-Known Member

    I don't have a TT-33 but have a Yugo M-57 (mostly same thing with a longer grip) and the CZ-52.

    Reportedly the CZ-52's action is stronger, but I like the ergonomics of the Tokarev better. Feels better in the hand and just points better for me. The CZ is a bit more "unique" in its design though.

    Overall, I'll never git rid of either, but if I could only keep one it'd be the Tokarev. For $200 they're hard to pass up - I'd get one.
  3. xxxleafybugxxx

    xxxleafybugxxx Well-Known Member

    Thanks mg. Knowing me, ill probably end up with one. What are the odds that a shipment of surp ammo comes in soon lowering the price?
  4. kerreckt

    kerreckt Well-Known Member

    I have a Yugo M57, Chinese Type 54,and a Romanian TTC. There are many things to like about the Tokarev design. Heavily influenced by John Browning's designs, which is a nice way of saying "copied" but with some interesting features such as a trigger assembly which can be removed as a unit. When you are dis-assembling it just lifts out. Much simpler and contrary to popular belief stronger than the CZ52. The CZ52 design is unique in that it is a cam roller lock system very similar to the German MG42. More complex and susceptible to problems than the Tokarev with an honestly earned reputation of breaking firing pins. I have a couple of these and enjoy shooting them but I believe the Tokarev in any of its versions is the better pistol. Go for it get a Tokarev or three.
  5. firesky101

    firesky101 Well-Known Member

    Check out our member Clark. He makes a hobby out of blowing up cz-52's. I personally like the look of the cz-52, and if you don't overload it it will be fine. I shoot my tokarev more, and it is what I chose to convert to 9x23win.
  6. bigfatdave

    bigfatdave Well-Known Member

    I'm in the same boat, CZ vz52 and a Yugo M57 ... they're both interesting and fun guns. My source for cheap ammo has dried up, so I shoot them less than I'd like.

    Don't ditch the CZ
    Do snag a Tokarev for $200

    stock up on magazines and ammo, they're going away and nothing is as useless as a gun with no ammo or a magazine-fed gun without a working mag.
  7. barnbwt

    barnbwt Well-Known Member

    Well, the CZ52 is definitely sexier than the TT-33, in a Soviet locomotive kinda way...

    Milsurp ammo is unlikely to be cheap again, but availabilty is the real problem at the moment. Fortunately there are (expensive) 9mm conversion barrels out there for both guns. I've seen them go (for the CZ) for over 300$, usually. Instead, I picked up a spam-can of 800 rounds (Bulgarian, I think) for 175$ (yeah, yeah, I know it used to be 80$; get over it!), and that should last me until the supply re-establishes itself.

    I like unusual and unique firearm mechanisms, so the CZ is right up my alley. Dual roller locks (as stated earlier, similar to the MG42 in concept) lock the barrel to the slide until the frame forces the rollers to drop away, freeing the slide to yank out the spent casing.

    With a (usually functional :uhoh:) decocker (DON'T TRUST IT), sear safety, rebounding hammer with block, and firing pin block, it was a very feature-packed gun in its day. It's actually pretty simple, despite all those features, too. When I tore mine down to pins for cleaning and polishing in my refurb project, I was suprised to see it consists of only a dozen or so parts (yes, counting springs and pins, too). Removing the barrel from the slide is more difficult than most guns due to the rollers, but I don't think there is an easier gun to do a full tear-down on. Basic field strip is a joke, pull a knurled pin while pushing the barrel back, and presto!

    On mine, the decocker mechanism is not worn, so it is perfectly functional and safe. I will not rely on it, though, because the instant it does wear, it could set the gun off. Safe decocking practices go double for this gun. The reputation for broken firing pins is very real; the original pins were cast in very hard, brittle steel. Half a dozen dry-fires will break it. The extractors have a (much rarer) similar issue. Fortunately, replacement pins of the correct steel are widely available (with a spring return, to boot), as are locking rollers, modified slide releases, extractors, mag floorplates, and springs (all). I believe Novak even does rear-sight jobs for the CZ52.

    The other common issue with the guns I'm aware of is trigger slap. When fired, the slide moves back and smacks the disconnector down (but also to the back a bit), imparting shock through the trigger. It can also be caused when the slide closes, smacking the firing-pin safety release cam down, again imparting force to the trigger. Both are supposedly easy to cure with simple polishing and shaping, but I have not yet attempted to do so. Aside from the slap, which limits my endurance, the trigger is spongy but smooth, and a bit heavy. At 25yards, my CZ is as accurate as any of my guns that aren't my Five-seveN (not really saying much, though; 4" groups).

    All in all, it's a fun, unique, and fascinating gun that really wasn't made in very high numbers. Moreover, the round has great potential, that I believe will be realized in the next couple of years. I keep hearing more and more people asking why modern guns aren't made in 7.62 tokarev. If you're lucky, the CZ52 will appreciate 50% in one year for you, too ;)

  8. xxxleafybugxxx

    xxxleafybugxxx Well-Known Member

    Barn, my safety issue is that after a shot or two, the safety starts to slowly engage itself. Do after every shot, I find myself making sure the safety is off (or else the trigger pull gets harder and harder) I do like the trigger pull, but its annoying making sure the safety is off after every shot. Other than that, Ive had my rear sight slide off... other than those issues I love the gun. I would like a tt 33, but also am probably more interested in a pps 43. IF ANY OF YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE PPS 43, PLEASE TELL ME ABOUT IT. Thanks for all the responses.
  9. barnbwt

    barnbwt Well-Known Member

    Link to PPS-43C Product Page

    The PPS 43 is a pistol-ed submachine gun. I believe they were modified to fire closed bolt, instead of the original open, which has caused cycling issues in other platforms (like MAC 10's). Like any modified mil-surp, I'm sure the quality depends highly on who does the modification (read: Century) and if the recievers are pieced-together or made from whole cloth.

    With a stock, I'd be the 43 would be an absolute pussycat to shoot, but I have a feeling they are a bit rough-shod in execution. I'd be delighted at the opportunity to check one out in person sometime, though. The folding stock looks cool, too bad CFS welded it closed...

    My CZ 52 had what I thought was a hammer-follow problem when I first got it. I later learned that the long-ass grip was causing me to grip the gun more with my thumb than usual. This meant my thumb stuck up more, and was bumping against the safety lever under recoil. Wasn't an issue unless I slacked my grip even the slightlest bit; then the safety lever would get spun all the way to decock, and I'd be left pulling the trigger on a lowered hammer going "huh?".

    I intentionally place my thumber lower than I like (for now) and haven't had the problem. Eventually, I'll make some grips with a ridge to catch my thumb when it flips up, guarding the decocker from activation. I agree, though, that it'd be nice if the gun went "fire, safe, decock" instead of "safe, fire, decock". At least then you could flip down the lever quickly and keep shooting. Also check the strength of the detent (sp? can't do accents) spring and it's groove in the decocker axle. I made a few quick passes with a triangular file to deepen the groove, and the lever is now much more positive.


    More CZ52 advice: don't try drilling a tang-sight hole into the slide; the metal is so damn hard you'll burn up three carbide bits and curse a lot. Pay someone else to do it. That hardness also makes it impossible to blue the slide and frame the same color.
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2012
  10. xxxleafybugxxx

    xxxleafybugxxx Well-Known Member

    Thanks barn. Ill go with the tt fro. Jg. Should I wait to order with the possibility of 7.62x25 coming in at a lower price, or not?
  11. firesky101

    firesky101 Well-Known Member

    I doubt 7.62x25 will come down any unless a huge quantity of importable surplus is found.
  12. xxxleafybugxxx

    xxxleafybugxxx Well-Known Member

    Surely there's more out there...
  13. Ash

    Ash Well-Known Member

    I have owned Tokes and still own a CZ-52 - have shot it for 15 years now with nary a problem. It was in new condition, phosphate, 1954 date without a rebuild and it is still just as tight as it was when I got it.

    But, a Toke is a good pistol and perhaps folks would be better satisfied with it.
  14. xxxleafybugxxx

    xxxleafybugxxx Well-Known Member

    Well I found a n m57 on aim surplus. What is better between me that and a tt33?
  15. firesky101

    firesky101 Well-Known Member

    Pros:9 rounds in the mag instead of 8
    Cons: Mags that cost 3x as much as their tt-33 cousins
  16. xxxleafybugxxx

    xxxleafybugxxx Well-Known Member

    What is the deal with a c&r license? Do I need one? Also, im leaning towards the m57
  17. mgmorden

    mgmorden Well-Known Member

    You don't need one, but they're a nice thing to have. It's a type of FFL that you can get as a collector that will allow you to have certain types of firearms ("Curios and Relics" - basically anything off of a list of collectible items or anything over 50 years old) shipped directly to your residence.

    It's convenient, but with $15-20 FFL fees these days, combined with the fact that things can ship to a regular FFL via USPS (whereas C&R holders have to use UPS or Fedex 2-day), plus the fact that since its a signature required item I have to take off from work to receive the package, I've found myself not using my license as much these days.
  18. Kiln

    Kiln Well-Known Member

    I dunno, people have been shooting up all of the old surplus ammo for a long time. There are tons more gun owners today shooting more and more 7.62x25 ammo than ever before.

    The supply of actual military surplus ammo in an obsolete chambering like this is bound to run out some day.
  19. Ash

    Ash Well-Known Member

    I had a license, but let it go. They weren't that great to have, didn't really save that much money, and worse, open you up to more government scrutiny (plus they get to inspect you - at your home or their office, your choice - but being at one more whim of the government to save some bucks on old firearms was too much sugar for a dime for me).
  20. GBExpat

    GBExpat Well-Known Member

    I have had an 03FFL for 10+ years.

    A 3-year license costs $35 and you can have C&Rs shipped directly to the address listed on your license ... usually the person's home.

    My 01FFL buddy charges $20/firearm for the Transfer Fee (and don't forget to factor in the time & expense in having to drive to another location to pickup your purchases), so each of my 03FFLs paid for themselves with my 2nd related C&R purchase ... and, perhaps, my 1st.

    I also get "dealer" discounts at a number on online gunparts/reloading merchants by having my 03FFL registered with my account.

    Yes, BATFE can contact you for inspection, but that seems to be getting rarer every year (I haven't read of an inspection on a forum in a long time), probably due to the huge number of people getting 03FFLs & the BATFE having limited staffing and MUCH more important things to do.

    So the answer to your question is ... only you can answer it.

    In my case, I bought a LOT of C&R firearms and also quite a bit of gunparts & reloading items, so my $35 investment in an 03FFL every 3 years has been well worth both the expense & slight possibility of an audit ... to me. The 03FFLs have saved me well over $1000 ... o'course there IS a dark aspect to this ...

    ... because I had an 03FFL, I spent a massive amount of money on this stuff.

    The C&R Curse. ;)

Share This Page