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. Walt Sherrill

    Walt Sherrill Well-Known Member

    The "Clark" in question is Clark Magnuson, and he's mentioned in the following link. It's an interesting article. It's a reference to Magnuson's test, but not direct info about those tests. These tests are also mentioned on some other sites, but I haven't (yet) found anything directly from Magnuson... Still looking.


    Last edited: Feb 10, 2013
  2. kBob

    kBob Well-Known Member

    Wasn't there also a conversion barrel and spring for .38 Super for the Tok?

    Might be intersting to have a Tok set up for 7.62P, 9x19 and .38 Super.

    Was there ever a .22 convrsion for semi auto fire?

  3. firesky101

    firesky101 Well-Known Member

    Never seen a .22 conversion, but I have barrels for my tokarev to shoot 7.62x25, 9x19, .38super, and 9x23. All those are stock except the 9x23. If I find another barrel I will ream it to 9x21. I use the same spring with them all, it is a little heavier than stock.
  4. Shadow 7D

    Shadow 7D Well-Known Member

    If you want to know about Clark's tests, PM him....
  5. barnbwt

    barnbwt Well-Known Member

    Quick summary, CZ fails first where the metal is thinnest (and at a sharp inside corner) below the chamber where the roller-pocket is. IIRC, both failed well above proof loads, with obstructed barrels, so IMO "ultimate strength" is hardly the issue (and even that was only found in handful of samples, so no definitive answers). The real issue is that the CZ is more prone to wear and breakage, since the design is ultimately more reliant upon good metallurgy (which the Czechs didn't manage to pull off in a few areas on the pistol).

    I like the CZ since it looks far more refined (even if it isn't functionally), and it has an interesting and unique mechanism. With proper maintanence, it is plenty reliable. There is suitable parts availability to keep it running for a long time, ammo is available, and I have a 9mm barrel to help with that even more. Being a Curio/Relic, I am more interested in the history and design of the pistol, than it's purported behavior under stress failure or suitability for daily carry. I'd imagine most buyers (or potential buyers) of either pistol would agree with that ;)

  6. Snowdog

    Snowdog Well-Known Member

    I used to have a CZ-52 but found the ergonomics horrible for me. It was reliable but simply not accurate (in my hands). Other than being reliable, looking exotic and firing an interesting round, it had no redeeming virtues IMO.

    I later used my C&R to purchase a Yugoslavian M57 and wow. There was no comparison. I found it comfortable, still no 1911, but it felt much better in my mitts than the CZ-52.

    I liked it so much, and disliked the Cz-52 enough to sell the latter after purchasing a second M57 with a bunch of Yugoslavian 7.62x25 ball.

    The Cz-52 may have the potential of being more accurate, but that doesn't equate to jack if the pistol doesn't fit you and has a heavy trigger (as mine did). Personally, I couldn't consistently print decent groups with it, whereas I can with both my M57s. Much, much better groups, in fact.

    And this whole "the Cz-57 is stronger" also doesn't mean jack to me. When's the last time you've seen a destroyed Tokarev? Have you seen it first hand? Got photos.
    Bottom line, Tokarevs aren't known for exploding or prematurely wearing loose, so I give zero credence to the whole potential strength hooey as it amounts to zilch.

    Go with whichever fits your hands and shoots the best for you.

    For me, it's the Tok (specifically the M57) for me!


    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  7. coalbed

    coalbed Well-Known Member

    Well just shoot whatever you like, I own both but I prefer the CZ 52, so much in fact that I bought both my sons and my brother one for a Christmas gift. They all love them as well. As far as the "blowing up" nonsense, the biggest yapper about it has hundreds of pages and posts on tons of forums and not one smidgen of proof ( I asked him about the methods of testing used and for some of the numbers, and maby a picture, no reply I'm still waiting). If you tap a bolt in the barrel of a gun and fire it, guess what, it's going to blow up. if you pack mud down the barrel, same thing, one story about the destruction of a CZ 52, the fellow had a failure to fire, then the next shot it blew up, he was using some old com block surplus ammo. I can't stress this enough, if you have a failure to fire, especially while using surplus ammo, you had best look and see if there is a bullet lodged in your bore. And as for barrel/chamber thickness, I have other firearms with less, the worst of which is the Kel Tec 3AT (I have one of those as well, and it hasn't blown up). The same guy spewing all the hate claims to have tested 12 CZ barrels at Aberdeen proving grounds or NASA or Area 51 or somewhere (of course no pictures or data report for this either just his story) and they had a hardness varying somewhere between a cast lead bullet and Kraft macaroni and cheese. Nonsense I don't have a dozen pistols to test nor do I have a $12,000 hardness tester, but between my family guns and 2 of my friends I tested 6 with my bullet hardness tester (heck he had even me worried, and I didn't want my kids hurt) It will ping a steel gilding jacket, and it wouldn't make a dent in any of the barrels, so I know they are at least that hard. (the numbers posted are impossible for any kind of steel). I'm not saying its stronger than the Tokarev, I have no idea which is stronger and really I could care less. What I am tired of is this BS has went from "which one is stronger", to "the CZ 52 is unsafe to shoot". In good condition, with the ammo designed for it, the CZ is perfectly safe. To the point, we are talking about Česká Zbrojovka in Strakonice, not some 3rd world Banana Republic built between a 12 year old's feet. The Czechs have been making firearms in Bohemia and Moravia for 700 (SEVEN HUNDRED) years. They made gun barrels for all of Europe when none could make them but this area. The CZ 52 pistol served hard military duty for 30 (THIRTY) years. In my big ham of a hand, its more accurate than my TT-33. I suspect, like a copy cat killer, the biggest majority of these "tales of destruction" are from guys who have read that before (and God knows one guy has posted it enough) and they think that alot of them will do that, so they created a colorful story for their link mates. My opinion for what its worth.
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2013
  8. Shadow 7D

    Shadow 7D Well-Known Member

    Yeah, CZ...
    not go check out Czech history in 52... NOT a high point
  9. coalbed

    coalbed Well-Known Member

    Yes I know it wasn't the high point of the country's history, the only thing my rant was about was to show that this pistol is a solid shooter, and its safe, contrary to what some would have us to believe. One more small little point, if you are familiar with the safety mechanism of a CZ 52, you know about polishing the firing pin retainer plunger or retractor/lock a bit to lighten the trigger pull. What some don't know is that the piece interacts with the hammer drop safety mechanism. After that article was posted, I wonder how many Bubbas' tore into those with a file? One thing I don't know, but I have a theory,(maby a real CZ smith could tell me), is whether or not the piece has anything to do with the firing out of battery safety.
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2013
  10. Snowdog

    Snowdog Well-Known Member

    The entire time I owned my CZ-52, I may have muttered and moaned about the ergonomics each time I took it out to the range, but never did I feel I was firing an unsafe design.

    I don't believe for a second that there are CZ-52s exploding in the hands of shooters using common milsurp or commercial ammunition.
  11. Shadow 7D

    Shadow 7D Well-Known Member

    Coalded, check out the CZ forum, they had a sticky on it a few years ago, gist was, not really safe to do
  12. Walt Sherrill

    Walt Sherrill Well-Known Member

    The ONLY safety issue I've ever heard about with CZ-52s, is the malfunction of the decocker mechanism on some of them. I've seen that issue on the pistol range; luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction -- even though the owner wasn't thinking about the potential discharge.

    And then there's the problem with firing pin's breaking -- solved by getting after-market replacements. Not a safety issue, just a minor PITA.

    I almost picked up CZ-52 factory converted to 9mm -- but passed it by; I later went back to see if it was still there, but it wasn't. there. It wasn't.
  13. Shadow 7D

    Shadow 7D Well-Known Member

    there is NO "factory converted"
    sorry, NO, all 9mm barrels are aftermarket
    It was originally a 9mm gun, but due to the fact they were Combloc they had to go with X25
  14. Walt Sherrill

    Walt Sherrill Well-Known Member

    I wasn't trying to suggest that CZ (Strakonice) had anything to do with the conversion -- I should have put quote marks around "factory" -- I was only trying to say that it wasn't done by Bubba or his cousin.

    The manual and the box the 9mm CZ-52 came in were professionally done and consistent with a commercially modified and marketed weapon. It was far more nicely packaged than the CZ-50 I got a few years earlier -- The manual was well-translated and illustrated.

    While I do think it WAS "factory" converted, I suspect the factory was something like the one run by the Gnomes at Century Arms. (There's no way it could have been done at the CZ factory that built it as that factory was no longer building handguns. By the time those CZ-52s made it to the U.S., the factory where the CZ-52 had been built was building motorcycles and precision equipment. All firearm production had been shifted to a different factory, and the CZ-52 hadn't been built for a decade or two...

    I'm surprised to hear that the CZ-52 was first developed as a 9mm weapon, as how NO OTHER military weapon routinely issued to the Eastern Bloc military used 9mm ammo. That may have been a design goal, but I can understand why it never happened. Apparently, only a few (very elite) Special Forces units/personnel even had access to 9mm weapons or ammo.
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2013
  15. coalbed

    coalbed Well-Known Member

    That issue is caused by excessive wear (or deliberate home "trigger job") of the aforementioned firing pin plunger or retractor/lock. here is a good post about the correct way to touch up this trigger, and explains the decocker problem in good detail. (there used to be a post on doing a trigger job that actually caused alot of these problems, but I cant find it now, they may have removed it, one can hope).http://www.czfirearms.us/index.php?topic=4980.0 as he states, you should really never trust ANY firearms decocker 100%.
  16. Shadow 7D

    Shadow 7D Well-Known Member

    Walt, don't forget CZ is the home of the WONDER 9(mm) Cz75, first of the first...
    so Yeah, it was but remember at the same time there was 'unrest' and the crack downs in Ukraine, Poland and Hungary...
    Oh, forgot, they were ALSO tooled for 9mm because of their war time production in WWII
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2013
  17. Walt Sherrill

    Walt Sherrill Well-Known Member

    When the CZ-52 was first designed and later built, there was unrest, but it was primarily private citizens who were unhappy and restless, not important segments of the existing power structure/government -- like the arms makers. After Hungary, things quieted down a bit, and it wasn't until the mid '80s that nationalism in all of the member countries of the Communist Bloc started to become (or was allowed to become) a force for independence.

    Until then, trying to build a military weapon in a non-approved caliber would have been a sure way to get fired and maybe even imprisoned. (Then, too, the folks pushing for 9mm weapons would have had to set up ammo manufacturing processes to support a 9mm version of the gun; I find the whole idea hard to grasp.)

    And YES, the CZ-75 was built in 9mm, but that was 25+ years later, conceived in a totally different manufacturing organization (still called CZ), a different CZ factory and staff, and designed by František Koucký, fresh out of prison. The design was apparently intended for international sales, and not military use. CZ hoped to sell it overseas, and did, but the Western blockade of Communist Bloc goods kept these CZs from hitting it big time. (You could get them in Canada and West Germany and places in Africa and the Eastern Bloc, but almost nowhere else. Quite a few CZ-75s came back to the U.S., first having been sold to G.I.s, in US Post and Base Exchanges in Germany. A lot of those guns were tricked out by a firm named Frankonia. Very nice guns.)

    It wasn't until around 1985 -- the start of liberalization under Gorbachev in the Soviet Union -- that 9mm ammo could even be used by military units in the Communist Bloc, and the gun itself was first made available to civilians in Czechoslovakia about then.

    During the dark years of Communist rule, the Communists had kept their patents for the weapon "secret," so the unprotected (under international law) design was simply "cloned" in the West, by Tanfoglio. It was the hot gun for a number of years in IPSC starting in the mid 80's.

    The Czech National Police LATER used the first alloy-framed CZs (the PCR, for "Police of the Czech Republic"), and that led to some changes in manufacturing processes to address problems with the earliest models. Those problems have long-since been resolved, and the alloy-framed versions now are as robust as the steel versions -- the FORGED alloy P-01 seems especially robust.

    If you have any technical references [or historical articles or books about the subject, etc.] that tells us more about the 9mm episodes, please share it with us, as I'd really like to know more about that part of their history. Even info about using 9mm by the Communist Bloc in WWII would be of interest.

    I've done some C&R collecting over the years, and read quite a bit, and I have always believed that only the Germans (for the P-38 and P-08 and P-35s) and the United Kingdom (for their High Powers) used 9mm in WWII. The ONLY 9mm weapons I've ever seen from the Soviets were CAPTURED weapons, later re-arsenaled and used by their police and border guards AFTER the war -- I had one of those Lugers, myself. I'd like to know more.

    [Later addition: the Germans also used some Stars, from Spain. I had one of their Model Bs, with Waffenampt -- but found later that those marks were likely faked by the importer or distributor. The Germans DID use Star Models Bs, however. I'm sure a few other oddball guns slipped into the German Amry's inventory, but I never heard of the Soviets using anything in 9mm until long after the war, and then only with captured weapons..]
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2013
  18. Shadow 7D

    Shadow 7D Well-Known Member

    I would have to dig, most of it was from people connected with old timers (and in czech) that were active in the Czech arms industry, second hand accounts, from what it seemed, the Czechs were tooled up for 9mm (remember the German production from WWII) and they had to RE-tool to x25...

Share This Page