Maybe
My source is owning and shooting them (and the internet). It's funny to have to take it apart to shake out the broken chunks of metal, so that it'll function again. I haven't had one blow up in my face yet, but let's just say I don't shoot 52s much anymore.
I didn't say that the metallurgy was universally bad, just that it varied. Do you feel lucky?
They are really truly a crappy pistol. Horrible ergonomics, bad sights, questionable metallurgy, bad trigger, decocker that is dangerous, eats firing pins like candy, crappy magazines. On top of all that, probably one of the weakest pistols out there. I know you guys love Clark and all, but he is right about the thin spot in the barrel.
Still a good deal when they were $89. Not worth too much more than that IMO.
I really can't think of a crappier modern era military issue pistol.
Back to the original post. My personal opinion is that there was not different ammo for subguns and pistols. That would be very unRussian. The accounts of CZ52s blowing up has only to do with their crappiness.