is a tokarev really at risk to blow up?
- Thread starter c919
- Start date
- Status
The Tok may shoot loose very rapidly with really hot ammo, but it's unlikely to blow up. The CZ52 may blow up with really hot ammo, but it's unlikely to shoot loose with ammo that doesn't blow it up.
The CZ52 has a stronger ACTION, the Tok has a stronger CHAMBER.
The CZ52 has a stronger ACTION, the Tok has a stronger CHAMBER.
WardenWolf
member
Blow up a Tokarev? Hell no. AIM currently has Romanian spam cans of 7.62x25 available. And since Romanian Tokarevs are some of the best, second only to the Norincos, it's the best ammo you can get for your gun. You can also quickly convert a Tokarev to 9mm with a 2 minute barrel swap. A good Romanian or Norinco Tokarev will shoot like a good 1911. On par for accuracy.
amd6547
Member
I was looking at the Reeds Ammo site, and I found it pretty thin on info. Yes, some of their ammo is labled "safe for TT33", but the rest of the loads are not labled "unsafe for TT33", or "CZ52 only". They have hardly any velocity info in the discriptions of the various loads, and certainly no discussion of how they determine one load is "safe for TT33", and the other is not (is it? they don't say...). It all seemed sketchy.
I have never dealt with them, I am used to dealing with DoubleTap for some of my other high performance ammo needs---There, they list velocity figures derived from real handguns for every load they sell.
As far as the CZ52 having the stronger action, and the Tokarev having the stronger chamber, I'll take the chamber.
The CZ52 I owned was one of my most disappointing handguns. I wanted one long before they were ever imported. Mine was like new, in every respect. It was never accurate at all at 25yds, I would be lucky to hit a paper plate 3 times out of eight rounds. It only functioned with S&B commercial ammo, having many different problems with any surplus ammo I used. My previous pistol in 7.62x25 had been a Chinese Tokarev Vietnam bringback with a dark bore, and mismatch slide/frame/barrel, a pistol that was 100% reliable, and accurate, with the same surplus ammo my CZ52 choked on.
For me, the Tok is a much better pistol, Browning derived, combat tested. The grip so many complain about bothers me not one whit...the Tok comes up for me spot on. There is no question in my mind...If I were in a combat situation, and there was a choice between having a Tokarev on my belt or a CZ52, I would choose the Tok.
I have never dealt with them, I am used to dealing with DoubleTap for some of my other high performance ammo needs---There, they list velocity figures derived from real handguns for every load they sell.
As far as the CZ52 having the stronger action, and the Tokarev having the stronger chamber, I'll take the chamber.
The CZ52 I owned was one of my most disappointing handguns. I wanted one long before they were ever imported. Mine was like new, in every respect. It was never accurate at all at 25yds, I would be lucky to hit a paper plate 3 times out of eight rounds. It only functioned with S&B commercial ammo, having many different problems with any surplus ammo I used. My previous pistol in 7.62x25 had been a Chinese Tokarev Vietnam bringback with a dark bore, and mismatch slide/frame/barrel, a pistol that was 100% reliable, and accurate, with the same surplus ammo my CZ52 choked on.
For me, the Tok is a much better pistol, Browning derived, combat tested. The grip so many complain about bothers me not one whit...the Tok comes up for me spot on. There is no question in my mind...If I were in a combat situation, and there was a choice between having a Tokarev on my belt or a CZ52, I would choose the Tok.
The CZ-52 was DESIGNED to fire the hot Czech M48 cartridge. No other country loaded the 7.62x25 cartridge to equal it. Most - if not all - of the CZ-52 pistols that were imported into the US had been rebuilt and the pins staked because the pistols had shot loose over the years of using the M48 cartridge. To suggest that a CZ-52 will blow up using the hotter cartridges is not logical when that's what they were designed to shoot.
Tokarev chamber diameter: .640" Chamber Length: 1.434"
CZ-52 Chamber at it's thinnest: .590" Chamber Length: 1.198"
The raw numbers suggest that the Tokarev has the strongest chamber and all else being equal, it would. However, you can bet your bottom dollar that the steel used in the CZ-52 is as good as it gets. Czech gun steel is famous for strength and I have no doubt that the CZ-52 barrel has a safety margin built in even with the M48 cartridge being it's normal diet. Looks and measurements may be deceiving. Until a qualified metallurgist tests the steel in both, I'm not going to proclaim one superior to the other.
If each pistol is fired with the ammo they were designed to shoot, neither is likely to blow up, fall apart or crumble into little BB's.
amd6547
Member
Yes, Czech steel was well known for it's quality, prior to WWII. Was it the same in 1954 behind the Iron Curtain? I doubt it. The Russians took whole factories from the countries they occupied, killed, jailed and replaced management and workers, and did their best to keep the workers under their boot. Were those workers inspired to produce the excellent steel and quality firearms they were known for prior the NAZI occupation and subsquent Soviet domination?
atblis
Member
Yeah
That's a very interesting assumption to make, and actually quite wrong. The metallurgy on the 52s is actually disturbingly variable and often quite crappy.
Can you back that up with facts? Can you point to CZ/VZ-52 pistol barrels failing when using the M48 cartridge or the lower velocity Soviet/Polish/Hungarian etc cartridges?
Why would post war steel used in Czech gun making be of lesser quality than pre-war? If the Soviets emphasized quality in any industry, it was arms making. The CZ/VZ-52 was used until the early 1980's at least. The ones I own were made in the early 1950's so the steel couldn't have been all that bad or they'd have long since been scrapped. The design may be faulted for various reasons but I don't believe for a minute that the steel used was in any way substandard. It may suit the conclusion that the Tokarev barrel is stronger but neither gun has a history of blowing up which makes the whole discussion about which is better somewhat moot.
If you examine a CZ/VZ-52 closely, you'll find small dimples on almost all - if not all - major parts including the slide and frame. Those are hardness testing marks as the Czechs were, and are, almost fanatical about proper hardening of their gun steel.
Insofar as Soviet plunder of Czech industry and factories, can anyone show that to be a fact and not supposition based on what happened to German industry? Guns were being turned out by the Czechs shortly after the war, indicating that their gun industry wasn't raped at all.
A ''corporate history'' of Ceska Zbrojovka-- the Czech armory.
by Kyrie Ellis
Kyrie posted this excellent history of the armory that manufactured the CZ weapons on the c-r-ffl board in September of 1998.
A bit of the history of Ceska Zbrojovka and CeskoslovenskaZbrojovka (and Ceska Zavody Motocyklove) for anyone interested
Ceska Zbrojovka: Ceska Zbrojovka was the sole supplier of handguns to the Czech military from 1926 to 1954 (and possibly beyond). Among the military pistols produced b Ceska Zbrojovka are the Vz-24, V-27, Vz-36/45, Vz-38, Vz-50 &Vz-70, and the Vz-52. (Note: "Vz" is the abbreviation for "Vzor", or "Model").
Ceskoslovenska Zbrojovka: Speaking of which, with the Communist take-over in the late 1940's both Ceska Zbrojovka and Ceskoslovenska Zbrojovka ceased to exist, at least as we thinkof them as separate companies. Rather they became State owned manufacturing facilities ("Narodni Podnik", or "National Enterprise"). At this point it becomes unclear the degree to which commercial firearm markings indicate what factory was involved in the production of the firearm.
Does the above sound as if the Czech arms factories were plundered by the Soviets?
An in depth history of Czech arms companies can be found where I lifted the above quotes: http://www.gunsworld.com/cz/cz_history.htm
The actual post-war history of Czechoslovakia will prove interesting to those who think the country fell under Soviet domination immediately at war's end. It came over a period of years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Czechoslovakia_(1945–1948)
Last edited:
amd6547
Member
Czechoslovakia was fully occupied by the NAZI's in 1939. Entire steel and chemical factories were moved to Austria.
atblis
Member
Sure. Look around for I think Clark's testing on barrels. Hardness varied over a range that is not indicative of quality.
rojocorsa
Member
Heh, I never even thought that Tokarevs had safeties.
Really? Funny how Czech gun factories turned out massive quantities of firearms and parts for firearms right through the war. They are considered to be some of the best the Nazi military had.
That's dodging the question of providing facts. I've defended my position and now it's up to you to prove yours..... or not. It's not up to me to go looking for anything beyond proving MY points. Obviously you can't show that CZ/VZ-52 barrels have failed and that's pretty good proof that they used quality steel.
I know nothing
but here's a two year-old thread that sounds vaguely familiar.
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-22071.html
What other pistols use the Tok round? Any 1911 conversions?
but here's a two year-old thread that sounds vaguely familiar.
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-22071.html
What other pistols use the Tok round? Any 1911 conversions?
woad_yurt
Member
Anecdotal evidence....
I have a 1944 Czech made K98k (dou) and it's much more nicely made compared to my father's 1944 byf (Oberndorf.) There's a major difference. Czech made weapons seem to be quality no matter what's going on.
About the CZ 52: When they hit this country, they had been around for 50+ years already. I suspect that they were reassembled after "rearsenaling" with little quality control. The ones I've seen were all out of spec. Although they may have looked great, they still needed to be tightened up.
If you take the time to make sure the pins are staked correctly, form the mag lips back to the proper shape, and change out the firing pin and the recoil spring, you end up with a true monster pistol.
I have a 1944 Czech made K98k (dou) and it's much more nicely made compared to my father's 1944 byf (Oberndorf.) There's a major difference. Czech made weapons seem to be quality no matter what's going on.
About the CZ 52: When they hit this country, they had been around for 50+ years already. I suspect that they were reassembled after "rearsenaling" with little quality control. The ones I've seen were all out of spec. Although they may have looked great, they still needed to be tightened up.
If you take the time to make sure the pins are staked correctly, form the mag lips back to the proper shape, and change out the firing pin and the recoil spring, you end up with a true monster pistol.
Last edited:
atblis
Member
You've provided exactly no proof either. SO where does that leave us?
Also, if the rest of the pistol is crap, what makes you think they'd suddenly use good steel for the barrel.
Seriously, search a ltitle for Clark posting stuff about the 52. A lot of people on here like to bad mouth him for some reason, but his info is very very interesting and truthfully more meaningful than all the "read it some where on the net" info people spew about the Cz52.
Czechs in general make very very good firearms. The CZ52 is not one of them. It was not made by the same CZ of CZ75 fame.
It means you haven't read the links I provided. YOU claim "The metallurgy on the 52s is actually disturbingly variable and often quite crappy." You provide not one bit of evidence to support that opinion..... and that's all it is: an opinion. IF you have proof, link it. Otherwise, you have no case or credibility. The length of service the pistol enjoyed says that it wasn't made of crappy material.
BTW, Clark points out that he doesn't believe that factory ammo would ever cause a CZ-52 to fail; only that those he caused to fail did so at a point below pressures required to blow the primer from a case. IOW, it takes a load in excess of what the pistol was designed to handle. He does claim that the CZ-52 is the weakest auto pistol he's tested and that's due to the cutout required for the locking rollers that reduces chamber wall thickness at that point. BUT, unless pressures are elevated above factory ammo, there's no chance of it blowing apart.
Last edited:
doubs43,
I think if you read what I posted and what you posted you'll see we're pretty much in agreement.
The CZ52 action is a strong design. That is, it's designed to function well with very hot ammunition. HOWEVER, as your measurements bear out, the chamber is not as strong as the Tok's chamber.
On the other hand, the Tok's beefier chamber doesn't mean that the action will tolerate a lot of pounding from shooting very hot ammunition.
In other words, if you start hot-loading ammo, the CZ chamber will give out before the Tok's chamber will. You'll get a blow-up at lower pressures in a CZ52 than in a Tok.
On the other hand, if you do a lot of shooting with very hot ammo that doesn't exceed the strength of the CZ52 chamber you'll probably find that the CZ stands up to it better.
So one might summarize by saying:
The Tok may shoot loose more rapidly with really hot ammo, but it's less likely to blow up from an overload. The CZ52 may blow up with really hot ammo that the Tok could handle without a blowup, but it's less likely than the Tok to shoot loose with ammo that isn't hot enough to blow it up.
Here's some interesting reading.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=22071
Here's a blurb from something posted on page 4
I think if you read what I posted and what you posted you'll see we're pretty much in agreement.
The CZ52 action is a strong design. That is, it's designed to function well with very hot ammunition. HOWEVER, as your measurements bear out, the chamber is not as strong as the Tok's chamber.
On the other hand, the Tok's beefier chamber doesn't mean that the action will tolerate a lot of pounding from shooting very hot ammunition.
In other words, if you start hot-loading ammo, the CZ chamber will give out before the Tok's chamber will. You'll get a blow-up at lower pressures in a CZ52 than in a Tok.
On the other hand, if you do a lot of shooting with very hot ammo that doesn't exceed the strength of the CZ52 chamber you'll probably find that the CZ stands up to it better.
So one might summarize by saying:
The Tok may shoot loose more rapidly with really hot ammo, but it's less likely to blow up from an overload. The CZ52 may blow up with really hot ammo that the Tok could handle without a blowup, but it's less likely than the Tok to shoot loose with ammo that isn't hot enough to blow it up.
Here's some interesting reading.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=22071
Here's a blurb from something posted on page 4
"1) John Becrovitz, long time rec.guns contributor, buys 10 CZ52 barrels and tests them for hardness. Measurements between RC25 and RC35 were taken on intact 7.62x25mm barrels. A more modern 9mm CZ52 barrel tests at RC47."
John, stated that way, I agree that we're pretty close in our assessment.
I own three CZ/VZ-52 pistols including one that has had a 9mm barrel chambered for the 9mm Largo cartridge.
I also own a 9mm Norinco Tokarev and a .38 Super conversion kit for it.
Both are fun to shoot and I reload all four cartridges. I don't push the pressure envelope so I don't really worry about blowing any of them to pieces. One of these days I'll buy a 7.62x25 barrel for the Tokarev just to have three calibers for it.
I own three CZ/VZ-52 pistols including one that has had a 9mm barrel chambered for the 9mm Largo cartridge.
I also own a 9mm Norinco Tokarev and a .38 Super conversion kit for it.
Both are fun to shoot and I reload all four cartridges. I don't push the pressure envelope so I don't really worry about blowing any of them to pieces. One of these days I'll buy a 7.62x25 barrel for the Tokarev just to have three calibers for it.
c919
Member
ok so any advice on the polish vs. the romanian fmj's? im gonna order a spam can with the pistol and im thinking romanian...... any other thoughts?
woad_yurt
Member
Romanian! It's good, quality stuff. Great, even.
If you get some that dont fire on the first pull, put a tiny washer under the hammer spring. The Romanian stuff had some no-goes because the primers are a little "hard." Once I put in the washer-spacer, 4,000+ rounds w/o misfire.
If you get some that dont fire on the first pull, put a tiny washer under the hammer spring. The Romanian stuff had some no-goes because the primers are a little "hard." Once I put in the washer-spacer, 4,000+ rounds w/o misfire.
amd6547
Member
In my Romanian TTC33, the Romanian has been 100%. I was shooting at the berm behind our clubs pistol range, which is about 75-85yds out. Just shooting at rocks and debris, I was hitting pretty close, and even making them fly and tumble. You could hear that little 86gn bullet smack the dirt.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
