In my humble opinion, CZ52 has two fatal flaws, one fixable and the other unfixable. When CZ52 started to show up in the early 2000, a lot of my friends purchased them because they were dirt cheap and looked really sturdy. Plus it fills the void for 7.62 x 25 rounds since Tokarev was getting scarce at the time before the Polish/Romanian Toks showed up. Then people started posting that CZ52 firing-pins were extremely fragile and would fracture after 5 -10 dry-firings. That problem was easily solved by replacing the pin with a US made one. Then posts started to show up depicting fractured CZ52 slides, not when firing Czech submachine 7.62 x 25 but when firing US-made 7.62 x 25 designed for handguns. I have examined my friend's CZ52, and despite the over sturdy construction of the slide, the one area where the delayed recoil mechanism is located at is extremely thin. 7.62 x 25 round contains a lot more powder than the 9mm Para, and if you look at the slides on a P38, which is much thicker than that area on CZ52. The Germans later thickened the slides on their P1 due to infrequent P38 slide fractures. In my opinion, the reason that CZ52 firing pins are so fragile is because their carbon content is too high, which makes it very brittle. I was wondering whether the CZ52 slides are made from the same steel as their firing pins, which augmented by the thin area near the delayed blow-back mechanism is causing a lot more slide fractures. Thus I would only shoot 7.62 x 25 in a Tokarev. I may be paranoid but I like to play it safe.