OT: Tokarev's are in

PZ93C said:
Satori- I was wondering if someone would bring up Clark. That dudes nuts.
Click to expand...

Hey...there's always one of them in every crowd. :)

I'll classify him with our own Cliff Stamp - love him or hate him, I'm glad he's doing what he's doing because otherwise, I would have to.
 
Satori said:
Hey...there's always one of them in every crowd. :)

I'll classify him with our own Cliff Stamp - love him or hate him, I'm glad he's doing what he's doing because otherwise, I would have to.
Click to expand...

...and with your long list of champagne bottles that still need to be sabre-tested, you might not get 'round to it for a year or two. ;)
 
That was very interesting, Satori. I'd like to know what the chamber dimensions are in the two guns. Not being familiar with either one I'd like to see how they lock up, too.

I think you're on to something. The Tokarev might be stronger.

Why does this "Clark' have such a reputation?


munk
 
Here's a couple. If "search" worked better at Gunboards, I'd round up a few more.

http://www.flyinglead.info/bb/viewtopic.php?p=14437&

http://www.assaultweb.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=003012;p=1

http://www.gunsnet.net/forums/showthread.php?t=123537&highlight=clark

http://www.gunsnet.net/forums/showthread.php?t=125450&highlight=clark

http://www.gunsnet.net/forums/showthread.php?t=118237&highlight=clark

Start with these. You'll see he overloads the rounds himself til the pistol fails.

I'm glad someone does. A 9x23 Tok sounds cool. Start with a Chinese 9mm and ream out the chamber. The gun can handle it.

Brian
 
raghorn said:
...and with your long list of champagne bottles that still need to be sabre-tested, you might not get 'round to it for a year or two. ;)
Click to expand...

Especially if I keep drinking the spoils of war. I'm not as young, nor as resilient, as I used to be.

Still, I can think of less desirable hobbies.
 
munk said:
That was very interesting, Satori. I'd like to know what the chamber dimensions are in the two guns. Not being familiar with either one I'd like to see how they lock up, too.

I think you're on to something. The Tokarev might be stronger.

munk
Click to expand...

Both the CZ52 and the Tokarev shoot the same 7.62x25 cartridge. The Tokarev uses the tilt lug locking system like the Colt 1911 uses. The CZ uses the H&K roller locking system and is much stronger than the Tokarev. Both are strong enough for their intended purpose. Problem comes when people use hot subgun ammo in the guns. Both will handle the ammo for a while but the TOK is likely to fail quicker than the CZ.

Ice
 
I don't know what the deal is, but the FNM ammo is supposedly 1600 FPS. This Yugoslavian ammo I got from SG is supposedly only 1400, but my God the thing almost jumps out of your hand with the Yugo stuff. Also lots of case ruptures but it doesn't seem to be hurting my CZ. I did put an 18 lb recoil spring on it though.

I'd like to have one of those tokarevs though just cause they shoot that same cartridge. Seems real accurate!
 
hollowdweller said:
I'd like to have one of those tokarevs though just cause they shoot that same cartridge. Seems real accurate!
Click to expand...

The TOK fits small hands much better than the CZ. And yes, the TOK is accurate. I have one of the Polish Tokarevs with the add-on safety and its superbly accurate.

Ice
 
Satorie, your post did not tell me what I needed to know, but that's OK.
Yes, they are both chambered for the same round. That does not mean their chambers are cut exactly the same way. (We have a modern manufacturer in the US that likes to err on the large side- Ruger)

I read all the threads and links posted by you and PZ93C
While the Tokarev chamber handled higher pressures, some of the poster's felt for normal use the CZ would last longer.
I don't know if this is true or not.
I doubt anyone does.

thank you,

munk
 
It may come down to this: the Tok, having thicker chamber walls, may be less likely to have a catastrophic failure (KBoom).

The CZ, having a stronger locking system, will probably last longer under hard use.

Do not do anything Clark does with a firearm you want to keep safe. He brags about all the firearms he destroyed- well and good, but I want to keep mine intact, along with all digits and accessories.

John
 
I haven't read enough Clark to know what he's thinking about, but testing a gun with high loads is not the entire story. It may survive, but metal fatigue is tricky stuff. So although the Tokarev survives loads that break the CZ, it may break apart without warning on a NORMAL load later down the road.

Has anyone worn out a Tokarev?



munk
 
munk said:
Has anyone worn out a Tokarev?
munk
Click to expand...

I'll give my CZ a good shot at getting worn out. ;) The refurbished one has a heck of a lot of slide play compared to the unissued one, but it shoots as good or better than the virtually new one. A little hard to compare cause the refurbished one has the firing pin upgrade that lightens the trigger pull.

Hey that Tokarev for sale link is not working for me now. Anyone know what's up with that?

Anyway for the price and the cheap ammo plus the cool grapefruit size fireball the CZ is cool. Makes me want an AMT or Blackhawk .30 carbine :D
 
I mentioned the CZ to my knowledgeable friend and the sub-gun ammo issue. This is his response, much like Spectre's and Green Ice's:

I wrote:
One of the posters on this thread said the sub-gun rounds were NOT to
be used in this handgun because they were loaded hotter.

In most cases(pun?), that would be true - but actually, the '52 would be
one
I wouldn't be afraid to try hot stuff in due to that roller lock setup.
An army amigo in CA got a '52 and noted that .38 Super rounds would
fit in the magazine and breech area, and talked about converting one
to that caliber. .38 Super is a seriously hot round, which can be loaded
to within shouting distance of .357 Mag pressures. R.H. is armament
trained(in fact, we met at the Army Ordnance Center), and isn't prone to
crackbrained ideas...

On the other hand...too hot, too long=mechanical failure of some sort.
 
munk said:
Satorie, your post did not tell me what I needed to know, but that's OK.
Click to expand...

If you're looking for actual measurements and such, Clark mentions some in the very last post of the thread that I linked to. You'll have to take his word on them.

The main issue here seems to be that the CZ's ability to tolerate hotter ammo (true or not) is based on the strength of the action, and at least one person (who was foolish enough to blow a few of them up) feels that this is not how the weapon will fail when pushed too hard.

At the end of the day, we don't have enough information to go on. Clark's experiments are interesting but statistically meaningless. It's simply something to consider. When a big name lab blows up a few thousand of each and gives me the data, I'll make my mind up then.

What one should bear in mind is that when a machine is pushed past its design parameters - be it a firearm, an engine, the CPU in your computer - its lifespan will be shortened. When we're talking about a firearm, though, a failure is potentially lethal to both the firearm and its operator. Those of us who haven't personally witnessed a firearm letting go (or, God forbid, been the shooter when it happened) may not understand just how intense the forces at work here are. Picking brass out of your face and sporting powder tattoos on your forehead are not cool. (And I had not even done anything wrong, other than shooting milsurp ammunition through a milsurp firearm.) Trust me on this and respect the limits.

Or, the short version: what John said. Leave the ballistic disassembly to Clark. Firearms are potentially dangerous enough without intentionally trying to destroy them.

Oh, and wear yer safety glasses.

:cool:
 
The TT-33 trumps POS CZ's every time.
My Polish TT is holding up very well.
It's alot beefier and heavier that the <<KABOOM>> prone CZ-52
my $0.02

If raw pressure curve data is made available with a statistically-signifigant sample, I'll run the numbers in Minitab and will post a capability six-pack.
you can PM me w/ the data. It has to be continuous-type data (variables). Go/no-go, qty failed, or attribute data is worthless here.
 
Does one have to have a FFL to purchase one? What's the deal with the "Curio and Relic" deal?
 
Bri in Chi said:
Does one have to have a FFL to purchase one? What's the deal with the "Curio and Relic" deal?
Click to expand...

BriChi,

The C and R is a license you pay like 30 bucks for that allows you to order firearms classified as C&R yourself instead of paying a person to receive them for you.

There was someone from Poland on another forum and he also said the TT33 was stronger. Although "conventional wisdom" says the CZ is. I love my CZ and would also love to have a TT33. I was just out shooting mine.

Something maybe somebody could explain to me. This Polish and Yugo ammo I have been shooting in mine. It really seems to pack a wallop, yet the specs are allegedly only 1400fps. However the commercial boxer primed FNM ammo is supposedly 1640fps, but the recoil is way less. Accuracy is a little better too. You think the specs of one or the other are bogus?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top