CZ-52, Tokarev, or Makarov

[Milsurplover]

I've been looking to get a new handgun and these 3 pistols came to mind: The CZ-52, the Tokarev, and the Makarov. The CZ and Tok are both chambered for the 7.62x25 round which appears to be pretty cheap while the Makarov is chambered for 9x18 Makarov. What pistol would you guys get for a fun range gun? I was leaning towards a tokarev but the only ones I can find are at J&G and it says they have frosty bores which worries me because to my knowledge that means that roughly 50% of the original rifiling has been worn away (They are out of hand selects). Also, I can't find a CZ-52 anywhere so if you guys know where to get one help is appreciated the Makarov seems like a good gun but the ammo price is much higher then that of the 7.62x25. I honestly cannot decide what pistol I would want so I'm open to any and all opinions on what you would get and why, Thanks

 

[harmon rabb]

For a fun gun, get a Tokarev. You can also get them from Southern Ohio Gun. I think they have ones in better condition.

For a gun you could actually carry, or use as a car gun, get a Makarov. The Makarov is a great gun, but nothing especially fun at the range. The Tokarev, on the other hand, is a blast (literally). Big muzzle flash, loud as heck, very very fun to shoot.

 

[Flash!]

the tokarev is the better range gun...... they are very accurate and fun! SOG has the Yugo and I believe the Romanian in stock. The CZ52 is also fun... the makarov is the gun to choose if you want a carry gun..... smaller and ultra reliable.

 

[sixgunner455]

Makarovs are accurate, reliable, and easy to shoot.

That's got the makings of being fun, to me.

 

[451 Detonics]

I would say the CZ-82 is a great and inexpensive 9X18. Of the two 7.62s I prefer the CZ, very accurate and reliable.

 

[harmon rabb]

I would say the CZ-82 is a great and inexpensive 9X18

It's probably the best range gun of the 9x18 guns, but none of them are as fun as a tokarev to blast away with

 

[jonnyc]

Best all-around, get the Mak. Most fun, Tokarev. Don't bother, CZ52.

 

[Milsurplover]

I've been looking at some Yugo M57 reviews and I've been seeing TONS of problems. Things like 25 pound trigger pulls, bad accuracy, only firing after 2 trigger pulls, and problems with bore diameters. Are all these problems worst case scenario? did they get bad pistols? I'm starting to worry about getting a Tok because If it has a 20 lb trigger... and anyone have accuracy experience on the Yugo models in particular? The Yugo M57 model is what I'm mainly looking at now because I can't find any Romanian ones :banghead:

 

[seed]

I have a Makarov and love it. It is reliable, durable, accurate and just plain cool. But I have read many times on this forum and others that the CZ-82 is the better gun in many ways (i.e. trigger, mag-release placement, shootability, etc) and I believe it, being that they were credible sources...I have never shot a CZ-82 unfortunately. They are cheaper in price right now too. I want one someday, but I will never get rid of my Mak. The Mak is like an improved PPK, in my opinion. Oh, and if you don't care about shooting Russian steel cased ammo, 9X18 is readily available and cheap. If you want to shoot brass, it is a bit harder to find and costs more than 9mm and less than .380.

As for the 7.62X25, I would definitely like one of those as well...I just can't justify getting one when I have a 5.7 and a Desert Eagle...I've got the fast and furious and BOOM factors covered.

 

[REAPER4206969]

The CZ-52 is the most collectible.

It is unique and only 250,000 were made.

 

[wally]

The CZ-52 is the most collectible.

Which makes the Tokarev the best choice for range fun. Stock up on the Polish surplus 7.62x25 ammo while you still can.

IMHO the Romanian is a better choice than the Yugo as spare mags for it are much easier to find.

 

[Fastcast]

The CZ-52 is the most collectible.

It is unique and only 250,000 were made.

Absolutely....Actually though I think it's only like 200,000 as compared to almost 2 million Toks.

The Tok is kind of a simplified copy of the 1911. Not necessarily a bad thing. What really ruins the Tok for me, is the knock off design and hideous added on safety for importation.

The CZ-52 in comparison is a unique design with its roller locking block, de-cocking single action, easy takedown latch and limited numbers produced. The 52's are getting harder to find because the surplus market has dried up. If you want one, you need to find someone that's selling theirs. Preferably look for an original "gray" finish, that has not been re-arsenaled. Some of the re-arsenaled, "black" finish 52's seem to have some pretty shoddy workmanship.

BTW.....Since when has a collectible, milsurp firearm not been allowed to be shot and enjoyed at the range?

Here, let me whore out the pic of my 52 again.

 

[M2 Carbine]

I don't have the Tokarev but I do have two CZ52 and sixteen Makarovs.
I like the CZ52 but not nearly as much as the Makarovs.


Interesting that Sunday a friend let a lady new shooter try his Makarov. The lady did much better than she normally shoots. She said she wants one.

 

[LJ-MosinFreak-Buck]

Funnily enough, there's a CZ-52 in my gunshop where I got my ASTRA...

 

[Rubber_Duck]

I love my Makarov! Very simple pistol, and very accurate and reliable.

 

[fallout mike]

I would like to have a tok and a mak, but I'm cheap and have to convince myself before every want (not need) that I should buy it. I'll pull the trigger on it one day.

 

[451 Detonics]

Of course the CZ 52 can benefit from a few additions. The stock firing pin is a weak point but it is easily replaced and that ends that problem http://www.harringtonproducts.com/firing-pins/ . The sights can be improved on as well...Novak can help out there http://www.novaksights.com/products/sights/models/cz52.html . And cosmetically something as simple as grips can add a great deal http://www.czgrips.us/cz-52.htm . Last extra magazines are a must. These work as well as the factory mags and are much less expensive and not made by Triple K http://www.keepshooting.com/cz-52-pistol-magazine.html .

My CZ 52....



It is the perfect companion for my Papashaw...

 

[Smaug]

Of those, I'd get the Mak

It is just the most non-wartime caliber, not to mention being compact.

The others have those necked down rifle-like cartridges that will penetrate and injur, but not transfer much shock.

The 9x18 Mak cartridge is also the most reloader-friendly.

Now, if you're open to others, I agree the CZ-82 is the superior gun compared to the Mak.

Another great option for about the same price as an old Mak is the Bersa Thunder 380. I have one, and it is quite accurate and easy to shoot, not to mention reliable and compact.

 

[Fastcast]

Be assured, if you're hit in the boiler room with the 1650fps. 7.62x25 (even FMJ), that is famous for tumbling, you're gonna get plenty of shock.

http://brassfetcher.com/762x25mm.html

I agree, the Mak is best for all around "carry" pistol but the OP asked about a fun range pistol.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Why decide
GET THEM ALL

 

[Smaug]

Fastcast: Thanks for the reference. However, the performance is not much better than a humble 22LR, HV, RN from a short barrel:

http://brassfetcher.com/WaltherP22test.html

Mind you, I'm not saying I'd want to be hit with either one. Solid point 22s also are famous for tumbling and causing massive damage, but not for transfering shock.

I think a good application of the 7.62x25 from a bigger handgun, such as a Tokarev, is effective range. In a pinch, and with a good rest, I bet a good shooter could hit a man at 50-100 yards with it and take him out of the battle. The relative rainbow trajectory of the 9x18 Makarov would not be conducive to this kind of use.

 

[Fastcast]

Fastcast: Thanks for the reference. However, the performance is not much better than a humble 22LR, HV, RN from a short barrel:

Oooook, believe what you want....Wonder why the Commies didn't use .22LR?

Muzzle energy:

7.62x25....514fps
.22LR....128fps

Yep, almost the same performance...lol

I really don't enjoy telling this story but to illustrate what the 7.62x25 is capable of:.....A local LEO was in a gunfight with a loon, who happened to be shooting a 7.62x25 (CZ-52) is what the paper reported. He was hit in the buttocks while trying to get back to his cruiser for cover. The bullet exited his neck....He expired where he fell, next to his cruiser and I imagine was in quite a bit of shock.

 

[Smaug]

The same types of things have been reported with 22s.

There was a thread over on The Firing Line in which folks started to say how ineffective 22s are. One member (and his wife) was a paramedic, who said that 22s are very lethal, and he cited a couple examples similar to yours.

In one of them, the victim was hit in the shoulder with a 22LR, and the bullet tumbled all the way down through his torso and came out his knee.

He also happened to have experience with another PAIR of victims. The front guy was hit in the shoulder with a 230 gr. 45 FMJ. Went through his shoulder, and clipped his wife's neck, and they were both fine.

Your point (and mine) was that little tumbling bullets can cause a LOT more damage than we would suspect just by looking at tiny wound channel in ballistic gelatin. I would bet (and this is just my feeling) that a 22LR would be even MORE prone to tumbling than the 7.62x25 FMJ due to its lighter weight; it's easier to de-stabilize it.

Of course, the ability of the 22LR to penetrate clothing, canteens, magazines, notebooks, etc. and light armor is not going to be in the same league as the much heavier and higher energy 7.62x25.

Another point I was trying to make was that ballistic gelatin is only one facet of the equation. The famous One-Shot-Stop statistics favored bigger calibers. Maybe the humble 22LR is just as deadly as the 45 ACP, but since it doesn't tend to stop the perp as quickly, it is considered less effective. The exceptions that prove the rule are the stories you and I have just related.

No need to roll your eyes and get all snotty just because I disagree with you.

 

[Fastcast]

Smaug, some good points, my apologies for being "snotty"..... With that said, I'm certainly still not buying your main point "the performance is not much better than .22LR"

 

[mgmorden]

Sorry Smaug but the math doesn't back you up here. 7.62x25 compared to a typical .22LR is shooting a bullet that's 38% wider, twice as heavy, and four times as fast.

Huge jumps in every category. Now compare the gains by going from 7.62x25 to 9mm Makarov: only 19% wider, 12% heavier, and 48% *slower*.

The 7.62x25 and the 9mm Mak are in a whole different ballpark than .22LR.