View Single Post
Old June 6, 2011, 01:20 AM   #4
Clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 1999
Location: WA, the ever blue state
Posts: 4,678
In 2000 AA published some CZ52 only data.
They said it as 42k c.u.p. per the Eastern European Tokarev ammo they tested.... but don't shoot it in Tokarevs, because they are not as strong.

I blew up a couple CZ52s and complained on the internet that they were not strong, despite what all the books and magazines said.

I got 90% flames in reaction.

But CZ52s kept blowing up and in 2004 AA reduced the CZ52 loads from 42 k c.u.p. to 32 k c.u.p.

I noticed that my Quickload program thought they had reduced the loads from 63,866 psi to 22,953 psi.

Later in 2004, AA took all CZ52 loads down.

11 years later, I must seem like a broken record
__________________
The word 'forum" does not mean "not criticizing books."
"Ad hominem fallacy" is not the same as point by point criticism of books. If you bought the book, and believe it all, it may FEEL like an ad hominem attack, but you might strive to accept other points of view may exist.
Are we a nation of competing ideas, or a nation of forced conformity of thought?
Clark is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.02444 seconds with 8 queries