View Single Post
Old July 17, 2012, 11:51 PM   #3
Senior Member
Join Date: December 4, 1999
Location: WA, the ever blue state
Posts: 4,678
CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.
Back around 2000 Sierra and Accurate Arms were saying there was a hierarchy of pistol strength.
1) CZ52
2) Tokarev
3) C96 Mauser

Since then I have contacted Sierra and AA and informed them that the math and the experiments point to the real hierarchy being:
1) Tokarev
2) C96 Mauser
3) CZ52.

As a result [in part due to my diligence in enduring years of flames] and many CZ52s blowing up and hurting people with surplus Tokarev ammo, AA changes it's CZ52 load:

FROM: 11.7 gr AA#9, 4.72" barrel, 110 gr Speer Round nose .308 bullet, 1.3" OAL [1622 fps 63,866 psi Quickload]

TO: 08.5 gr AA#9, 4.72" barrel, 110 gr Speer Round nose .308 bullet, 1.3" OAL [ 1114 fps 22,953 psi Quickload]

To make a long story short... AA had measured surplus Tokarev ammo from many Eastern block countries and found all of it [except from Russia] to be 42k cup.
They worked up some loads in the AA facility with AA powder and tested it on one borrowed CZ52.

Since then I bought a dozen CZ52 barrels and got them tested at the jet propulsion laboratory on their RC hardness tester as ranging between RC25 to RC47.
The CZ52 chamber wall over the roller relief cut is .058" thick.
The Tokarev chamber is .125" thick.
So one CZ52 may blow up and another CZ52 may not.
I can't get Tokarevs to blow up, even with brass destroying loads.

What does it all mean?
Published loads are now down at the lowest common denominator ~ 23 kpsi for all three; CZ52, Tokarev, and C96 Mauser.

With a 90 gr XTP and 1.3", that would be 4.7 gr Bullseye or 5.3 gr Unique @ 23,000 psi in Quickload

I personally do not shoot my CZ52s or C96 much.
I shoot my Tokarevs with 110 gr and Power Pistol, and I run them hot.
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 0.03314 seconds with 7 queries