11-13-2006, 12:01 AM
| #1 |
| Senior Member  | Makarov or CZ 52? I dont know whether to get a makarov or a CZ 52. I have heard of great acuracy of the 9x18 makarov because of the Attatchment of the barrel to the frame, but, i havent heard anything about the CZ 52 accuracy. The 7.62 x 25 would be an interesting round to shoot. But is there much of an accuracy trade off?
__________________  Blow you up.
|
|  |
|
11-13-2006, 01:48 AM
| #2 |
| Senior Member  | Not sure about the accuracy, but for penetration tests: The Box O' Truth #29 - The Helmets O' Truth and The Box O' Truth #26 - Little Guns vs. The Box O' Truth One of my favorite sites.  |
|
| |
|
11-14-2006, 01:18 AM
| #5 | |
| Senior Member | Quote:
The 32acp 71gr impressed me. Lots of penetration for a so called small gun. Last edited by Zen900; 11-14-2006 at 01:36 AM. | |
|
| |
|
11-14-2006, 06:29 AM
| #6 |
| Moderator   | The HP spread out and dispersed its energy into the target, which is what the HP is designed to do. It had a greater displacement, causing more damage. Ball shot, not spreading upon impact, continued through the subsequent jugs to disperse its energy. |
|
| |
|
11-14-2006, 08:41 PM
| #8 |
| Member | The CZ is just like the Eveready bunny-it keeps going, and going, and going. For self protection you better be sure there aint nothing behind your target cause it will continue down range for a long while. stay safe
__________________ You can run but you will just die tired! |
|
| |
|
11-26-2006, 10:36 PM
| #9 | |
| Senior Member  | depends on your desired use...! The Makarov would be much better if you plan to use it as a CCW, if you are concerned about over-penetration (what's behind your intended target) and 9x18 MAK is easier to find and available in a much greater variety of rounds than 7.62x25, which is almost an orphan caliber. The CZ-52 might be a better choice if you are concerned about lack of penetration or if you just like a more powerful round in a less expensive, rather unusual firearm. Jay1958 Quote:
__________________ http://www.yourweapons.com/ | |
|
| |
|
11-26-2006, 10:43 PM
| #10 | |
| Senior Member   | Quote:
I prefer the CZ52...more powerful and doesn't have an odd recoil like the Mak...at least the 9x18 Mak...I've never had the chance to fire a Mak in .380 P.S. Wolf now loads the 7.62x25 in a couple different flavors including hollow point... 
__________________ U.S. Army 1976-1979 237th Combat Engineers Heilbronn, Germany Last edited by NRAJOE; 11-26-2006 at 10:45 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | |
|
| |
|
11-28-2006, 01:32 PM
| #11 |
| Super Moderator   | Hollow point loads would certainly make the difference in the CZ-52's usability for self defense. Me, I would treat it as a target pistol able to work at much longer ranges than typical handgun rounds. Not sure if anyone uses it for hunting, but if your state allows semi-auto pistols it may be a great short range or dispatch arm.
__________________ Trust is earned, not... GIVEN away. - Worf |
|
| |
|
12-07-2006, 09:34 PM
| #12 |
| Registered User  | the cz 52 is probaly the better of the two. I have owned bolth and i had better luck with the cz52 the rond was made to go throw body armer so for hunting it makes a verey good back up. I is also made to withstand moor preser. On the ammo side try to stay away from the s&b serpluss ammo they have a bad tindensy to have the lite masengun ammo mixed in with it and it is right at the limet on presser for the cz52 some reports of it blowing up have serficed. u can also get the berral for the cz to convert it to 9x19 and u can swich back and forthe |
|
| |
Linear Mode
