military handguns??

[1911crazy]

I just picked up my first norinco tokarev in 9mm and was wondering what else is there??  I still have a Springfield Armory 1911 like NIB I shot it a few times.  So what else should I look for??             BigBill

[Robert357]

As a 357 mag and revolver fan, many years ago, I decided I "needed" a semi-auto pistol and a 9mm just so I could see what all the hoopla was about.  Since I didn't want to spend an outragous amount of money on a pistol I wasn't sure about I decided on a surplus 9mm.  I ended up liking it so much and the price was so good, I bought a second for spare parts.

I have two Norinco's 9mm tok's from many years ago that I bought NIB.  

I am not sure about yours, but I am certain that mine were basically just converted to 9mm by the Chineese from standard 7.62x25 new parts as a way to make them more sellable in an overseas market.  Mine will take the standard surplus 7.62x25 magazines and reliable feed 9mm out of them, which has allowed me to extra mag's for each at a reasonable price.

My two Tok's in 9mm always shot way, way high.  I atributed it to the fact that the 9mm is so much slower than the Tok round for which it was developed and that the allows for much more time in the barrel and hence muzzle climb between trigger pull and bullet leaving the barrel.

I ended up grinding off quite a bit of the rear site so that the POA and POI were the same.  If yours is a newer model, I am not sure if the Chineese have fixed this or not.

Mine is fairly accurate.  When I am shooting well, I get people asking me what is that fancy pistol I am shooting, as they don't recognize it from the gun magazine artiles they are use to reading on 9mm pistols.  I like to tell them it is my $109 surplus pistol I bought.  The ones with the $400 to $500 9mm pistols that shoot no better look crushed.

I think that the Tokarev is a very strongly made pistol and one that is relatively simple in design.  It was manufactured for a long time in a lot of countries and therefore has to have a lot going for it.  I collect old Browning designed pistols and the Tokarev looks to me like a cross between a Colt Model 1911 and a Colt Model 1903 with some features of each, but not the grip safety.  For the money, I know of no better single action semi-auto pistol.  Mine have a "backwards" thumb safety on the slide, that is ackward, but works.

I have had to replace the plastic handgrips on both of mine as the spray gun cleaning fluid I use softened and then cracked the pastic grips.  

Good luck and enjoy!

I still prefer shooting my 357 Ruger Blackhawks and my 357 Taurus, but they aren't  mil-surp.  I also like to shoot my pre WW-1 32 ACP's, but that is another story.

[Mikey]

Robert357:  I had the same problem with my Tok in both 9mm and 38 Super - shooting high at the same distances the 7.62x25mm round was dead on.  I left it like that as I shoot the other two cartridges for fun, not serious work.  For serious carry with the Tok, I go with the 7.62x25mm round.  If I'm going to carry any other caliber it will be the 38 Super and since I know where that shoots, or rahter how high it shoots, I will factor that in but I usually go with the 7.62.  Mikey.

[1911crazy]

I never use my sights on my auto's or short barrel magnums maybe because I was shooting so many different handguns it was easier to cover with the barrel what i wanted to hit and they did.   I showed so many to shoot their 45's that way because they couldn't hit squat with them.   Have you ever tried it with the 9mm tokarev's??      BigBill

[TimW]

Hello Big Bill....

 SOG has their CZ52s on sale for $99.  Just ordered one yesterday and awaiting it's arrival.  Bought a Ballester Molina from them a couple weeks ago and was pleasantly surprised when it arrived. It was arsenal refinished in green park with new grips and a decent bore. Took it out and rattled a few mags through it and it functioned fine. The sights are the down side, but my buddy is going to install a set of Millets on it. The internals are built like a Mack truck.  All I know is this C&R is costing me a lot of $$$

 Good Luck,
             TimW

[Robert357]

>>Have you ever tried it with the 9mm tokarev's?? BigBill

Nope, well with my shotgun, but that's different.  At the range I shoot at, you allowed to miss at trap and sporting clays.

Most of the time I target shoot at 25 yards.  I do pretty well with sites and the range is very fussy about folks keeping all shots on paper or else you are asked to either leave or get back on the paper.

Not using sites at 25 yards is something I haven't tried and would be a little hesitant.  Grinding down the real site wasn't that much of a problem.  I did need a small jewerls file to deepen the rear site notch.  I then used some rebluing touch up to retreat the metal.

To Mikey;

Over the years, I have read a number of stories about the 7.62x25 tok.  One of the most interesting things was that in the far east where the 7.62x25 tok cartridge was fairly common with the criminal element, that the police use special Tok rated bullet proof vests.  Evidently the Tok is known for super penetration, especially with Chicom military ammo.

[Mikey]

Robert357:  Yep, you're right about the penetration with the 7.62x25mm Tokarev - it is pretty fearsome.  A buddy of mine performed penetration tests on wet newspaper, comparing it to standard velocity 38 spl 158 grain roundnose and semiwadcutters, 38 Spl 200 grain roundnose, and 9mm ball.  The 158/38s penetrated some 4", regardless of bullet type;   the 38-200 grain penetrated 5" or so; the 9mm ball penetrated to 6-7 inches and the 88 grain 7.62x25 penetrated to 10".  I think that may be why the Soviet bloc liked the cartridge so much - they specified the TT33 as an offensive weapon in that caliber and downgraded the role of the sidearm to defensive when they went to the Makarov cartridge.  

Interesting note about the body armor made up by the Chinese to defeat that round - I once encountered a Russian immigrant who poo-pooed the Tok, laughing it off as ineffective because during the cold Russian winters when people would wear ten pounds of thickly woven layered clothing, he said the Police would shoot at them with their Toks and when they got home they would shake the spent bullets out of their clothing.  Hay, last I recall, ten pounds of thickly woven layered clothing would constitute a pretty effective type of body armor.

Here is what I personally know about that cartridge from both my readings and my experiences with Comm bloc weaponry in S.E. Asia:  From history, Sir Winston Churchill used a 30 caliber Mauser (same caliber as the Tok) during a stint in Africa.  He was required to use a pistol after taking a wound to his sword arm.  He wrote home to his mother that the enemy, some hundreds or thousands of indigeonus African warriors (ready to chop them into chutney) had massed 30 meters to his front.  He fired his pistol 10 times, killing nine and wounding one.  He recharged in an instant, and this time his aim was better.  That says something for the caliber.  In S.E. Asia, the same caliber and the Tokarev proved itself on the battlefield and was as effective as any combat pistol.  As lightweight as they are, I carried one in my 'flare pocket' in the right side cargo pocket of my BDUs and a couple of extra magazines anywhere I could find room.  That's why I still have one.  Mikey.

[John Traveler]

Mikey and all:

While I have no doubt that the 7.62x25 "Tok"/M96 Mauser is a highpowered pistol cartridge and that it WILL kill and WILL stop, the historical evidence is scanty that it is a RELIABLE stopper.

Mr. Jeff Cooper stated that a friend of his during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war was shot in the throat by a PPSh41 submachine gun in that caliber.  He was hors 'd combat, but only briefly.

Now, granted that Mr. Cooper is the Father of the "Big is Better" school of pistolcraft, his opinions carry a lot of weight.

Capt Bruce Fairbairn of the pre-WWII Shanghai, China, police did extensive studies of the 7.63 "Broomhandle" Mauser shootings (caliber and pistol used by the Shanghai Police for more than 40 years)) and reported that the Mauser was an effective stopper, but only when the bullet hit bone.

My Dad was in pre-WWII China and described an incident in a rural village.  Some guy posted all-night sentries to protect his orchards from raids and one night emptied his M96 broomhandle Mauser at an intruder.  The next day, it was discovered that a slight, 100-lb "rice burner" was hit several times in the side and lower abdomen, and had RUN several kilometers to the next village for help.  He survived the shooting!  I dunno what condition the Mauser pistol was in, but even given extensive velocity loss and power from old ammunition and a worn bore, how can someone survive several solid hits???

My own feelings are sorta mixed.  While NO ONE wants to get shot with ANY pistol, the 7.65x25 is still a "small bore" and probably marginally effective as a stopper.  The Soviets adopted the cartridge in pistols (1933), based on their previous service pistols (7.62 Nagant and 7.63 Mausers), were rushed into WWII, and standardized on submachine guns as quick, dirty, and effective armament for millions of expendable footsoldiers.  That does not in itself, make the 7.62 "Tok" a good pistol.  That makes it widely adopted, available, and used for it's intended purpose.

John

[John Traveler]

Mikey and All,

The US Army has many "field reports" with documented cases of the .45 ACP, .38 Spl, and .30 US M1 Carbine engagements that failed to penetrate winter clothing of North Koreans and Chinese during the Korean War of 1950-1953.  Like your example of the Russian emigre, Chinese winter clothing was simplly multiple heavy layers of padded cotton clothing.  Synthetic fibres (nylon, rayon, kevlar, etc) were not widely used or even available then.

That performance was one of the factors that lead to small arms research for 9mm pistols and assault rifle calibers to replace the M1, M2, and M3 Carbines used then.

I jsut did some notepad scratching and came up with the following:  The 7.62x25 Tok fires almost the same diameter bullet and weight as the .32 ACP, but at about 50% higher velocity.

That means the Tok bullet has about 2.25 times the muzzle energy of the .32 ACP.   Call it 2.5 for round numbers.   I dunno about the rest of you, but that doesn't mean a very big increase over the .32 ACP, a notoriously poor manstopper.

John

[Mikey]

John:  you were absolutely right in both posts.  Truth is, you have to hit bone with something like that before it really becomes effective or it becomes a through and through round with little debilitating effect.  But, so do most of the other fmj or military ball rounds.  Hence, either load in a nice softpoint like Hornady, I believe has, at the same velocity or practice,practice and practice some more.  

Actually, with all the Toks and CZ52s out there, and firms like winchester and S&B marketting the 7.62x25 ammo, I am quite surprised that one of the two or someone else doesn't sell a soft or hollow pointed loading it that round.  Then you would have quite an immediately incapitating round.  Think?  Mikey.

[John Traveler]

Shades of Doc Savage! (1930's fiction hero that used .32 ACP)!!!

I'd like to have some soft point/hollowpoint 7.62x25mm ammo to play with.  They should be nifty for small game and varmits.

Col Jeff Cooper, a great man that has a way with words, once wrote that in terms of pistol caliber effectiveness, (paraphrasing now) that "the .32 auto is satisfactory...... about as satisfactory as a 4 oz beer.  The 9mm Parabellum is a pussycat, and the .380 Auto (9mm short) is more like a possum."

I like all calibers and pistols for sport shooting.

But for serious defensive use, there are some that you would rather have the OTHER guy use.

[Robert357]

>>Shades of Doc Savage! (1930's fiction hero that used .32 ACP)!!!

This thread has shifted so far that it has touched a hot button of mine.  I collect pre-WW1 32 ACP pistols.  I have a number of nice Colt 1903's, a Savage Auto Pistol and a FN 1900.

While a 32 ACP is not the stopping power of my 357 Mag, there are winchester silver tips and others reasonable bullets available for this.  After all, for years the overpriced, impossible to wait for SeaCamp (sp?) was the backup firearm rage of all the gun magazine.

The 32 ACP cartridge is a semi-rimmed cartridge that was inspired/designed by John Moses Browning.  Let's not diss this cartridge.  The 32 ACP was used as a police and military round in a lot of places on this earth for a long time.  With the exception of 22's, there probably have been more 32 ACP handguns made than any other caliber.  If we limit to semi-automatic that becomes even more true.

From what I have read when John M Browning wanted to go shooting handguns, he like to carry around a 1903 in 32 ACP.  Any firearm that was the favorite of John Browning (who could have had any - as he designed so many ) is not something to dismiss too quickly.  Yes, it is not designed to stop Alaskan Brown Bear, but it is a firearm that if shot in the right place  will wound or kill with a single shot and with one or two more definately kill most attackers.  

Now back to my Savage Auto Pistol.  Savage actually out sold Colt 32 ACP  in most years of head to head competion.  Savage actually had their own ammo they sold, the 32 ASP (Auto Savage Pistol) that was about 1000 fps and so a bit hotter than the standard 32 ACP.  The Savage Auto Pistol has a European look not aquite like a luger but more rounded than most of the other  US manufactured pistols on the market.   Savage was also very good at advertising.

Now back to the Tok, especially in 9mm.  I like mine!  It is very good and from what I can gather a very strong action compared to a lot of other 9mm's and 7.65 x25 Tok caliber firearms on the market.  What I especially like about the Tok is its action, which has elements of a Colt 1911 and Colt 1903.  I sort of wish that in the copying this and that they would have included the grip safety feature that is in both the 1911 & 1903, but the Tok is a much simplier to produce pistol with out it.

[John Traveler]

Okay, Guys!  and Robert 357 in particular:

NONE of my comments about the 7.62x25mm or .32 ACP guns and quotes were intended as "flames" or even smoldering embers!

"Doc Savage, The Man With The Golden Skin", was a fictional hero-type character of the 1930's.  His trademark was use of futuristic selective-fire .32 ACP pistols equipped with "snail drum magazines" with shoulder-stocks, etc.  He "shot to wound, and not to kill, usng hollowpoint bullets that stopped under the skin.".

Now aside from the simple enjoyment of reading boyhood fantasy stories, there is a lot of truth to the stories, based on ballistic fact.

There is NO DOUBT that small bullets will kill.  They will also occasionally stop.  The basic fact is that the .32 ACP (and similar small calibers) are much more likely to wound than stop or incapacitate.  Period.  That is what makes them inadequate defence guns.

An old gunsmith once told me that many years ago on a horseback hunting trip, his guide carried a .22 Colt Woodsman pistol, and when asked what it was for, the guide replied, with a smile, "That's my MOOSE gun!"  Everyone chuckled.  Days later, they came across a bull moose feeding sedately near the trail.  The guide unholstered, drew down, and fired ONE shot, hitting the moose between the eyes.  The moose collapsed immediately. A ONE SHOT KILL.  "See, I told you it was a MOOSE gun!!" said the guide.

What this story illustrates is that almost ANY gun can be used for ANY purpose, but that doesn't mean that it is BEST for that purpose.

I have no problem with .32 ACP guns.  I have a couple myself and enjoy shooting them.  The design excellence, machining quality, fit and finish of the classic guns made several generations ago are much admired by most of us.

All I was trying to convey was what Col Jeff Cooper (and others) has advocated for what, several DECADES now, is that if a "major caliber" pistol isn't used for defence, it almost doesn't matter WHAT is used.  

That sounds pretty absolute, doesn't it?  To conclude that .22 LR, .25 ACP, .32 ACP, .380 ACP, .32 revolver, .38 revolver are ALL lumped into a category as MARGINAL or INEFFECTIVE as defense pistol calibers?  Yes, IT DOES!

Those are NOT my conclusions.  They are the conclusions of Col Cooper and other advocates of BIG BORE pistols.  His conclusions are based on thoroughly-documented statistical studies of thousands of actual shooting events over several decades, on several continents.

Col Cooper also wrote (paraphrased) that there is a theory that any consumer item that achieves great popularity among the general population can't be best for it's intended purpose, because there can never be enough specialists to have sufficient experience to evaluate that item objectively.  He gave the .32 ACP as an example.  I would like to add the Volkswagen beetle as another.

Have you noticed that in the last generation or so, that European police (formerly great advocates of the .32 ACP guns as police tools) have almost completely shifted to more serious calibers/weaponry for daily carry/antiterrorist operations?

What I am trying to say is that as far as many of us are concerned, any pistol bullet/caliber that can solidly hit a human target several time, and still have that target run away, is not my first choice as a defensive arm.

John

[Robert357]

>> What I am trying to say is that as far as many of us are concerned, any
>> pistol bullet/caliber that can solidly hit a human target several time, and
>> still have that target run away, is not my first choice as a defensive arm.

I agree with you completely on this and "no flame" was intended or taken.

If I am going somewhere, where I am concerned about personal safety a 357 Mag is about as small a handgun as I want, because it is about as "powerful" a handgun as I can really shoot well.  Actually a pump 12 guage is preferred but not real concealable.  

I have read the complete Thompson-LaGarde Report, which was presented to General William Crozier on March 18, 1904.  I have a copy of it as an appendix to a book on the Colt 1905 pistol.  It is the report that swayed the US government to go to 45 Caliber for military handguns.  The tests involved a Luger in 0.3012 caliber (probably close to the Tok cartridge), a Luger in .3543 caliber (i.e. 9mm), Colt revolvers in .38, .455 and .476 caliber, and Colt Auto Pistols in Colt .38 caliber.   Like Jeff Cooper, they concluded that based on shots fired on cadavers (i.e. dead human bodies), and live animals, that the bigger caliber was more "effective."  

It makes for an interesting read, but it hardly looks like either "science" or very definative in terms of determining the relative merits of each round.    
This is especially true if you probe the way they determined "stopping power."  If you read closely, what they really liked was heavy (over 200 grain) bullets versus 92 to 148 grain bullets.  I have often felt that a lot of the "big bore" versus "small bore and speed" debate ignores the bullet weight and its effect.

There are some pretty heavy bullets that one can stuff in a 357 Mag, but in a 44 Mag one can stuff even heavier bullets.  Your really can't get a 200+grain bullet for a 32 ACP and expect it to cycle in an pistol.

Sorry for the thread drift.

I do like my Chi-com 9mm Tok's.  Althought they really needed to have the rear site filed down.  I have seen some Eastern block Tok target pistols that have adjustable sites and would love to find out where I could purchase just the sites.  I contacted a few importers but nobody has every heard of what I am asking for.  I have even thought about seeing if the dovetail in the back might be similar to some other brand of pistol that has adjustable rear sites.