Valuable inputs Timmy, actually I was asking & replying to @pawan1981 in a limited context as the availability of guns & ammo in our part of the world is too narrow compared to yours ( i guess you are in USA),here after a very long time ( post 1980's)timmy wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2024 12:11 pmMAGNUM: Here's what I can say about the guns and cartridges mentioned:
CZ-52 in 7.62x25: When this is fired at the range, everyone knows it. There is a sharp muzzle blast, and the recoil is on the 9mm level. This gun is safe to carry and has a firing pin blocker. The grip is nearly perpendicular to the frame and the natural tendency is for it to point down. Lots of practice might overcome this.
Norinco 213/TT 33/ "Star": A little smaller than the CZ 52 in overall dimensions, this pistol is quite a bit heavier. It is easier to conceal. The muzzle is heavy and it also has an awkward grip angle, but the grip is a lot shorter and my "pinkie" finger is fully off of the grip. (The Serbian version of this pistol has a magazine capacity of one more round, and the grip is longer.) Some versions of the Norinco have a safety, but safety or not, the pistol is unsafe to carry with a round in the chamber. Mine is chambered in 9mm, but 9mm and 7.62x25 are about the same power level and recoil. The gun is not pleasant to shoot.
7.62x25 Tokarev: This is a powerful and good round. It does have lots of penetration (In the USA, the police tried to get it banned because it will penetrate some of the lowest level body armor) but this is a function of the full metal jacket bullet that most ammunition comes with. If the ammo had a good bullet design, it would be a lot better of a defensive round.
Other 9mm: I do have a new modern 9mm, and it is a delight to shoot - very controllable and shoots very comfortably, speaking of recoil.
45 Auto: I have a 1911 and it does have somewhat more recoil than 7.62x25 and 9mm, but not objectionably more. The reason for this is the pistol's superior ergonomics that are over a century old. (One wonders why, when this issue was gotten right that long ago, what the excuse of some of the more modern pistols is for having poor ergonomics?)
I own all of these pistols I'm making comments about, and that's my take on them.
I also have a Czech CZ 70, which is quite similar to a Walther PP in shape and size (in fact, it uses the same holster as the PP). It's 32 Auto cartridge is much weaker than all the previous mentioned pistols, but its light weight, compact size, and just adequate ballistic performance still makes it a viable carry pistol for close range in the hands of a practiced person. I would rank it as a better carry choice over the "Star" and the CZ 52. The 1911 is quite superior, but it is larger to conceal. My new 9mm is the "Goldilocks" choice: just right. But what works for me may very well not be the best choice for anyone else. I share my impressions here, based on my own personal experience. Make of them what you will and good luck.
the govt has allowed a few new companies to make & sell weapons which was beyond our reach till now. Also the strict licencing process & very few ammo permission on our licences makes it important to search a lot & get various opinions before buying a weapon ( I am in the process of buying a new pistol).
