Talk:7.62×25mm Tokarev

Czech 7.62x25mm Ammunition and Vz-52 Failures
Could the poster please provide a source for the following information, preferrably as a link on the page (or as a simple reference if no URL is available)? I have seen statements from various unverifiable sources that the Vz-52 was designed specifically to handle the 7.62x25mm "Czech load", referred to often as "M48". I have also seen statements that this load was designed for submachine guns only and shouldn't be fired from any pistol. At this point, I think it would be appropriate that at least one verifiable source be provided on this Wikipedia page before any solid statements are made either way regarding the use of Czech loads fired from any firearm, let alone the Vz-52.

There are two things I can reasonably cite as fact:
 * 1) This, and
 * 2) My own CZ52 handles the Czech-manufactured Sellier & Bellot 85 grain FMJ quite well, which is rated at 1,647 fps by S&B from the CZ52 (though independent testing (links below) has shown that this figure is exaggerated by about 100 ft/s). It has thus far digested 500 rounds of it without any sign of problems.


 * http://members.nuvox.net/~on.melchar/tokarev/tokssnb.html
 * http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_159_26/ai_90099729/print

Thanks, Raygun 05:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

07:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree, Wingedbrick keeps insisting on putting up a myth about the "special czech submachine gun load" that never existed. If there is no evidence, then it shouldn't be included. Hell, why not put in the "special china BS load that shoots poo". you can't prove china didn't make it, so should we leave that in????????

bob —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.255.17.209 (talk) 07:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

WHB Smith, "Small Arms of the World", Stackpole, 1966, describes the Czech load as M48 and as ~20% heavier than the Russian. When the Soviets insisted the Warsaw Pact countries standardize on 7.62x25mm, the Czechs adapted their VZ 24 and CZ 26 submachineguns to 7.62x25 in 1951, but loaded their M48 rounds to get ~1800 fps from an 11 inch barrel. They then adopted the CZ Model 1952 (CZ vz 52) pistol to handle their standard M48 7.62x25 load (developed for the submachinegun). Smith lists Czech 7.62x25 from the pistol at 1600 fps, and lists the Russian 7.62x25 at 1640 fps from the PPSh submachinegun and 1378 fps from the TT33 Tokarev pistol. Given the muzzle flash evident when firing the CZ 52 with Czech ammo, I suspect higher velocity is achieved with slower burning powder not with higher operating pressure. Czech and Russian pistols appear safe with either Czech or Russian commercial or issue ammo but the recoil impulse of the Czech ammo seems more intense. An experimenter who goes by the internet handle "Clark" who does tests-to-destruction warns that with deliberate overloads the Czech CZ 52 barrel will fail before the Tokarev barrel. Naaman Brown (talk) 21:16, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

My own experiments with 7.62x25, included shooting a number of different commercial brand loads, various surplus, and handloads. Using Accurate AA5 powder and an 85 grain FMJ, I was able to achieve 1980 fps from a CZ52. That load was stopped by a NIJ level IIIA Point Blank soft armor panel, but penetrated an NIJ level II soft armor panel. Someone gave me a box of ammo,found in a garage, that turned out to be Czech m48. The box was brown cardboard with stripper clips made to fit the VZ24 submachinegun. I pulled a few of the bullets and cut them in half. They were steel core with copper plating. The Headstamp was bxn 52. Testing was done at the reserved range for the college police science shooting course, where I turned them in to the law enforcement instructor. All that were not consumed were kept by the program for training. Shooting them from a Moisin M44, using a chamber adapter delivered velocities around 2000fps and from a CZ52 delivered velocities in the 1600-1650 fps range. I did very limited penetration testing with these. They readily penetrated a U.S. military (Ballistic Nylon) flak vest and a steel pot helmet at 20 yards. 946towguy (talk) 03:33, 29 May 2015 (UTC)946Towguy

Article renaming
--Commander Zulu 12:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

As per the general consensus from the team at Wikiproject: Military History, it would seem that this article really ought to be named "7.62x25", with no spaces. I'm not even sure the "TT" needs to be there, though. I can't find any reference to "7.62x25 TT" in any of my reference books. I thought I'd give people a chance to comment before arbitrarily changing the title, however. --Commander Zulu 07:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Article moved. --Commander Zulu 09:45, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I really think the mm should be included, I realize that the point symbol makes this an obvious metric measurement but it's included in every single piece of official literature I've seen. What may work for englis/US calibers isn't necessarily correct for metric calibers. Koalorka 03:31, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * FWIW, most of the print stuff I've seen tends to omit the "mm" if there's a name with the calibre as well- so, you'd have 7.62x25 Tokarev, 6.5x55 Swedish, 5.56 NATO, etc. If you didn't have the name, then you'd have the "mm". Most (if not all) boxes of ammunition that I've seen use this convention. The other thing is that if you start including the "mm", we end up with the Weights & Measures bots buggerising all the article titles to make them look like algebra equations written by someone typing v e r y slowly (7.62 x 25 mm Tokarev, for example). Simple answer: AxB (name), no "mm". I've had a look through some of my reference texts and you're right, many of them do have the "mm"- but not all of them, and even then, not always for every metric calibre (none of them mention the "mm" in relation to any of the Russian calibres except 7.62x39, and even that's called 7.62x39 Soviet in some cases). It's a tough one, but the system we have now seems to be working OK, and I'm inclined to leave well enough alone at this stage. --Commander Zulu 12:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


 * According to Russian book by Alexender Zhuck (Александр Б. Жук), there is no need to list "mm" if you write the length of the round. Proof: ISBN 5-17-017819-0, pages 757-761 are full of images of gun rounds, where "mm" is ommited, if round legth is added. So, I vote for removing the "mm". 178.215.105.1 (talk) 12:49, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Differences between Mauser 7,63 and TT 7,62 ammo are inconsistent
A small piece of info about if there are 10-20 images of different pistol rounds on same page. As for subject ammo, it listed there as "42. ТТ 7,62 мм (СССР), Маузер 7,63 мм (Германия", which means "(number of illustration). TT 7,62 mm round (USSR), 7,63 mm Mauser (Germany)", the cyclopedia by Zhuck lists these two rounds under same image. 178.215.105.1 (talk) 12:49, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Removed from Main Article
This really didn't belong in the article as it was. If someone wants to briefly summarize and include in another section at the end, that might be better. Twalls 21:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

In March 2000, Ted Curtis, ballistician at Accurate Arms, sent a letter to industry leaders and some consumers prior to the May 2000 published release the new higher pressure loads for the CZ52: ""7.62 X 25 Tokarev .. Due to the large number of handguns imported into the U.S. chambered for the 7-62 x 25 Tokarev Accurate Arms has developed the following load data for those shooters who wish to reload the little powerhouse. In determining the appropriate pressure limit for our load data we tested various military ammo from China, Russia, Austria Bulgaria and the Czech Republic. Commercial ammo produced by Sellier & Bellot was also tested. Based on these tests we arrived at a maximum pressure for our lad data of 42,000 C.U.P. Only the single lot of Russian ammo was significantly below this pressure averaging 31,000 C.U.P. The consistent pressures between all other types and manufactures was a welcome surprise. Indeed, the fact that Czech ammo, made for the CZ-52 pistol, produced the same pressure as that of the other countries was perhaps the biggest surprise of the whole project. This in spite of the "tribal lore" regarding this particular handgun and the ammo loaded for it claiming that shooting Czech ammo in any other firearm so chambered will causes spontaneous disassembly. The pressure data produced by the ammo tested certainly doesn't support this theory."" Since that letter and book, AA has recanted the high pressure loads for the CZ52 and now offers for free, corrected low pressure loads for the CZ52 on the AA web site.


 * I have removed this yet again. Twalls (talk) 08:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Photo. Armor piercing?
Is there anyway to confirm that the right hand cartridge in the photo is armor piercing. Sellier & Bellot sells surplus lead core FMJ in lacquered steel cases that looks identical to the pictured cartridge. Being a high velocity round 7.62x25 will pierce some levels of armor but lead cored bullets are not specifically designed to pierce armor. If no confirmation can be made I suggest the caption be changed to reflect brass vs. steel case instead of non-AP vs. AP. Nailedtooth (talk) 01:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

The photo in question appears to be Sellior and Bellot commercial ammunition, which is loaded with a lead core, copper jacket fmj. Some ammunition has a lead core, copper washed steel jacket, which will attract a magnet but is not AP. Czech military ammunition made by Sellior and Bellot will have a bxn and 2 digit year headstamp. i believe all of the m48 ap ammo was issued on 8 round stripper clips.946towguy (talk) 03:44, 29 May 2015 (UTC)946towguy

Velocity Information Incorrect?
Every firearms article on Wikipedia has bullets in order from smallest grain size to largest. Then, corresponding to the size, the speed. The speed of the higher-grain rounds is always lower than the smaller (in the other articles). I don't know much about guns, but something seems wrong with the speeds. Paladin Hammer (talk) 05:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


 * With the Tokarev ammo, the velocity seems to have quite a variation based on the manufacturer. Different manufacturers produce rounds with differing velocities.  Thus one company may make a light round with less velocity that a heavy round made by another company.  Check the footnotes to see that the table uses different makers.
 * Now the Ammo Table for Wolf FMJ has 1720 fps velocity. But when you go to the citation, you find 1641 fps.  Should this table not be corrected? (EnochBethany (talk) 18:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC))
 * The muzzle energy section does not add up. This seems to be a general problem with Wikipedia muzzle energy boxes. BorkBorkGoesTheCode (talk) 11:10, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Why no case capacity?
Why does it not mantion the case capacity? This must be the 5th article today i've brought this up on, yet nobody seems to notice. Also, why only one resource mentioned? It doesn't provide half of the information in this article! Somebody please fix this article as soon as possible. Avianmosquito (talk) 03:19, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * This is Wikipedia. If you don't like it, change it.  Case Capacity is irrelevant, if you ask me, and beyond the scope of this article. Do you really need to know the angle of the shoulder for the purposes of Wikipedia? How about the radius of the rim chamfur? --Nukes4Tots (talk) 12:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Case capacity is not irrelevant. In all actuality it is more relevant than half the information on this page. It may not seem important to you, but it might be to some people. If anybody can find this information they should add it to the page immediately. I would do it myself, but I have no clue what the case capacity is. 71.112.219.8 (talk) 06:09, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Case capacity is an arbitrary number that changes from manufacturer to manufacturer, lot to lot, and even a great deal amongst lots. Further, the area a bullet takes up within the case varies by load, bullet type, etc.  There is no useful data that can be gleaned from case capacity and used to any encyclopedic purpose.  Feel free to remove anything in the article you feel is irrelevant. This is not a "how-to" guide and such minutia that is of highly limited use to reloaders borders on the absurd, in my opinion.  Please establish both verifiability and notability on the talk page prior to adding this to ammunition articles.  In fact, try making your case on WP:GUNS talk page as that's where I will go to with the discussion after I revert it.  Thanks for your time. --Nukes4Tots (talk) 06:22, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

OTs-27 Berdysh?
The article states that the OTs-27 Berdysh is chambered in this cartridge, but I can find no reference to this elsewhere. Anyone have a source or shall this be deleted?-- Surv1v4l1st (Talk 16:44, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I found several sites in Russian stating the pistol is available in 9mm Mak, 9mm Para, and 7.62x25mm. Twalls (talk) 05:40, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info. The ones I found in English only stated the two 9mm chamberings.  If you could add sourcing for the 7.62x25mm variant, that would be great.  Thanks. -- Surv1v4l1st (Talk  15:49, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll try to find the best source. Regards, Twalls (talk) 08:10, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Original Design Purpose of the Round
The original purpose of the round is a significant question. Some 7.62x25mm rounds will pierce some armor. On YouTube there are videos of Tokarev ammo going thru a bullet resistant vest, also of a vest stopping it. Obviously steel core bullets would have a tendency to pierce armor. I don't know about other states, but Texas has a law against the possession of bullet piercing ammo made for handguns. Yet the definition is such that it is not the fact that a bullet pierces which defines the round, but what its ORIGINAL PURPOSE was. Thus if a round in fact pierces armor, but was not originally designed as a handgun round with the primary purpose of piercing armor (or metal), the round is legal to possess, IMHO. Therefore, it is important to determine what was the original intent of the round. If a type 7.62x25mm was originally designed for sub machine guns, those rounds would be legal to possess. If those rounds were designed for handgun use and steel was the material of the bullet just because a government was saving money over lead, those rounds would be legal to possess. Therefore, if someone has the information as to the original intent of Tokarev rounds, the added information would be significant. As it is, in the introduction, the writer hints that they were made for Russian submachine guns. But no citation is given. (EnochBethany (talk) 03:55, 22 January 2013 (UTC))

Feedback
Which was a better SMG round: It or the 9mm Parabellum? And how about an all-rounder?.. And how about a pistol for that matter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.101.38.242 (talk) 05:50, 14 April 2019 (UTC)