CZ52 or Makarov?

I like them both, but for the uses you listed, get the Makarov. Ammo is cheaper, and the power is between .380 and 9mm. The CZ52 is pretty powerful, but a tremendous penetrator so isn't ideal for home defense.
 
CZ-52 & Home Defense

I own a CZ-52. It is definitely a fun gun to shoot. However, I would agree with Halo, the 7.62x25 round can apparently penetrate soft body armor(I've only read about it, haven't tried it). So, I personally wouldn't use it for Home Defense, mine is locked in the safe when it's not at the range.

Both are inexpensive to purchase and you can easily pay out more than the cost of the pistol, if you want to accessorize it.

If you get the CZ watchout for the corrosive surplus ammo.

If you haven't already, you might want to check out: www.makarov.com . They also have a section on the CZ-52. It's a convenient place to find any accessory that you may want.
 
Go with Makarov. Easy on the pocketbook, both to buy & to shoot, accurate & a very robust design. I have never heard of anyone wearing out a Mak. However, in the event you do break something, parts are very easy to come by - except for the factory adjustable sight on the Russian commercial gun. You are out of luck if you break one of those, & no one makes a replacement.

But all the other parts are easy to come by. Or you can do what I did - since they are so economical, buy 2 or more! ;)
 
Last edited:
Go with the Mak. Both are great handguns, but the Mak is more practical. Better ammo selection, and a better ergonomic package all together. I have both, and I really like both, but for the money, if it were me, the Mak is the better choice for your purpose. Just an opinion, of course.
 
The CZ-52 has a reputation for being a strong gun, but I've been led to believe that its not as strong as its held out to be.

A couple of guys on the Curio & Relics list note that nearly every gun available in the US has been arsenal refreshed -- not just refinished. One of these experts there wrote the following:

In terms of the lock-up, it depends on relatively little metal to keep slide and barrel locked together. Compare the mass of the rollers in the Cz.52 to the mass of the locking block in a P.38, the mass of the toggle assembly in a Luger, or the mass of the locking lugs on a 1911A1 barrel and I think you will see the Cz.52 doesn't have (relatively) very much keeping the action shut.

The overall durability of the pistol is a different question. That the Vz.52 required rebuilding (in some cases more than once) during peacetime use makes it something of an oddity, and does not speak well of the durability of the pistol. We also need to keep in mind the unpleasant fact that the early imports of this pistol (all in 100% condition after rebuild) were recalled due to a hammer drop safety that produced unintentional discharges if used.

This is not a pistol I'd use to push the limits.
Click to expand...
(This is in addition to the obvious problem with firing pins, which are delicate.) The Decocker is apparently flaky, too.

And then there's the fact that they're BUTT ugly. <grin>

I may get one someday, but only after I've gotten darned near every other pistol I might ever hope to have.

An East German Makarov, on the other hand, would be VERY nice.


(I now await all of the attacks from the CZ-52 lovers....)

I have a number of CZs, by the -- just no 52s.
 
The CZ-52 is a historical curiosity and a fun gun to shoot. Brno has a great reputation for making quality pistols.
With that being said, the Makarov is a "working man's" gun. Strong, reliable and very accurate. 50 years of continuous service with the Com-block nation's, has proved that. It is my primary carry piece, and I have complete confidence in it's ability to do the job.
 
"And then there's the fact that they're BUTT ugly. <grin>" (Walt Sherill) I've always said that a difference of opinion is what makes a horse race. <bigger grin> The CZ's appearance kind of grows on you.

I have both, like a lot of other posters here. I pretty much agree with everyone elses sentiments, the CZ is a good gun, fun and a great conversation piece but I'd carry the Mak before the CZ, and mine has stood nightstand duty for travel and home defense.

Now all that being said, I've employed a Tokarev in 7.62X25 for concealed carry and HD duty in the past.

Kurt
 
I have a CZ-52 with a cracked slide at home (and a new slide I need to install). I've only fired commerical S & B through it. When I posted to several mailing list, a couple of people said, "Oh yeah, that happened to me, too." I don't know what to make of this, but I was pretty disappointed.

I had probably put 1000 rounds of S & B through it when the slide cracked.

Mike P. Wagner
 
I love the CZ-52. It's a good weapon that with just a bit of work can be made great.
If you pick up a '52 I would recommend going to makarov.com and picking up two things:
1) One of the new Harington firing pins (very easy to install, takes less than a minute.)
2)A new, heavy recoil spring. The springs issued with the gun tend to be rather weak, and if you shoot high-velocity ammo through it, the weak spring will allow the barrel assembly to beat the holy heck out of the rollers. A heavier spring will prevent this.

That being said, the '52 is a fantastic gun to take to the range, you will have people asking about it.
Beside the fun factor, the pistol is extremely flat shooting (pushing an 80 grain pill at something like 1400 fps.)
I have hit targets at 100 yards with these pistols. (shooting off of the bench, of course, and taking plenty of time to squeeeeeeeze the trigger.)
It does take a bit of practice, as the gun has a pretty high 'flinch factor.'

As for Makarovs, well, I've never shot one. :(
I would very much like to, they seem like excellent pistols at a good price, and well, I have this thing about old com block handguns.
They're just so cool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top