makarov question

Walt said:
The Bulgarian Maks are apparently pretty good, but note: NONE of them are military surplus. These are all NEW PRODUCTION guns, most of them made in the last year or two. (None of them qualify for Curio & Relic status, while most of the other Maks do.)
Click to expand...

Sorry Walt, but this statement is full of holes & in some places just down right wrong.

First, many of the Bulgarian Makarovs are mil surplus; I own 2 now, had 3 but sold one off. All were unissued when I bought them. There are also commercial Bulgarian pistols available. The commercial guns will have the word "ARSENAL" very prominently located on the slide. Unless there are some other frame marking differences, the slide marking is the only way the commercial gun varies from the mil-surp.

You are correct in that none of the Bulgarian guns, whether mil-surp or commercial, are C&R guns. But the statement "most other Maks do" when referring to C&R status is misleading at best. All East German Maks qualify as C&R, and Russian mi-surp guns do also - & that is all. The Russian commercial offering does not, it is easily identified by the factory installed adjustable rear sight. The Russian mil-surp looks exactly like the EG & Bulgarian mil-surp guns. The Chinese Mak is another that doesn't qualify as C&R. Also, it must be 9x18 caliber - .380ACP does not qualify as C&R.

But hey - we do agree that they are "pretty good"
:D
 
Oris,

Yes, both my M48s came with bent down bolt handles. They do take a little wider bend than my K98 and don't go down as far and close to the stock, but they are clearly bent down. I'm not sure how well they would work with a scope (if that's your interest). I think the bent bolt handle makes them look better than the straight-handled Mausers that are common now. Another difference is that the M48s have wood handguards that go around and behind the rear sight (between the sight and the action). The wood handguard on my K98 is only forward of the rear sight.

Doug
 
Thanks a lot, Doug. I was indeed evaluating it for scope use.
I should probably find one and and see if I can place a scope relatively low...
 
With regard to Bulgarian Maks. I stand corrected. Thanks to those who had the proper information. I've talked with several guys who have EG Maks and also Bulgarian Maks, and they put the Bulgarians -- at least the new commercial ones -- as being close (but not quite matching) the EGs. For the difference price, that's pretty impressive.

About the Mauser M-48s. There are apparently several varieties of M-48s out there. Some that saw service with the Eastern Bloc military, being refurbished Mausers of an earlier variety; some that were made new after the war using German equipment, saw some service and were arsenal refinished; and still others that were assembled from a stockpile of parts (which had been warehoused) in the last 10-15 years, when Yugoslovia was looking for hard currency and exports.
 
I own Makarovs from every country that made them, including China. The East Deutsch maks are the best bar none!!! I own three of them. The Chinese are the worst. The Bulgiarian Maks are OK, but not as good as the E.D. There is nothing wrong with my Arsenal Mak!!!! The Russian commericial maks are also OK, but the sights are way cheesy. Russian military maks are right on par with the E.D..
 
Walt said:
With regard to Bulgarian Maks. I stand corrected. Thanks to those who had the proper information.
Click to expand...

:D Glad to oblige, Walt! These little guns really got me right...well, I dunno right where, but I just couldn't get enough of them or their history. Still - I'm no expert; there are a lot of Mak enthusiats out there with knowledge of frame markings & manufacturing sights that I know nothing about.

Great little guns though. The TIMEX of the handgun industry!
 
Kevinch...

What you say about the commercial Russian Mak not being C&R makes sense. However, the ATF bible doesn't make that distinction. Do you have a reference?
 
I had an East German 1961 production Makarov and a Russian Baikal Makarov, both were very good guns and worth every penny. I also own a Chinese Norinco Model 59 and it is a much better gun overall than the Bulgarians I have handled and shot. Fit and finish is about between the Bulgarian and EG, but with very deep and dark blueing. But since the Bulgarians are plentiful, and the Chinese Maks are rare, that point is neither here nor there. I recommend EG's if you can find one for under $200, and if you can't Bulgarians are still a great value.

mlk18
 
A question for those who believe the East German Maks are superior to the Bulgarians (which seems to be the overwhelming consensus): In what way, SPECIFICALLY, are they superior? I'm not looking for generalities like "fit and finish," "quality of construction," etc. - I'd like something more specific - like "the Bulgarians have burrs on their triggers, the EGs don't," for example.

I ask, because just about everything I've read indicates that the EGs are better, but when I examined 4 or 5 of the nicest EG Maks in a local store, none seemed as nice as my Bulgarians. The EGs I saw showed more use, and some appeared to have been refinished (and not too carefully). Maybe it was just a rough batch of EGs I saw (I believe the store had over 100 in stock, which they had imported themselves). But I can't help but wonder if EG superiority is just "conventional wisdom" not supported by fact. I went into the store fully intending to buy one (they were on sale for $169.95), and some of them looked great in the case, but when I handled them, I didn't find any of them quite as nice as my Bulgarians.

The only specific advantage I recall reading is that the EGs have better triggers, but it is also commonly reported that Mak triggers improve significantly with use. If the EGs have been used more (like the ones I saw), it stands to reason that the triggers might be a little smoother. I assume the design is virtually identical, and most parts are interchangeable, so what makes the EGs better? Maybe the parts are more nicely polished before assembly on the EGs? I'd be interested in someone pointing out some specific, verifiable way in which the EGs are superior.

Doug
 
Ed Brunner said:
What you say about the commercial Russian Mak not being C&R makes sense. However, the ATF bible doesn't make that distinction. Do you have a reference?
Click to expand...

Ed, I have to say I don't - but I "know" it to be true.

I remember this was a very hot topic over at the Makarov.com message board in the past.

In Section II: Firearms Classified As Curios Or Relics Under 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44, which is the section where the Makarov is listed, the opening statement says:

The Bureau has determined that the following firearms are curios or relics as defined in 27 CFR 178.11 because they fall within one of the categories specified in the regulations.

Maybe the milsurp Russian gun falls into one of the categories, and the commercial gun doesn't. I guess it is one of those topics where you would have to write the BATF for the definitive reasoning. Certainly, the language of Section II does not indicate a difference between the military & commercial guns.
 
Doug, I agree with you. I see no evidence whatsoever that E.G. Maks are "better"... people probably get hypnotized by "German origin of Mak", overlooking a well known fact that EAST GERMAN
quality was never close to WEST GERMAN, or just German quality.
 
I admit that I don't understand all I think I know about this.

In the ATF P 5300.11 (3-2001), Firearms Curio or Relics List, Section II; Firearms Classified as Curios or Relics Under 18 USC Chapter 44, it lists Makarov, pistol, Russian and East German, caliber 9mm Makarov.

I don't see any distinction noted for the commercial Russians.
 
DougB - I took some pictures to try and illustrate the difference between the finish of the various Maks. This little project is not finished, and I plan to take more photos to further illustrate the differences, but here is what I have so far:

Bulgarian Makarov

Russian Makarov

East German Makarov

Notice the tool marks in the safety well. They are deep and very pronounced on the Bulgarian, not as bad on the Russian, and almost non-existant on the EG. The same differences can be observed on other parts of the guns as well. It's hard to tell from the photos, but the slide and frame on the EG are better polished, and the bluing is higher quality.

IMHO, it's rather obvious that the EG is a better finished gun. It simply looks much nicer than the other two. Functionally, the triggers on all my East Germans are MUCH nicer than my other Maks, but I don't know if it's because of better quality, or just that the EGs are more broken in.

I hope my pictures shed some light on the quality issue! :)

Best regards - Pussball
 
Ed Brunner - I don't have a reference to show you in regards to your question about Russian Commercial Mak's C&R status, but I did in fact, see a letter from the BATF posted over on the Makarov forum last year covering this very subject. The letter stated in no uncertain terms that Russian Military and East German Makarovs are the ONLY Makarovs that are C&R. Furthermore, if I recall correctly, the letter specifically referred to the commercially made Russian Makarovs as NOT C&R eligable. The letter left absolutely, positively NO DOUBT that the commercial Maks are not C&R.

If you want me to pursue the matter further, I'll be glad to post over on the Makarov board and see if I can find the letter from last year. LMK.

Best Regards - Pussball
 
Pussball,

Thanks for posting the photos. Interesting. We're talking pretty subtle differences here, aren't we. I got out both my Bulgarians just to compare with your photos. They do have some machine marks in this safety area, though I don't think they are quite as deep as those in your Bulgarian photo. But I'll take your word for it that the finish seems a little smoother on your EG. I'll have to keep my eyes open and pick up a nice EG so I can make my own comparison :). I think the EGs I saw probably weren't the best examples. I picked out the nicest looking ones looking through the glass case, and these may have been refinished pistols that had had quite a bit of use. A like-new EG would probably have impressed me more.

By the way, I assume by your "name" that you are the originator of the idea of slightly modifying the Uncle Mike's pocket holsters to hold a Kel-Tec P32 AND and extra magazine. That was genius. I looked all over before I finally found one of these holsters (found it in a different state while on vacation), but I love the result. It coldn't be better if Uncle Mikes designed it just for that purpose. I showed a friend, and he got one, made your mod, and uses it all the time. Thanks.

Doug
 
I meant it when I alluded to the fact that I have no expertise in C&R. It sounds reasonable that the commercial Russians would NOT be C&R, I just haven't seen anything except the ATF publication I referred to. If there is a footnote or whatever I haven't seen it.
 
Doug;
I purchased my EG from Dennis Kroll at Empire Arms almost 2 years ago. It was in mint condition (looked un-fired, but couldn't verify that).
Although a Russian design, the EG's are Walther-like in finish and fit. It is an attention to detail more than anything else, when comparing the different Maks.
 
A question for those who believe the East German Maks are superior to the Bulgarians (which seems to be the overwhelming consensus): In what way, SPECIFICALLY, are they superior? I'm not looking for generalities like "fit and finish," "quality of construction," etc. - I'd like something more specific - like "the Bulgarians have burrs on their triggers, the EGs don't," for example.
Click to expand...

Doug,
I'll tackle the question. I own two Bulgarian Makarovs, one of them being a commercial Arsanal. The 9x18mm round was standardized among the Warsaw Pact countries. Hungary, and Poland, which had their own firearms industry, came out with pistols of their own design. The DDR, Bulgaria, and China adapted the Makarov, and produced them. There are differences in the fit, finish, and accuracy. There are large visible machine marks on the interior of the slide, and to some extent the exterior frame of both of my Bulgarian Makarovs. This effects the ease of assembly in that the slide is sometimes hard to reattach to the frame. It very often takes several tries to accomplish this. This is not present on any of my E.D. Makarovs. There is also a pronounced tendency for the Bulgarian military, and Arsanal pistols to shoot to the left. This, also is not present with the E.D.'s. Admittedly, these conclusions are drawn from a pitifully small data base, but that's my story, and I'm sticking to it!!! :D
 
Denfoote,

Thanks for the additional info. I have noticed that reassembly of my Bulgarian Makarovs can be pretty tough. Same goes for a friend's. I just assumed that this was inherent in the design - or operator error (sometimes they seem to go together easily, other times it's a struggle). I've never removed the slide from an EG, so didn't know that they'd be easier.

I've mostly plinked with my Maks. I know they don't shoot exactly to point of aim, but I don't remember how they were off. I'll check next time and see if they shoot left. I posted a question here recently about drift adjusting sights - partially because I want to adjust the sights on these Maks.

Even accepting that the EGs are nicer, I don't regret getting my Bulgarians at all. They seem very solid and reliable, and I think I paid $105 for the last one (plus shipping and FFL fee). That's about $60 less than an EG would have cost me. Also, I live in California, where I can still get EGs (due to their C&R status). No more Bulgarians for sale here unless you find a private party deal.

Doug
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top