Author Topic: Why not a modernized 52?  (Read 11900 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Walt-Sherrill

  • Guest
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #45 on: November 29, 2007, 05:11:45 AM »
And please note:  Windex is for the range, and should be carried in the gun bag.  Flush/spray/soak your gun when you finish at the range.  Then, when you get home, do what you think is best -- which can include hot water -- which isn't generally available at the range.  (Hot, soapy water is a favorite of the blackpowder enthusiasts.)

Corrosion can start quickly.  The sooner you do something to offset it, the better.

Offline woadyurt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #46 on: November 29, 2007, 10:21:03 PM »
A long time ago I asked a doctor why one shouldn't neutralize acid on skin. He said that the chemical reaction could generate heat, which would be bad for skin. One should neutralize acid on steel but I agree that that isn't the only thing that should be done. It should be washed and oiled, too. In addition, I think that a strong base can hurt metal, too. Neutralize, wash and oil your gun. Yes?

Offline CZooter42

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #47 on: November 30, 2007, 04:52:56 PM »
Funny how talk of a new 7.62x25 turns to a corrosive ammo thread. Did anyone e-mail gun companies? What companies would offer a desirable .30 tok?

Offline CZ Prime

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 252
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #48 on: November 30, 2007, 09:35:18 PM »
Unfortunately no company can undo military surplus ammo, which is the stuff that is corrosive. Newly manufactured ammo from S&B, WOLF Gold, Prvi Partisan and Winchester (really repackaged S&B ammo) should all be safe and non-corrosive. If you are nervous about corrosion, use one of theses, otherwise follow proper care and cleaning precautions.

Offline CZooter42

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #49 on: December 05, 2007, 04:39:32 PM »
Wouldn't chromed barrels be a good step though? I'm sure they could get over little problems like corrosive ammo. Maybe include a cleaning kit or something. That being said, I would submit that Tisas Turkiye would be the best company to make a 7.62x25; they'd probably make it selective fire, which would be AWESOME.

Offline brigadier

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #50 on: December 05, 2007, 05:09:16 PM »
I am working on a CZ-52 modification that uses a high-cap magazine, tack rail and a bunch of other modern goodies that'll put it ahead of most guns but I put the project on hold to do a .50AE scratch build.

 Don't get too worried about time though. Scratch builds are easier then major modifications and I know at least one company who is willing to produce a modernized CZ-52 provided there is a market for what will then be a $500-$700 gun. I intend to have all of my gun projects finished by spring of next year so you may see something by then.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2007, 05:13:19 PM by brigadier »

Offline new52

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #51 on: December 05, 2007, 07:05:33 PM »
I'm not a gunsmith, but I wonder if it would be possible to make an extended magazine to fit a few more rounds in. Maybe it could be welded together using 2 stock mags with a tab where the mag release is. Maybe it could be part of a kit with a new frame that has a tac rail on it and uses all the other internal parts as well as the stock slide. not sure of the legal factor involved as i'm also not a lawyer!

Offline Radom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2783
  • HGWT
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #52 on: December 06, 2007, 09:07:46 AM »
Quote from: brigadier
I know at least one company who is willing to produce a modernized CZ-52 provided there is a market for what will then be a $500-$700 gun.
 

Not to be a Negative Nancy, but there is no way someone can produce an all-steel, machined pistol as complex as the CZ-52 for $500.00 MSRP.  That said, the design probably does not require this, and it could be made much less expensive with an investment cast frame.  

The artist formerly known as FEG...

Offline CZooter42

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #53 on: December 06, 2007, 05:52:51 PM »
FEG, we don't mean starting up new CZ52 production, that would be pointless and expensive. We want a modern 7.62x25 platform, something with all the nice new bells & whistles.

Offline tf34mech

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 196
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #54 on: December 06, 2007, 06:37:19 PM »
Why not re-chamber something that uses 32NAA or 357 SIG?  I'm no gunsmith either though so I apologise if that is a really ignorant idea.

Offline Radom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2783
  • HGWT
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #55 on: December 07, 2007, 09:27:19 AM »
Quote from: CZooter42
FEG, we don't mean starting up new CZ52 production, that would be pointless and expensive. We want a modern 7.62x25 platform, something with all the nice   new bells & whistles.
 

I understood that you didn't mean that, but I understood brigadier to be referring to a true new-production CZ-52.


At any rate, the real question I have is the advisability of a cast frame for the cartridge.  My understanding is that a high quality investment cast frame can be as strong as a milled frame.  Also, 7.62x25 isn't THAT high in pressure.

CZ-UB used the money from export of the CZ 75 to expand into investment casting in the late 1970s.  Before that, Czech gun manufacturers didn't have a choice.  In other words, the fact that 1952-1954 production CZ-52s are milled is not a conscious rejection of a cast frame; Brno and Strakonice had no other options.
The artist formerly known as FEG...

Offline brigadier

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #56 on: December 07, 2007, 03:05:25 PM »
Quote
What will it be like, then?  
 
  The most commonly discussed confrontations with a handgun (not happening in a shop or store) seem to have two forms: 1) a home invasion where the homeowner   is responding to noises in the house (or an alarm) and is trying to find out what's going on, or 2) the gunowner is confronted or attacked on the street,   in a parking lot, near a automated teller machine, or while going to the car.  
 
  In any of those cases, multiple magazines are comfort factors, but seldom used. I can't think of any account of a real-life civilian shooting (other than   gang drug shootouts between gang members) where more than one magazine was used. In most cases its seldom more than 3-4 rounds used.  
 
  In any of the examples cited above, getting the gun ready (in the home or on the street) is going to take more time than you think. (In a home with kids, the   guns likely to be secured in some way; on the street, the gun is probably being carried concealed, and you may be with a companion, and going into action may   be difficult.)  
 
  In either of those cases, you aren't likely to have an opportunity for a well-aimed shot, and you probably aren't going to have much time to think   about it... If you're lucky, you're going to point shoot and do it almost instinctively. The noise may be enough to make the perp think twice -- or   it will open the floodgates.  
 
  In the home, you're going to be far better served with a shotgun (or carbine firing a handgun round -- maybe .40 or .45) -- a lot more firepower, and   even then, it not likely to take out the neighborhood.  
 
  On the street you're going to be better served with a gun easily brought into play, perhaps while you're trying to elude the attacker.  
 
  If you're in any kind of densely populated area, you've got to be concerned about where the shots go after they're fired, and even if you're   lucky enough to get one into the perp, you've got to be concerned that it doesn't got through the perp and into an adjoining house or two.  
 
  I simply don't see the advantage of a high-powered round with extreme penetration/pass-through capabilities. Or, for that matter, a magazine that is less   than 10-16 rounds.
Hmmm. I have used guns before in self defense a number of times. The .22LR has been my cartridge of use in most cases and has given me a sense of respect and trust that few have in the round. Allot of important factors come in to play, but I think how well you remain calm and in control is probably the biggest. It IS true that when it happens, whatever training you have will instinctively kick in. Being able to handle a situation under stress is not easy and not likely if you have trouble with emotional self control. One of the most important things is to get a bullet in your target before they can harm you, whether it be a .22LR or a .50AE. Once you have hit home once, 9 times out of 10, you have bought yourself another shot and it keeps getting easier until the threat has been eliminated. Not only that, but at least for me, the "no going back" factor helps to lower the stress level.
I actually have allot of confidence in the 7.62x25 that I don't in many other rounds. Unfortunately, overpenetration is part of it, so unless you are using a round that is good about stopping in the target (heard good things about Wolf), I would not make it my round of choice. At present, anyone who takes to deadly violence against me on the streets will stop a 135gr 10mm bullet moving at over 1600fps, and I am fairly confident that in 95% of all cases, only 1 shot will be fired, per perp.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2007, 03:17:24 PM by brigadier »

Offline brigadier

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #57 on: December 07, 2007, 03:26:20 PM »
Sorry for double reply. This new ez board quotation and post editing feature is ridiculous. They need to go back to the original which worked just fine.

 Anyway:

Quote
I'm not a gunsmith, but I wonder if it would be possible to make an extended magazine to fit a few more rounds in. Maybe it could be welded together   using 2 stock mags with a tab where the mag release is. Maybe it could be part of a kit with a new frame that has a tac rail on it and uses all the other   internal parts as well as the stock slide. not sure of the legal factor involved as i'm also not a lawyer!
I am doing exactly that (Mauser M-2 mags to be exact)  and heavily modifying my own CZ-52 to accept it. I have to fix the magazine first as it is having trouble stacking the shells properly after about 5-7 rounds which I suspect to be result of an overly wide tube.
 No legal issues in doing this if you are doing it for yourself. If you sell it, make sure the buyer signs a release.

Walt-Sherrill

  • Guest
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #58 on: December 07, 2007, 08:19:35 PM »
No legal issues in doing this if you are doing it for yourself. If you sell it, make sure the buyer signs a release.

The release may (may, not will) protect you from the buyer coming back on you if there is a failure or damage, but it won't keep the ATF off of your back.

As I understand it, I don't think you can sell it.  Period.  If you do, you've gotten into "manufacturing"  (if you've modified the grip frame, etc.) and then you're facing big problems from the ATF.  (If you think I'm off base on this -- and I might be -- give the ATF a call.  There's a lot of risk here, including your future ability to own weapons.)

Offline new52

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Why not a modernized 52?
« Reply #59 on: December 07, 2007, 08:49:16 PM »
Brigadier, Keep us posted ....can't wait to see that clip!

Roger that Walt ,But, Sell it? I'll part with my '52 when they pry my cold,..............