TT33 or CZ52?

[DubC-Hicks]

I have heard many arguements about this and would like to hear what you guys prefer and why.

BTW, i can't figure out how to post my quotes at the bottom of my posts. Any help plz?

 

[chris in va]

Tokarev. The 52 I had cut my fingers with the sharp edges and bad ergos. See that curve below the trigger guard? Ouch!

 

[dances with guns]

yep, my cz52 hurt my hand during recoil because the handle had some sharp edges.

 

[raftman]

TT-33. IMO, it's the better looking of the two, plus it seems to have a firing pin that's less prone to breaking. Plus the CZ has that unreliable de-cocker.

 

[DubC-Hicks]

there is one posted up at the restaraunt in my town for $275. It has holster, 400 rds of sellier and bellot ammo, and it has brand new grips. It says it has about 50 rds of ammo ran thru it. It is practically brand new. Is it worth $275?
Would love to have one. Trying to decide on that or Hi-Point 995 carbine
9mm

 

[mnw42]

I own a CZ52 and have shot a number of TTs in both 7.62 and 9mm.

The TT is great gun. The magazines, sights, and ergo's of the TT are superior to the CZ. I also like the 1911ish disassembly and easily removed lock-work. The big down side to the TT is the safeties that were added on when they were imported can be a major problem.

I bought the CZ because I like the 50s ray-gun look. The ergonomics are a bit odd, but not unmanageable. The sights are a bit harder to use, but they help contribute to the CZ's fine accuracy. The firing-pins are brittle, but as long you don't dry-fire the pistol it is a non-issue. The fact that it has a factory safety/de-cocker is a definite plus, but as was mentioned the de-cocker can be a bit iffy. Follow the first rule and keep the gun in a safe direction. In my experience it is a minor issue and I have only seen the de-cocker issue on one really beat pistol.

If you are looking for a neat collector's piece then go for the CZ52. If you want a shooter then get the TT33.

 

[Kyo]

tt33

 

[Tamara]

Depends what you want to use it for.

Personally? I own both.

 

[EnoughGUN]

I am pretty surprised to hear most people lean toward the 33. The CZ looks like the construction and quality is vastly better while the 33 looks like someone built it in their garage. I much rather get the CZ and spend some money making it perfect.

 

[amd6547]

The Tokarev is combat proven in decades of the worst combat of the 20th century, and still serves in some corners of the world today.
I much prefer it to the CZ52...The CZ I had was wildly inaccurate, and jammed with any of the mil-surp ammo I tried.

 

[IdahoG36]

I like the TT-33 over the CZ52 myself.

 

[cougar gt-e]

The TT-33

It has the "look and feel" of a Colt 1911 - that's what shades my thinking.

 

[ballardw]

If I could get a Tokarev without the stupid add-on safety levers I'd be much happier. The gun was NOT designed with a safety and IMHO the add-ons are unreliable (falls out of the frame for one Norinco 213 of my acquaintance) and the ones I've met all move through very strange arcs and some in unusual locations on the pistol.

I like the grip angle on the CZ52 better than the Tokarev.