| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Tokarev TT-33
Additional variants of TT-33 pistol
Experimental Variants
Country Variants
Less-Lethal and Blank Firing Variants
Airsoft Variants
Screen Used Variants
Question
- Is a Tokarev worth buying? I saw one at a gun store in my town a while back and the price was really low-S&Wshooter 05:15, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
- I have many Tokarev Pistols, however, the surplus ones have a problem, the firing pins tend to shatter. I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a really good American copy of the Tokarev Firing pin (not the crap Milsurp that you see everywhere). Perhaps Titanium so I don't have to stress out whether or not one of my Toks will suffer from a failure to fire due to broken firing pin. :( MoviePropMaster2008 01:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
It is well worth buying. They are very reliable and accurate. I like the fact that it breaks down similar to a 1911 but the hammer assembly is one piece that makes it easier to clean. I would suggest trying to find one in 9mm or one that includes both the 7.62x25mm and 9mm barrels. The Norinco 213 is the same as a Tokarev but somewhat easier to find one but includes a safety that is actually a good one.96.32.133.162 04:02, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Too bad I have the rule of NO CHINESE GUNS EVER. I know where to get a 9mm Tokagypt though-S&Wshooter 04:09, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Even though I don't like Chinese guns, new ones aren't coming so buying one isn't supporting China anymore, Its been paid for so why not?--FIVETWOSEVEN 21:42, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Yugo Tokarev
The Zastava M57, the Yugoslavian copy of the Tokarev was used in Savior and Rambo II, should we include it here as well?
- Yes, it is a type of Tokarev pistol so definitely MoviePropMaster2008 02:31, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Reason for obsolescence?
I'm confused as to why this pistol and its proprietary 7.62x25mm round was deemed obsolete by the Soviets and replaced by the 9x18mm Makarov round, a cartridge that was arguably obsolete right from the moment it was designed due to the popularity and widespread use of the already-in-use 9x19mm Parabellum round. I've heard that the 7.62x25mm Tokarev round is supposed to possess more velocity and better kinetic energy than most 9x19mm Parabellum loadings, coupled with better kevlar penetration against low-level ballistic armour, so it seems a bit of a mystery to me as to why they would "downgrade" their pistols and SMGs from something that wasn't broken in the first place.
Also, if indeed the hype about the 7.62x25mm round is true, then does that mean the PPSh-41 was the FN P90 of its day, or that the TT-Tokarev was the Five-SeveN pistol of its day?
For the 1st section of this post: I looked up some information about the Makarov round and the Tokarev round. The Makarov round was designed because the Red Army wanted a simple pistol using the Direct Blowback system (the Makarov PM, PMM, etc), and to prevent the chance of ammunition falling into Western Hands and being used against the Red Army in the event of war. (information paraphrased from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9mm_Makarov). Come to think of it, a similar situation occurred with the American-180 Sub machine gun, chambered in the .22LR round, which was designed as a weapon to arm police in the hope that should the weapon ever fall into the wrong hands and be used against police officers with ballistic vests, the officers would not be killed by a police issue weapon, due to the .22 round being a low penetration round. For the 2nd part of this post: I'd think the TT-33 being the Five-seveN of the day would be more appropriate, given the PPSh-41 not being very compact or that accurate after about 75 meters because of the high rate of fire and the not exactly great sights.
I see, the rationale behind the Soviets' adoption of the 9x18mm Makarov cartridge wasn't on wikipedia the last time I checked that particular entry. I'm surprised then that the Russian military (cash-strapped as it is) hasn't gone back to the 7.62x25mm Tokarev round in order to update its pistols and SMGs to armour piercing ammunition again. Rather, they've gone to overpressure variants of the 9x19mm parabellum cartridge to turn their SMGs into PDWs. Maybe the reason why they chose overloaded 9x19mm rounds was that they felt they had to match or exceed the FN P90 in their box or helical magazines? I take it the reason why the Bizon SMG can't use Tokarev rounds in a helical formation is because they're too long to fit in a helical magazine of manageable length, and repeating the PPSh-41's drum magazine format is bound to result in feeding problems.
- No, why? It's possible to make helical mag for TT cartridges, but its capacity will be almost a half less. What's the point then? TT rounds are not as good at piercing armor. Russia developed special cartridges - SP10(armor-piercing) and SP-13(armor-piercing incendiary) and weapons chambering them - SR-1(pistol) and SR-2(SMG). You can find info about it on the nets.
I think another reason why the Soviets decided to switch to the Makarov was that they chose the Tokarev initially so they could make use of the German 7.63mm Mauser round for pistol and SMG ammo. So then the Makarov was their attempt at ensuring the same trick could not be pulled on them. A shame that this round went into obsolescence for reasons other than its performance, like the fate the 10x25mm Auto round suffered. Makes me wonder what a modernized version of the PPSh-41 using the Tokarev round might look like today, and if it could actually serve in the "armour-piercing SMG role" well . . .
- From what I have heard the performance of the 7.62x25mm Tokarev round is more similar in performance to the .357 SIG than the 5.7x28mm.
- The 7.62x25 round actually isn't as good as described here. In deed it has good penetration but overall the whole kevlar-buster myth is caused by AP ammo, and more by steel plated bullet's with lead core. With standard copper plated bullet it has no more penetration than 9x19 and probably even less, due to a lightweight bullet. It causes more problems than has to offer. Its loud and very bright. It has much recoil in my opinion much more than .45 acp (fired from TT pistol). It ricochet's (?) much. It losses energy very fast due to a instability in flight - bullet shot at 100m from ppsh-41 can be catch by gloved hand. With only minor bruises. (ok, what glove you want??? ypour joking right? at 100yrds my Yugo Tok goes thru a lvl II vest and the 12-14" diamiter oak tree that was "wearing" it. No glave will save you... )Stopping power is low - bullet go trough flesh without spinning and leaves very narrow and clean canal.
- All this from my own experiences with few guns in this caliber witch can still be found in my country as a service weapon in some security agency's due to a low cost and quite easy maintenance needed.
- And one more thing - the Russians adopted this cartridge with c/96 - it was just the round they already have in production. They only added a little power to it. And that's all--Ripp 15:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, if it's all from your own experience.. You catched bullets with your hands? Or was shooting human flesh that is advancing on you? Shot the walls?
- I was eyewitness of this. One guy was shooting, the other one was in line of fire about 100m away and one meter to right (crazy...) and catching bullets like a "fast bee's". "Hard but not impossible". He showed me 3 cached bullets and tree not so big bruises on his hand. He has some thick working gloves on his hands when he did that. Maybe it was the old gun, maybe bad ammo. I think that bullet started to spin shortly after leaving the barrel, and loose much of it's initial energy. (Man sorry for the bad English i wasn't using it for few years.)--Ripp 22:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, probably fucked-up 60 years-old barrel that spits bullets like a camel and (maybe) underloaded cartridges. And in what country bullshit-fest like that happened?
- Happy land of vodka and twins. The barrel could be worn out, ammo was standard military FMJ - fresh can. Curious thing: never used polish ppsh41 (manufactured 1956 - we have thousands of them still in factory grease) shots 80mm groups at 25m. This can rise many questions. But that was only curiosity - including it or not I still think that 7.62x25 is bad as self defense ammo, and only average as military ammo.PS. Didn't Fairbarn or Applegate made similar thing with Thompson SMG? I've heard only some rumors. --Ripp 23:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm, Ripp's experience with sounds very odd. Your "bullet catching experience" sounds like it came from an old barrel. Maybe you should get try shooting those fresh rounds in a newer barrel and see what happens. Still, the penetration sounds like something that could be made use of in a more modern PDW with the barrel length to make better use of the powder that gets wasted as blast and muzzle flash. I hear the OTs-14 Groza has a 7.62x39mm variant, and I think something like that could be converted to use old stocks of 7.62 Tokarev ammo (the barrel's already the right size, but the firing mechanism needs to be converted). --Mazryonh 00:54, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, probably fucked-up 60 years-old barrel that spits bullets like a camel and (maybe) underloaded cartridges. And in what country bullshit-fest like that happened?
- I was eyewitness of this. One guy was shooting, the other one was in line of fire about 100m away and one meter to right (crazy...) and catching bullets like a "fast bee's". "Hard but not impossible". He showed me 3 cached bullets and tree not so big bruises on his hand. He has some thick working gloves on his hands when he did that. Maybe it was the old gun, maybe bad ammo. I think that bullet started to spin shortly after leaving the barrel, and loose much of it's initial energy. (Man sorry for the bad English i wasn't using it for few years.)--Ripp 22:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, if it's all from your own experience.. You catched bullets with your hands? Or was shooting human flesh that is advancing on you? Shot the walls?
can the new Russian 9mm 7N31 +P+ armor-piercing round be fired our of any 9mm hand gun or only The PP-2000?
also how effective are Teflon coated bullet on Ballistic vest? Rex095
As far as I know the new Russian round can only be fired from pistols built for it. As for the Teflon coated "cop killer" bullets.... that is a complete myth created by a script writer to scare people.-Ranger01 05:28, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- I apologize for my bad English. The reason for replacing pistols TT-33 on the PM is very simple. Based on the experience of the World War II, Soviet commanders believed that in the next war will do the job guns, tanks, aircraft and atomic weapons. Pistol then seemed almost unnecessary weapon whose main task - to be a symbol of officer authority . So they decided that the gun should be simple, cheap and small enough not to burden its owner. It was agreed that an advanced copy of the Walther PP pistol would be sufficient for most officers. In addition, in those days there were no bullet-proof vests, and therefore the ability to punch them had not valued. Moreover, it was assumed that for the purposes of the police is better to have not too powerful cartridge, so as not to injure bystanders. And for those who really might need a gun like assault weapons (for example, for a soldier, whose main weapon is a bazooka), was created by APS (Stechkin). Flexo 07:37, 20 November 2011 (CST)
- BTW, the statements in the English part of the Wikipedia that: "The Soviet military required that their ammunition should be incompatible with NATO firearms, so that in the event of armed conflict a foreign power would be unable to use captured Soviet ammunition supples"- is typical Western legend of the Cold War times. The only reason why the PM was used cartridge 9 x 18 is that this round was the most powerful of those allowed to be used in the construction of a pistol “blowback” (or as it called correctly in English?). All other statements on this subject is the result of imagination of American specialists. And so common that even the Russian had already started to believe in them:) Flexo 07:37, 20 November 2011 (CST)
Ripoff of the Colt Hammerless?
The Tokarev has always looked to me like a cheap copy of the Colt Model 1908 Hammerless. Has Colt ever tried to sue them (I know it's long past time now for it) in the past? Harleyguy 07:35 16 February 2010
- It looks more like a Colt 1903. And there IS a hammer. And I don't think Communists ever really cared about our bourgeois copyrights to begin with. --Funkychinaman 21:23, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Actually the TT pistol only looks alike 1903 Colt - there are some major differences. Striking mechanism are Tokarev patent and the locking is from C.1911. Another thing is that in the time it was constructed CCCP actually cared about international patents. (PS can someone tell me if im doing editing right? )--Ripp 15:54, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- I apologize in advance for my awful English.
- Actually all was so: In the beginning of XX-th century in imperial Russia (in the city of Tula) under FN license pistol Browning 1903 (aka FN Model 1903) was made. It was the pistol with a “blowback” (I hope this is correctly name in English) which used a cartridge 9 x 20 mm Browning Long.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browning_1903
- Made in Russia Browning 1903 arrived in imperial police. After revolution of 1917 manufacture Browning 1903 has been stopped, but the equipment and the documentation remained. At creation of a new TT-pistol have decided to use a cartridge 7.63x25mm Mauser because this weapon has well recommended itself in days of Civil War 1918-1922, but it is even more important because trunks for new pistols, it was possible to make on the same equipment, as trunks for rifles Mosin-Nagant and machine guns Maxim. For manufacture of slides and frames have decided to use the equipment which remains after manufacture of pistols Browning 1903 and for this reason the TT-33 doesn't differ almost outwardly from Browning 1903. But as cartridge Mauser was much more powerful than a cartridge 9 x 20 mm Browning Long it was necessary to use the mechanism from Colt 1911. And this pistol has turned out – almost all decisions have been caused by available technological possibilities. At least this version presented in all the Russian books, which tell about the TT-33.Flexo 07:37, 20 November 2011 (CST)
- As far as I know, Browning 1903 was never produced in Russia. These pistols were purchased from Belgium. Only ammunition was Russian-produced. The only not-Belgian manufacturer was Swedish Husqvarna. Greg-Z 09:24, 20 November 2011 (CST)
- Greg, I know you know the Russian special literature. About this manufacture wrote A.B.Zhuk - he has a big authority. Flexo 13:40, 20 November 2011 (CST)
- It's very interesting, thank you! In 1992 edition of Zhuk there is nothing about production of Browning 03 in Tula and I have not later edition so I didn't know (to my sorry).
- BTW, there is an interesting article about Browning and TT in "Orujie" (Оружие) magazine 08/2011. Greg-Z 14:09, 20 November 2011 (CST)
- Greg, my apologies. I checked and guess that I was wrong. I made a mistake, this information is not from the Zhuk’s book. I will look for the source. But, of course, the new source will not be as authoritative as Zhuk :( But I belive that the recently read about it... At the moment, you're right. And sorry for my English... Flexo 05:30, 22 November 2011 (CST)
- Greg, I know you know the Russian special literature. About this manufacture wrote A.B.Zhuk - he has a big authority. Flexo 13:40, 20 November 2011 (CST)
- As far as I know, Browning 1903 was never produced in Russia. These pistols were purchased from Belgium. Only ammunition was Russian-produced. The only not-Belgian manufacturer was Swedish Husqvarna. Greg-Z 09:24, 20 November 2011 (CST)
Zastava M57
The entry on this page for the Zastava M57 claims that the weapon lacks a frame mounted safety (Directly referring to the safety on the Chinese guns, I remember correctly. I have seen Zastava M57s before that do have a frame mounted safety, however, the safety is a lot more reminiscent of the M1911 style thumb safety, rather then the one seen on the Chinese versions of this gun. Can anyone else confirm or deny this? ---ChrisJ- CONTRIBUTIONS 06:12, 24 September 2012 (EDT)
30 vs. 33
So, I've heard these guns referred to alternately as the TT-30 and as the TT-33, and I, quite frankly, am confused. Are the TT-30 and the TT-33 separate guns? (And if so, how can one tell them apart?) Is this a DP-27/DP-28 situation (i.e. year of design/introduction vs. year of adoption)? The general gist of what I've found online is that the differences are mostly internal, with the only outside distinguishing factor being the presence/absence (respectively) of a removable panel in the backstrap, but I could always go for a second opinion from a knowledgeable individual. Debatably sincerely, Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 21:20, 20 August 2018 (EDT)
- TT-30 is the first version, produced in 1931-1934 about 90,000 piecies. After design changes, made to simplify manufacturing, the pistol became TT-33 (issued in 1934), the main producion version. BTW, the sample image, called TT-30, is just a standard TT-33 of pre-1947 version. Greg-Z (talk) 00:23, 21 August 2018 (EDT)
- ↑There it has a removable rear grip cover, so it is a TT-30. --Slon95 (talk) 12:39, 10 August 2021 (EDT)
Page Title
In keeping with my usual mannerisms, I'm suggesting that we move this page to "Tokarev TT-33", as the "pistol" suffix isn't really necessary. It's more egregious here than in other places, as "Pistol" is capitalized, implying that it's actually part of the name, which it isn't; even then, there's no other type of weapon called the "Tokarev TT-33", so it's redundant regardless. Any objections? Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 02:45, 8 February 2023 (UTC)