7.62x25 load

[stool]

clark is a very unique character.
you have to read what he is saying to understand the real picture

he down grades the cz52 because it can loose primer pockets at:
SIXTYFIVE THOUSAND PSI

the cartridge is only rated for aprox 35000 psi which produces aprox 1550 with an 85 gr bullet.
that is max ..but if you run 40 or 45k psi,,,then things get better.
the testing showed that even tho the russian tok round was 35kpsi, other ammo was much hotter...the cz ammo for instance.

so do what you feel is safe, be comfortable,, but in the case of the cz52 the testing has been done by a major powder company and their data published for the cz52 handgun.

 

[A Marsh]

That is not what Clark said at all. If you take the time to read you will see that his problem with the CZ52 is that the barrel will fail BEFORE the brass will because of the thinned chamber area to make room for the block that holds the locking rollers. IE, the opposite of the case with the TT33 and darn near any other gun you could name.

As far as AA goes, if the data was correct they would have had no reason to change it. But they did, and by a significant amount.

I'm not advocating for Clark or denigrating what he has done. Linking to past threads is simply a convenient way to convey information.

clark is a very unique character.
you have to read what he is saying to understand the real picture

he down grades the cz52 because it can loose primer pockets at:
SIXTYFIVE THOUSAND PSI

the cartridge is only rated for aprox 35000 psi which produces aprox 1550 with an 85 gr bullet.
that is max ..but if you run 40 or 45k psi,,,then things get better.
the testing showed that even tho the russian tok round was 35kpsi, other ammo was much hotter...the cz ammo for instance.

so do what you feel is safe, be comfortable,, but in the case of the cz52 the testing has been done by a major powder company and their data published for the cz52 handgun.

 

[stool]

ok one last time then i am done.....
aa data was for the cz52 and listed for it.
at the time there were few other guns on the market..it was easy to list a gun specific load and be safe.
accurate no longer exsits, they are now part of another company. the new company looks at the market see lots of different 7.62x25 pistols and produces a load that is safe in all of them and publishes that data....


the original cz52 data is still safe in acz52

the issue clark had with cz52 pistols occurred at pressures way higher than normal operating pressures, either primer pockets or bbl splitting, it was way above normal pressures for the gun and the reloader.

 

[normmatzen]

I, too, have a CZ52 and love it!

Try Googling Tokerov or CZ52 reloasd and you should find some info as well as how to make cases from .223 cases.

 

[CJ6]

I, too, have a CZ52 and love it!

Try Googling Tokerov or CZ52 reloasd and you should find some info as well as how to make cases from .223 cases.

Why make cases when Starline has NEW brass. PS. If you can find it the Cech. mil surp ammo (in 70 rnd. boxes)is the hottest loading I've found. and one other note wasn't the 7.62x25 used in the PPSHa in WWII then later adapted to the CZ 52. edit to ad 7.62x25 introduced in 1930. also in Lees 2nd Edit. loading manual here are some more loads. 110gr jacketed bullet Accur. #9 (start) 10.5grs. (max) 11.7grs (1688fps) 41800 CUP, Accur #7 (start) 8.5grs (max) 9.5grs 42000 CUP. Accur. #5 (start) 7.2grs (max) 8.0 grs 41700 CUP. min OAL for all loads I gave is 1.300

 

[stool]

just a note for those that do not know
lee does not do loading or load development...
they reprint with permission....
thus you find aa 7.62 data still out there..in its original form....

so the real question does it say cz52 only ??
(my lee book is packed away so i cannot check)

 

[dedogs]

So much for "one last time"

 

[CJ6]

so the real question does it say cz52 only ??
(my lee book is packed away so i cannot check)

No. it says 7.62x25 Tokarev. No listed firearm/firearms were specified.

 

[stool]

now there is an ouch waiting to happen.....

the only reason i replied, was for the safety of all...
no arguing , just for your safety.
the loads were developed for the cz52....
clark says the tt-33 is actually stronger than the cz52..

do what makes you feel safe.....someone should mention it to lee.

so the real question does it say cz52 only ??
(my lee book is packed away so i cannot check)

No. it says 7.62x25 Tokarev. No listed firearm/firearms were specified.

 

[CJ6]

do what makes you feel safe.....someone should mention it to lee. Not saying Lee is right or wrong BUT a number of manuals DO NOT list a specific firearm, mostly bbl length and twist.

so the real question does it say cz52 only ??
(my lee book is packed away so i cannot check)

No. it says 7.62x25 Tokarev. No listed firearm/firearms were specified.

 

[stool]

duh...
MOST MANUALS do not specify a gun, it is when they do that it is important to note.
lee copied the data from aa ( with their permission)but ignored the warning that the load was for the cz52 pistol.

again were you around when this was being worked on , developed and published ??...i was.

again , some of you guys are dangerous....

do what makes you feel safe.....someone should mention it to lee. Not saying Lee is right or wrong BUT a number of manuals DO NOT list a specific firearm, mostly bbl length and twist.

so the real question does it say cz52 only ??
(my lee book is packed away so i cannot check)

No. it says 7.62x25 Tokarev. No listed firearm/firearms were specified.

 

[CJ6]

Stool ,If you've known this since the beginning of development then WHY in the name of SAFETY did you not contact Lee then and tell them about the mistake. We are talking SAFETY here right. just asking.

 

[stool]

you have a very distinct ability to take things out of context and to redirect.
if you read closely , you will see I DO NOT HAVE ACCESS to a copy of the lee manual.
and
that my cz52 loading was done from ACCURATE'S original published data.

i never looked up 7.62x25 data in LEES BOOK, because i worked WITH THE SOURCE..ACCURATE.

TO GET BACK ON TRACK..
what i said was LEE PUBLISHES other's data in LEE'S book....with their permission.
someone pointed out that:
lee still has the old cz52 data,
but
DOES NOT HAVE THE CAVEAT that it is specific to the cz52....

soooooo
based on the CURRENT LOAD DATA from accurate, it would APPEAR that lee's book may be unsafe......in the case of accurate data and the 7.62x25 load data...

that information was shown HERE, YESTERDAY.


where does it say i knew that "from the begining?"....

(nowhere)

Stool ,If you've known this since the beginning of development then WHY in the name of SAFETY did you not contact Lee then and tell them about the mistake. We are talking SAFETY here right. just asking.

 

[CJ6]

well if you had asked that to begin with this would have been a different discussion. instead you started out by questioning published load data by a major powder maker/distributor. the problem is, i was around when they were doing the load development for the cz52, i had lots of discussions with them when i did my work with lite bullets. i know the data was safe in cz52's.

i do not know what guide you have that only shows max, but my guide from 2002 shows 10.5 to 11.7 for the 110spr rn with an oal of 1.300 FOR THE CZ52 ONLY
and that means in your cz52 you would still be safe as the data is for the 52..not generic 7.62x25.

? Stool , I'm not argueing (I'm discussing)with you, But if this load or loads are incorrect for a specific firearm and you have (or know someone that does) have info otherwise shouldn't this be sent to Lee for their use. Another question is it JUST the 110gr loads w/Accur #9 or all the data (only Accurate powder data is listed in Lees manual for the 7.62x25) 2009 printing

 

[stool]

YES IT SHOULD..but as this came up on SATURDAY.....no one has had the opportunity to talk to lee...they are closed!


go read what i said.....as in i already said we need to tell lee.....

read the whole thread, then ask questions or make suggestions.......

 

[CJ6]

Please keep us updated on what Lees has to say if you would.

 

[stool]

so i punched up lee on my cell phone...yep they are in my phone..they use to do contract work for me.

the bad news is the guy was out , so we will have to wait till tomorrow or so to hear from them.

 

[stool]

ANSWER NUMBER ONE:
FROM THE ACCURATE/RAMSHOT "ASK A QUESTION" PROCESS.
without going into data..they have NO PISTOL PRESSURE/LOAD DATA.
they have some data for 16" ar in 7.62x25, and access to others load data.
they do run pressure up to 50,000 plus PSI.

i cannot believe that in purchasing accurate they did not get or trashed lab data. just amazing.

 

[stool]

ANSWER NUMBER TWO( A CALL TO LEE PRECISION)
they removed the accurate 7.62x25 data from the current book at printing 2 or 3.
so some early books still have the data.
the only reason they removed it was the same as western powder: no more lab data to support it.
they did not believe it was UNSAFE, but with no lab data chose to pull the info.

 

[stool]

none of this changes the original lab data as published by accurate.
it was safe in the cz52, and as the russian tt is actually stronger, it is safe in it.
and until someone does lab testing with the current guns on the market, we will not know if it is safe in those guns.....
so those guys will have to shoot wimpy lawyer loads,
and those of us with cz52's can continue to shoot safe published, lab data supported loads.