7.62x25 Tokerov, How does this old hi velocity round compare to newer fast offerings?
This is a discussion on 7.62x25 Tokerov, How does this old hi velocity round compare to newer fast offerings? within the Handguns forums, part of the Gun Forum category; 7.62x25 Tokerov, How does this old hi velocity round compare to newer fast offerings?
Compared to .357 SIG, .38 Super, 5,7 mm ect? Balistic Tables ...
The 7.62 Tok round is a very misunderstood phenomena. It is an old cartridge, and harkens back to an era of 30 cal rounds like the .30 Luger and 30 Mauser. The velocity is high, for it's day, but the energy levels are not up to par with modern rounds. My observations:
1) The light projectile weight gives up it's energy too fast.
2) Normally, the bullet selection is poor. The FMJ rounds had a fearsome reputation as body armor beaters in the way back days, but did little more than poke holes.Most level IIa+ will easily stop the tok now.
3) As compared to modern loadings with modern Bullet design, there is no comparison. Using the 357 SIG as an example, the only comparison is they have similar velocities.
4) While robust and reliable, the pistols chambered for the round tend to be of typical poor ComBloc quality and are not real popular with American shooters.(personally, I kind of like the Russian, no safety real TT33 Toks) There are some design traits in the TT33 that make it an incredibly survivable and service oriented pistol. It's thin profile is well suited for concealed carry, albeit is a little long.
The above drawbacks not withstanding, I think the round is an EXCELLENT submachinegun round. I'd love to see an UZI type weapon in the chambering. I'll bet the recoil would be slick and managable.
There have been many different loadings of the old 7.62x25 round. The Czech CZ-52 used a round designed to penetrate cars of the 1950's era. Hong Kong Police used to mandate that body armor be tested to be resistant to the 7.62x25 round. It's still a favorite in Asia.
The .357 Sig normally runs a 124 gr. bullet at around 1350 fps, with 500 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle. Looking at the various manufacturers tables, several don't list barrel length. Some others use 4" or 5" barrels.
The 7.62x25 currently runs around 85 grains bullet weight, at anywhere from 1590-1722 fps, depending on barrel length. Energy also approaches 500 ft/lb.
The 5.7x28 runs anywhere from 28gr. to 40 gr., with velocities from a 16" PS-90 going from 1800-2350 fps, not including the sub-sonic round. Energy, again excluding the sub-sonic round, runs from 290-390 ft/lb, in the 16" barrel.
Of the three, the .357 Sig seems the most useful to civilians. There are no modern iterations of the 7.62x25 pistol, leaving you with older variations of the single-action gun. Many are of less than stellar manufacture.
The 5.7x28 was designed primarily for LEO and military use, to defeat body armor in a compact weapon. Ammunition capacity will be greater in a pistol than the others, and much greater in the PS-90 variant than anything else currently available. However, the loads designed to compliment the pistol/PDW in it's purpose are restricted.
The .357 Sig was designed for LEO and civilian self-defense. It will also be the most versatile in that job.
I would have to look at the cost of these options, also, as a point of measure. Seems like the TT33's of the Romanian variety have been plentiful and not very expensive, plus I saw a lot of surlus ammo out there for very reasonable prices. I don't know too much about the sig round - I do really like the 5.7 round and that little pistol the Belgians make for it, but you better be ready to pay. Bang for the buck sides with the little Tok - I'm partial to that art-deco style too.
The problem with the older 7.62x25 ammo is in mis-fires with ammo designed with a harder primer for those sub-guns, and the fact that 100% of the surplus ammo is corrosive. Is can really alter the function of the roller-locked CZ52 if allowed to remain in the pistol.
For plinking, the 7.62x25 is going to give you the most bang for the buck, with the most stringent cleaning regimen, too.