Military Review

Veteran relatives

167
Verwandte veteranen
Posted by: Laszlo Tolvaj

Article published in the Swiss Weapons Magazine (Schweizer Waffen-Magazin) 2-2009


John Moses Browning created the foundation, and Fyodor Vasilyevich Tokarev twenty years later applied its basic elements in his own design. Similarities and differences between two dissimilar brothers.



The photo above immediately invites you to check both models for similarities and differences. Estet looks at their beauty (if this concept is generally applicable to arms). Person interested in history, wonders which of the pistols is older and which one served as an example for the newer. From our “Western” point of view, the Colt is “more beautiful” and looks more modern than Tokarev. This subjective feeling has some grounds. First, the Colt in the photo looks almost the same as its modern, “spick and span” descendant. TT, on the other hand, has not been produced for many decades, and until the fall of the iron curtain was practically unknown here. Its design can hardly be called elegant - a sort of “Trabant” (a car produced in the GDR), which was not bought for beauty.

If you forget about the subjective sensations, the picture looks a little different.
The Colt story begins in 1905, when Browning adapted his “Automatic Colt Pictol” in .38ACP to the more powerful .45ACP. After rigorous tests and numerous alterations, the Model 1911 was officially put into service and went into mass production. This story has long been known and does not need to be repeated.

In the USSR, it was only at the end of the 20-s that the turn came to replace the revolver with a modern self-loading pistol. Fedor Vasilyevich Tokarev, a talented gunsmith, who was 16 years younger than Browning, developed a pistol for "his" cartridge 7,62x25 by order of the military leadership. He developed a cartridge shortly before this, in order to provide his first submachine gun (originally created for the Nagan revolver's cartridge 7,62x38) with higher firepower and reliability.

The main difference between these two pistols lies not in the plane of the structure, but in the ammunition. Americans, based on the unsuccessful experience of fighting in the Philippines, where the .38 Long Colt cartridges showed their low effectiveness in battles with the rebels, preferred the more powerful .45 caliber. The Soviets looked more in terms of supplies - they wanted to have a pistol using the same cartridge as the submachine gun.


The five-pointed star and the inscription of the USSR, as well as the marking of the Colt, indicate the nationality.


7,62х25 Tokarev




Cartridges: on the left is a 7,62x25 cartridge with a 88 gran bullet, a right .45 ACP with a 230 gran bullet.


To be completely honest, this cartridge is not entirely a creation of Tokarev, but is based on the 7,63 Mauser, created a quarter of a century before for the С96 pistol, and, in turn, based on 7,65 Borchard 1883 of the year. Nothing is new under the Sun, and there is no need to reinvent the wheel every time to move forward.

The Tokarev cartridge is almost identical in size to the Mauser cartridge, but somewhat inferior to it (according to the reference literature) in gas pressure. The difference in 200 Bar (2600 Bar at Mauser versus 2400 Bar at Tokarev) today hardly anyone would notice, but nevertheless it is not recommended to charge Mauser cartridges in “weak” TTs. Nevertheless, a slightly different diameter of the bullet and another type of powder provides the Tokarev cartridge a high initial velocity and muzzle energy, but more on that later.


TT shops are more reliable.


Simplified design




The guns of both pistols have the function of a safety half joint, the TT does not have other safety devices. The colt has automatic and non-automatic fuses.


The main similarity of the Colt and the TT is in the method of locking the barrel through the "earrings" and grooves in the breech breech. To ensure the fixation of the barrel muzzle in the locked position and at the same time its free deflection when the bolt departs, Browning used a guide bushing. Also entered and Tokarev, but made it much more massive. This adversely affected the accuracy of shooting, but increased reliability.



On the left - the "small-caliber" TT, on the right - the impressive Colt muzzle. Both pistols have guide sleeves.


But the fuses Tokarev stingy. Rather, they have no TT at all, except for such a protrusion on the trigger for a safety semi-armature, while the Colt has a non-automatic safety device in the rear part of the frame and an automatic safety device on the rear part of the handle. Therefore, wearing a cocked TT is categorically not recommended, as well as with a cartridge in the chamber and a flattened trigger, because if the trigger is not on the safety half arbor, then it is in contact with the drummer.



The TT is more compact and weighs less on 300 grams, besides its store capacity is more than one cartridge.


The trigger mechanism of the TT is removed in assembled form (as in the XIG 210) - very convenient for cleaning and repair.

The combat qualities of pistols and submachine guns of the same caliber (PCA and Thomson 1928) will be considered in the next issue.


The length of the pistols is almost the same.



The width of the pistols corresponds to their calibers.



Above - blued barrel, guide bush and Colt spring bush. Below - they are TT.



Valves and return springs - left - TT, right - Colt



The protrusions of the TT frame (on the left) additionally support the shop's miniature sponges.


To be continued


PS Translator's Note (Slug_BDMP)
With the Colts of the .45ACP caliber I practically had no business - I shot 1-2 times. It was remembered that the return is stronger than from 9x19, but not by much. But I have a small-sized copy of the Colt-GSG-1911. Appearance and controls correspond to the original. What can I say. In the hand sits well, the fuse is quite comfortable. In general, there are no complaints.

There is a TT in our club, though not the original, but a Chinese copy of the 9x19 caliber. Shoots - very accurate. The handle looks disproportionately small, but in the hand, however, the gun sits well. Chinese fuse is very uncomfortable. Like the fact that USM during disassembly is removed entirely. The disadvantage is the impossibility of using blunt-bullet cartridges, for example, expansive bullets. The barrel has no guide chute, and the bullet rests against the edge of the chamber. It is said that the Colts have the same problem.
Well, that's all personal impressions.
Author:
Originator:
Swiss Weapons Magazine 2-2009
167 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. I am Groot
    I am Groot 21 February 2016 07: 16
    -13 qualifying.
    you need to give a gun to the hero of the previous article, let him shoot himself then he will have no problems with anyone, not neighbors, not America, not even the president himself. http://topwar.ru/91218-prichiny-kraha-doktriny-ahmeta-davutoglu-nol-problem-s-so

    sedyami-dzhamilya-kochoyan.html
    1. Now we are free
      Now we are free 24 February 2016 09: 40
      +1
      Thank you very much for the article! From childhood, I wondered so what is better, domestic Tokarev, Colt, or Walter / Parabellum (The latter two would also be very suitable for comparison). In my opinion, for daily wearing (ceremonial / civilian) Colt is definitely better for:
      1) Has fuses
      2) More ergonomic of which there are only one "Cheeks" on the handle
      3) More aesthetically made.
      3/1) In addition, for the stopping action, the cartridge is 45 cal. -11 * 43 is more suitable than 7,62 * 25 (from TT).

      On the other hand, the TT is a weapon of war, not a battle, not a military operation, namely WAR. 1) Reliability
      2) The persistence of a bullet’s flight due to the Mauser’s well-proven earlier 7,63 * 25 ammunition (yes for the TT 7,62 * 25), but the difference is not so significant because TT cartridges can be used in Mauser and cartridges can be used in the TT (with a creak) Mauser.
      3) Legendary bullet penetration
      4) TT weighs 300 grams less than Colt and for a pistol it is a VERY big difference because unlike a rifle / machine gun it is always with you
      5) Store 1 cartridge more (do not explain what the last cartridge in battle costs ...)

      I repeat, it is a pity that the article does not contain the "Peers" of Colt and TT - Walter and Parabellum without them, the comparison of the "Old Guard" seems incomplete.
      1. 4thParasinok
        4thParasinok April 1 2016 13: 21
        0
        1. Walter R-38- twists the brush when firing, you have to spend time returning the gun to the sighting line. in the hand lies conveniently aimed at the target intuitively.
        2. TT- there is no normal fuse and as a result, a long time for the first shot. The handle is not comfortable, you have to twist the brush when aiming. Disgusting front sight and rear sight - as a result, you need to spend extra time on aiming. On many pistols, a magazine sticks after shooting a second one (incorrect gaps). Very tight and small store eject button .....
        3. Colt 1911 was also produced in a more successful (from my point of view) civilian caliber 9x23mm corresponding to modern 9x19 ++ and having greater accuracy and sighting range than 11,43x23mm (and even than 9x19). With "fine-tuning" or just high-quality manufacturing, it surpasses the TT in reliability and is also not inferior in accuracy to Walter P-38 at a distance of 10 m (well, in caliber .38АСР it is even better)
        TT is just a bad Colt clone with the only improvement being a detachable trigger. And the best gun of the 2nd World War is Browning High Power.
  2. svp67
    svp67 21 February 2016 07: 28
    24
    The “Soviets”, on the other hand, looked more from the point of view of supply — they wanted to have a pistol using the same cartridge as a submachine gun.
    "Soviets" were even more pragmatic, since the manufacture of pistol barrels used what was rejected in the manufacture of rifles and PP ...
    1. CTABEP
      CTABEP 21 February 2016 10: 36
      +7
      Well, the caliber of the PP and the American pistol was also the same, so that the marriage from the Thompsons to the trunks for the Colts could be allowed
    2. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 10: 53
      13
      Quote: svp67
      "Soviets" were even more pragmatic, since the manufacture of pistol barrels used what was rejected in the manufacture of rifles and PP ...

      No, well, there are no limits to the fantasies of "Tyrnet specialists" and will never be. Look at the photo of the TT barrel, it is in the article. And then tell me, how can a barrel be cut out of a defective rifle barrel tube, albeit shorter, but of a different, larger external configuration?
      1. Alex
        Alex 21 February 2016 11: 16
        +4
        Quote: svp67
        "Soviets" were even more pragmatic, since the manufacture of pistol barrels used what was rejected in the manufacture of rifles and PP ...

        Quote: carbine
        No, well, there are no limits to the fantasies of "Tyrnet specialists" and will never be. Look at the photo of the TT barrel, it is in the article. And then tell me, how can a barrel be cut out of a defective rifle barrel tube, albeit shorter, but of a different, larger external configuration?

        I heard that the defective barrels went not to TT, but to "revolvers". There seems to be no special design delights, so it is quite possible. And for TT, I agree, - it is necessary to initially produce, the savings are hardly possible and justified.
        1. carbine
          carbine 21 February 2016 11: 33
          +4
          Quote: Alex
          I heard that the defective barrels went not to TT, but to "revolvers".

          I do not know. There is a fly.
          I think it was not a matter of using defective trunks, but of using the same tool to cut them - the number and course of the rifling coincided.
          1. Severok
            Severok 21 February 2016 12: 26
            -1
            The fly was welded.
            1. martin-159
              martin-159 21 February 2016 21: 38
              +1
              Have you seen a gun with a welded fly?
      2. Severok
        Severok 21 February 2016 12: 25
        +4
        It’s a historical fact, by the way: the barrels of the Nagan system revolvers were made from rejected barrels of the Mosin system rifle since 1939.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. carbine
          carbine 21 February 2016 12: 47
          0
          Quote: Severok
          the barrels of revolvers of the Nagan system were made from rejected barrels of the Mosin rifle system in the period since 1939.

          I won’t argue, maybe so. I especially do not exclude this during the Second World War. In order to say something specifically, you need to know the thickness of the rifle barrel and the thickness of the gun barrel in the front sight. There are tides for the base of the fly (not the fly itself). I was not interested in this.
        3. sibiryouk
          sibiryouk 22 February 2016 20: 03
          +1
          This is not a fantasy, I read about the use of defective rifle trunks in the early 80s in the book of the gunsmith Fedorov, before the invention of the Internet!
      3. Grandfather Luka
        Grandfather Luka 21 February 2016 18: 36
        -1
        In the days of mass production of TTs, they could very easily put them on the wall for marriage. Which excludes the production of a huge amount of TT from defective components.
        1. tolancop
          tolancop 21 February 2016 21: 45
          +1
          I fully admit that a certain percentage of defects in mass production of trunks was acceptable. The reasons for this could be mass: material heterogeneity, curvature, etc.
        2. sibiryouk
          sibiryouk 22 February 2016 20: 07
          +1
          At the beginning of the Second World War in 1941, there was a lot of marriage in the PPSh, an article in the magazine. Kalashnikov in 2014 or 2015
        3. 4thParasinok
          4thParasinok April 1 2016 13: 40
          0
          Quote: Grandfather Luka
          In the days of mass production of TTs, they could very easily put them on the wall for marriage. Which excludes the production of a huge amount of TT from defective components.

          Well, actually the marriage in the manufacture of trunks less than 10 mm and longer than 20 calibers (except forging) is very high (like even more than 5%) for technical reasons. And on trunks shorter than 20 calibers, it abruptly drops to values ​​less than 1%. Curvature of the bore is also related to marriage. This piece was cut out, and the rest went to revolvers and machine guns. For those who are not in the topic, the blank for the barrel had at least 40 mm in diameter.
      4. sibiryouk
        sibiryouk 22 February 2016 20: 02
        +1
        This is not a fantasy, I read about the use of defective rifle trunks in the early 80s in the book of the gunsmith Fedorov, before the invention of the Internet!
    3. Tarikxnumx
      Tarikxnumx 21 February 2016 23: 17
      +6
      The pragmatism of "Soviets" consisted mainly in the fact that for drilling and cutting the barrel of a rifle or a pistol, one set of equipment could be used without its serious readjustment. The same applies to cartridges for weapons. The unification of calibers, first of all, led to a decrease in the number of machine tools and a reduction in the time for changeover of equipment for the release of other products. Which in the pre-war and war years helped the Soviet industry very much ...
      1. carbine
        carbine 22 February 2016 00: 00
        -3
        Quote: TarIK2017
        The unification of calibers, in the first place, led to a decrease in the number of machine stock and a reduction in the time for the readjustment of equipment for the production of other products. What in the prewar and war years greatly helped the Soviet industry ...

        There was one major nuisance. Such unification negatively affected the national economy. Because for every business there is a tool. And digging potatoes with a shovel is ridiculous, at least. Likewise in the shooter. The unification of calibers here is stupid.
        1. Tarikxnumx
          Tarikxnumx 24 February 2016 14: 43
          +1
          I did not quite understand what was hidden under the word "people-saving". If we mean an increase in personnel losses during hostilities, then your statement is extremely controversial, since it is the single-caliberness and the absence of the need for equipment readjustment, as well as significant metal savings (For much less metal will go to the barrel of 7,62 than to the same 9mm, and even more so 11,5mm), allowed in the future to massively saturate the infantry units with automatic weapons such as the same PPSh. That just the same increased "people saving". How many resources, and most importantly time, in military conditions would it take to adopt a new rifle complex and a new cartridge for it?
          7,62x25 cartridge, as for military operations, is very, very good. High flatness, good penetrating effect, high energy bullet.
          Let me remind you that the 9x18 cartridge was developed as a "peacetime" cartridge and subsequently a lot of people who participated in hostilities complained about its insufficient effectiveness ...
          1. carbine
            carbine 25 February 2016 01: 44
            0
            Quote: TarIK2017
            allowed in the future to massively saturate infantry units with automatic weapons such as the same PPSh. That just the same increased "people saving".

            You see, submachine guns in general and Soviet PPs in particular can be called an "army weapon" with a stretch. Therefore, the saturation of the army with such "weapons" is just a negative factor for people-saving.
            Quote: TarIK2017
            7,62x25 cartridge, as for military operations, is very, very good. High flatness, good penetrating effect, high energy bullet.

            What shit. It is good to hunt gophers with such a "weapon". In a normal army, this would never have happened.
            Quote: TarIK2017
            Let me remind you that the 9x18 cartridge was developed as a "peacetime" cartridge and subsequently a lot of people who participated in hostilities complained about its insufficient effectiveness ...

            What is it like? What is such a mythical peacetime cartridge for the army? And he is not "peaceful" at all. Just a regular cartridge for a service (police) pistol. In the army, this has nothing to do at any time.
            1. Tarikxnumx
              Tarikxnumx 25 February 2016 23: 30
              +1
              You see, submachine guns in general and Soviet PPs in particular can be called an "army weapon" with a stretch. Therefore, the saturation of the army with such "weapons" is just a negative factor for people-saving.

              That is why so far most armies have not abandoned the use of PP? That is why PDW concept weapons are being developed? Note that the caliber of the cartridge of the brightest representative of this direction is FN P-90 5,7x28. Not 9mm, not 11,5, namely 5,7. Because the bullet does not have a high leaving effect but has a high penetration and good ballistic performance. That is, these characteristics are considered more important in wartime ...
              As for the military personnel as an army weapon during the Second World War, including the Soviet military forces, you must agree that if they were engaged in combat in urban conditions, they were preferred to the same rifles and carbines. Well then there were no full-fledged assault rifles unfortunately. And their rate of fire made it possible to create high fire density at short distances. Nothing else could be achieved at that time ...
              What is it like? What is such a mythical peacetime cartridge for the army? And he is not "peaceful" at all. Just a regular cartridge for a service (police) pistol. In the army, this has nothing to do at any time.
              It is a police cartridge with reduced penetration and increased stopping power. And yes, indeed, such a cartridge has nothing to do in the army, which subsequent operation has shown. But again, producing pistols separately for the army and separately for the Ministry of Internal Affairs in the Union was considered unprofitable, which led to the appearance of the Makarycha and subsequently the PP under the 9x18 cartridge in the army.
              What shit. It is good to hunt gophers with such a "weapon". In a normal army, this would never have happened.
              Yes???? And the caliber of modern automatic rifles 5,45 and 5,56 then for whom? for mice and cockroaches? )))
  3. Alex_Rarog
    Alex_Rarog 21 February 2016 07: 32
    +6
    An interesting review ...
  4. alex-cn
    alex-cn 21 February 2016 07: 39
    10
    Nothing new in general ... everything has been examined for .... times. But it's nice to read an unbiased review.
    1. Slug_BDMP
      21 February 2016 09: 27
      +9
      I started posting this and several other translations of articles from German weapons magazines on the guns.ru forum under the topic "Russian-Soviet weapons through the eyes of foreigners" for quite some time. (http://forum.guns.ru/forummessage/51/1194137.html)
      There are really no revelations there, but the look from the outside is still interesting.
      Even one can learn something new. For example, in another article, I learned how to distinguish the post-war TT intake from the earlier post-war post with smaller ribs on the housing-bolt. (Here on the demotivator in the comments below - post-war :-))
    2. avt
      avt 21 February 2016 10: 25
      +2
      Quote: alex-cn
      Nothing new in general ... everything has been examined for .... times. But it's nice to read an unbiased review.

      Now, if it were not going to extremes, well, compare with 9mm, which John Moiseevich actually created, and which many consider to be the best of the times of World War II (I didn’t come up with this laughing ), let not under his patron, but Para. It would be very good.
      1. Slug_BDMP
        21 February 2016 11: 09
        +5
        In one of the German magazines there was a comparative test of WWII pistols: Colt, Walter P-38, TT, Parabellum, Browning HP-35. They put Browning first. In the dock-series "Weapons of the Second World War" (went to the Star), the same pistols were tested with the same result - according to the availability of the characteristics of the Browning HP - the first.
        1. carbine
          carbine 21 February 2016 11: 40
          -5
          Quote: Slug_BDMP
          Comparative test of World War II pistols: Colt, Walter R-38, TT, Parabellum, Browning HP-35. They put Browning first.

          And what, there may be other options?
          Patron Wartime Steam was rather weak. From this, the weapon on it drops out of the fight. Especially the ancient Luger. And TT with his cartridge there was apparently just out of politeness.
          Quote: Slug_BDMP
          In the dock-series "Weapons of the Second World War" (went to the Star), the same pistols were tested with the same result - according to the availability of the characteristics of the Browning HP - the first.

          Do not look Murzilki. Moreover, there most likely the modern Browning High-Power was tested on the modern Para cartridge. And this is a slightly different weapon.
          1. Slug_BDMP
            21 February 2016 11: 48
            +4
            Quote: carbine
            There most likely was tested modern Browning High-Power


            No, the original 30-40-s.

            Quote: carbine
            And this is a slightly different weapon.


            What's the difference? I myself have a Browning 95-year of release. It has a cast frame, several other sights, a magazine for 15 cartridges (but there are also 13-meshes with a spring for ejection).
            1. carbine
              carbine 21 February 2016 12: 05
              -1
              Quote: Slug_BDMP
              No, the original 30-40-s.

              Then the strange conclusions. The barrel of 118 mm on the pre-war cartridge. The pair does not provide the gun with a sufficient DEP. It kills for an army pistol, it doesn’t matter, in other words. If you remove Colt, then for the army I would choose Walter. He is also not very, but as an army pistol it will be more effective than Browning. Perhaps the tests were some kind of elongated Browning. I did not watch the program.
              Quote: Slug_BDMP
              What is the difference?

              In the cartridge. A modern cartridge A pair and a pre-war cartridge are slightly different things. In the same way as Walter under a modern cartridge differs from the pre-war Walter.
              1. Slug_BDMP
                21 February 2016 12: 27
                0
                Quote: carbine
                Then weird conclusions

                According to the characteristics: ergonomics, store capacity (13 versus 7-8 from competitors), etc.
              2. Slug_BDMP
                21 February 2016 12: 34
                +1
                Quote: carbine
                Then weird conclusions


                According to the combination of characteristics: ergonomics, store capacity (13 vs. 7-8 from competitors), etc. They shot on the boards there, so the penetrating ability of all 9 mm. The pistols were the same.
                1. carbine
                  carbine 21 February 2016 13: 17
                  -3
                  Quote: Slug_BDMP
                  By the totality of characteristics: ergonomics, store capacity (13 versus 7-8 from competitors), etc.

                  It is, of course, understandable. But the army pistol has one main task. He must from 50 m with a quality hit bring down the enemy for sure and forever. Out of the whole company, ONLY Colt can easily do this. And even with a margin. Walter copes with 35 m, Browning with 10 m. TT and Luger can not cope with this even at point blank range. Of course, all the figures given relate to pre-war pistols and pre-war cartridges of Para.
                  And so, I easily believe that Browning could be more convenient in the hand. And don't forget, 13 rounds weigh more than 7 or 8.
                  Quote: Slug_BDMP
                  They shot on the boards there, so the penetration ability of all 9 mm. the pistols were the same.

                  Breakdown ability with different n / a bullet of the same cartridge will ALWAYS be different. Perhaps they simply did not notice her. In addition, this indicator is important today, when there are bronics. In the time of 2MB, it had no practical significance.
                  1. Slug_BDMP
                    21 February 2016 14: 08
                    +7
                    One guy from our club (countryman, from Kazakhstan) bought a TT caliber 50 for 7,62 euros. He somehow brought a helmet, either Polish or Czechoslovakian, of the 60s. We decided to check for bullet resistance. They shot from a distance of 25 meters from a Colt .45АСР (shell bullet), I from my Browning (9x19, semi-shell bullet), and from TT. From the Colt, there was a barely noticeable dent. 9 Para - hit in the center, a noticeable dent without breaking. TT-hit in the peripheral part, pulled out a whole piece in the "ear". What bullet was - I don't know
                    1. carbine
                      carbine 21 February 2016 14: 59
                      +1
                      Quote: Slug_BDMP
                      TT-hit in the peripheral part, pulled out a whole piece in the "ear". What bullet was - I don't know

                      So no one argues with the best penetrating ability of a TT bullet.
                    2. 4thParasinok
                      4thParasinok April 1 2016 13: 56
                      0
                      Quote: Slug_BDMP
                      9 Para - hit in the center, a noticeable dent without breaking. TT-hit in the peripheral part, pulled out a whole piece in the "ear". What bullet was - I don't know

                      the shell can break through.
                  2. cherrybuster
                    cherrybuster 21 February 2016 17: 53
                    +6
                    WHAT? Who told you that with a pistol at all, they shoot at 50 meters somewhere except for the shooting range?)))
                    Remember, young man, a gun is up to 10 m (98% of all shootings). The remaining 2% - up to 20 m.
                    1. carbine
                      carbine 21 February 2016 18: 10
                      -4
                      Quote: cherrybuster
                      What? Who told you that with a pistol at all, they shoot at 50 meters somewhere except for the shooting range?)))

                      Many different sources. I can’t list everything.
                      Quote: cherrybuster
                      Remember, young man, a gun is up to 10 m (98% of all shootings). The remaining 2% - up to 20 m.

                      Sorry, you have never been told that sometimes it is better to chew than talk? No, I just asked. Do not think what. And read the special literature.
                      How can you judge this if you most likely never held an army pistol in your hands? And you have no idea what kind of weapon it is. This is, like Zhvanetsky's - "it's stupid to argue about the taste of oysters with those who ate them."
                      1. cherrybuster
                        cherrybuster 21 February 2016 18: 49
                        +3
                        spit on these sources.

                        Judging by your comment, you didn’t hold a combat pistol in your hands. Otherwise, we would know what a short trunk at 50 m is and even along a moving target ;-)
                        Tell us, how much do you heal a zinger on 50 m?)))
                        Well, since: I have an annual shot at 5K. How much do you have?
                      2. carbine
                        carbine 21 February 2016 19: 05
                        0
                        Quote: cherrybuster
                        Judging by your comment, you didn’t hold a combat pistol in your hands.

                        Quote: cherrybuster
                        Well, since: I have an annual shot at 5K. How much do you have?

                        I think this applies primarily to you. What do you indulge in? Pneumatics? Or a little thing?
                      3. cherrybuster
                        cherrybuster 22 February 2016 05: 53
                        +2
                        Not at all. G17. So, tell me already how long you surely hit the target at a distance of 50 m.
                  3. Vlad74 Q
                    Vlad74 Q 23 February 2016 18: 14
                    0
                    On the taste of coconuts .... in the original. wink
                  4. carbine
                    carbine 23 February 2016 20: 02
                    0
                    "... about the taste of oysters with those who ate them." In the original.
                    In addition, coconuts are not food. Unless soups on coconut milk can still be eaten. But the chips are not edible at all. Confectionery only, after processing.
                  5. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  • AK64
    AK64 21 February 2016 11: 29
    +1
    Now, if it were not going to extremes, well, compare with 9mm, which John Moiseevich actually created, and which many consider to be the best of the Second World War (it was not me who invented laughing), even if not under his patron, but Para. It would be very good.

    The difference between 9mm (Browning Long 03) and 0.45 Colt is only that Colt knocks much more reliably: hitting 0.45 in "anywhere" causes pain shock and death
    1. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 11: 43
      -2
      Quote: AK64
      Colt knocks much more reliably: hitting 0.45 in "anywhere" causes pain shock and death

      Yes, the weapon on the .45 ACP cartridge was very effective at the time. But with the development of the bronics they are gradually abandoned. Today, a weapon with a modern Para cartridge is a reasonable compromise.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. aiw
      aiw 24 February 2016 09: 40
      +3
      "The difference between 9mm (Browning Long 03) and 0.45 Colt is only that Colt knocks much more reliably: hitting 0.45 in" anywhere "causes pain shock and death"

      And the traumatic amputation of the finger / genitals / ear also gives such an effect?

      Shock can be fatal only in acute croter, learn first aid. Even traumatic amputation of a limb (which, by the intensity of the pain syndrome, is by no means less than a .45ACP hit) does not lead to death with the timely application of a tourniquet. The myths about the terrible efficiency of the 45th and low efficiency of TT are greatly exaggerated.
    4. 4thParasinok
      4thParasinok April 1 2016 14: 02
      0
      Quote: AK64
      The difference between 9mm (Browning Long 03) and 0.45 Colt is only that Colt knocks much more reliably: hitting 0.45 in "anywhere" causes pain shock and death

      then the Americans began to come up with different "shooting with a troika" for their 11,43 ...
      This fairy tale led to huge losses among the amers themselves, because as it turned out in practice, even after being wounded in the chest, some opponents managed to drop a horn from a machine gun, who thought that he had won in the back of an idiot ...
  • 4thParasinok
    4thParasinok April 1 2016 13: 51
    0
    Quote: avt
    Now, if it were not going to extremes, well, compare with 9mm, which John Moiseevich actually created, and which many consider to be the best of the Second World War (it was not me who invented laughing), even if not under his patron, but Para. It would be very good.

    it’s not necessary under the native 9x23, it’s not in vain that the modern standard NATO 9x19 ++ (high power) was fitted according to the characteristics, but due to the smaller amount of high-impulse gunpowder, they received greater returns and less barrel survivability. In the same Walter P38 with such 9x19 ++ just breaks the barrel lol
  • PKK
    PKK 21 February 2016 14: 53
    0
    It is better to compare TTs not with Colt, but with Browning No. 6, a one-to-one copy. By the way, who carried a pair of Browning in their pockets during the Civil War, basically everyone survived for some reason.
    1. Voice of the Mind
      Voice of the Mind 21 February 2016 23: 09
      +2
      Quote: PKK
      TT is better to compare not with Colt, but with Browning No. 6,

      C FN Model 1903 Browning No.2
      1. gross kaput
        gross kaput 22 February 2016 10: 42
        +1
        Quote: Voice of Mind
        C FN Model 1903 Browning No.2

        Where did you find the Browning in this picture? What is depicted in the photo is an April Fool's joke from Shiryaev's grandfather, published in the April 2010 issue of the magazine "Weapon", the joke was a success, but it has been dragging on until now, many recount it as a "great secret secret"
        1. Voice of the Mind
          Voice of the Mind 23 February 2016 03: 00
          0
          Quote: gross kaput
          April Fool’s joke from Shiryaev’s grandfather

          It seems that this joke was accepted even by English-speaking countries: TT-33 is very similar to John Browning's blowback operated FN Model 1903 semiautomatic pistol, and internally it uses Browning's short recoil dropping-barrel system from the M1911 pistol.
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TT_pistol
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_Model_1903
          1. AK64
            AK64 23 February 2016 09: 12
            0
            It seems that this joke was accepted even by English-speaking countries: TT-33 is very similar to John Browning's blowback operated FN Model 1903 semiautomatic pistol, and internally it uses Browning's short recoil dropping-barrel system from the M1911 pistol.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TT_pistol
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_Model_1903


            I do not understand, you continue to insist or what?
            In the same text, one sentence from which you quoted is further written

            Externally, the TT-33 is very similar to John Browning's blowback operated FN Model 1903 semiautomatic pistol, and internally it uses Browning's short recoil dropping-barrel system from the M1911 pistol. In other areas the TT-33 differs more from Browning's designs - it employs a much simpler hammer / sear assembly than the M1911, with an external hammer. This assembly is removable from the pistol as a modular unit and includes cartridge guides that provide reliable functioning.

            I have highlighted the bolt just about the trigger "one block" - and, mind you, not the slightest reference to Browning.

            No need to insist on stupid things. I honestly don’t understand who and why spent so much time to make this fake photo.
      2. Alexey Lobanov
        Alexey Lobanov 22 February 2016 12: 26
        +2
        Quote: Voice of the Mind
        Quote: PKK
        TT is better to compare not with Colt, but with Browning No. 6,

        C FN Model 1903 Browning No.2


        With all the external similarities, they have a completely different principle of automation:
        Maud. 1903 - free shutter (as in Walter PP and Makarov), in TT - interlocked.
        And the removable trigger in this photo is a fake, especially since 1903 has a fuse that is not on the frame of the fake photo.
  • gladcu2
    gladcu2 21 February 2016 21: 44
    0
    Alex

    Of course it's nice to read. There are a lot of details and they are really interesting.

    Americans have so many small arms reviews on YouTube. 10 minutes and 10-20 minutes per video. They note very significant features that are hard to guess.

    For example, the back side of the frame has an unjustified profile, which affects the accuracy of shooting people with large hands. Well and so about 10 minutes.
  • Masya masya
    Masya masya 21 February 2016 07: 47
    24
    Does not matter...
  • Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 21 February 2016 08: 16
    +1
    Summary.
    TT is lighter, smaller, thinner, more reliable, more technologically advanced and more cartridges.
    And so in everything.
    1. Tjeck
      Tjeck 21 February 2016 09: 35
      +1
      I do not advise you to blindly believe everything that is said in military secrecy. Cartridge 7.62 / 25 has excellent ballistic performance but also has a weak stopping effect, that is, it can flash on launch without causing lethal damage. As for reliability, the TT begins to misfire at minus temperature and it has a stupid fuse. Not just because the TT was replaced by a less impressive but more reliable Makarov.
      1. gross kaput
        gross kaput 21 February 2016 11: 25
        +4
        Quote: Tjeck
        then the TT begins to misfire at sub-zero temperatures
        Have you come up with? laughing
        Quote: Tjeck
        and he has a stupid fuse

        The TT does not have a fuse, it has a safety platoon, however, the Colt 1911a1 also has the same safety platoon in addition to automatic and manual safety locks, by the way the Colt can be put on safety only with the trigger cocked or on the safety platoon. On the TT, manual fuses were installed only by the Hungarians on the "Tokojip" - this was the customer's request - Egypt and the Chinese on the M213 - there the fuse appeared for export to the USA, since without the fuse it did not meet the requirements of American laws.
        Quote: Tjeck
        Not just because the TT was replaced by a less impressive but more reliable Makarov.

        Not just - only your revelations to the reasons for the emergence of PM have nothing to do. laughing
        1. Tjeck
          Tjeck 21 February 2016 13: 19
          0
          The TT does not have a fuse, it has a safety platoon, however, the Colt 1911a1 also has the same safety platoon in addition to automatic and manual safety locks, by the way the Colt can be put on safety only with the trigger cocked or on the safety platoon. On the TT, manual fuses were installed only by the Hungarians on the "Tokojip" - this was the customer's request - Egypt and the Chinese on the M213 - there the fuse appeared for export to the USA, since without the fuse it did not meet the requirements of American laws.


          Have you read Wikipedia and like to express yourself correctly? Only if for that matter it's called not a `` safety cocking '' but a slide stop lever. But this does not change the fact that this semblance of a fuse is flawed and dangerous.

          As for the problems in the cold, I felt this from my own experience, and as it turned out later, I was not alone. Here, of course, it depends on the instance itself, but this is definitely not a faulty marriage.
          1. gross kaput
            gross kaput 21 February 2016 14: 35
            +5
            Quote: Tjeck
            Have you read wikipedia and love to put it right?

            laughing
            Quote: Tjeck
            Only if for that matter it's called not a `` safety cocking '' a slide stop lever

            laughing for that matter, some "not read Wikis" do not even understand what they mean
            Quote: Tjeck
            As for the problems in the cold, I felt this from my own experience, and as it turned out later, I'm not alone

            Was the experience in call of duty? Miracle lever ЗЗ has nothing to do with the safety platoon - if you really felt something out there in the cold, you would know that by sending the cartridge into the chamber of the TT, you can hold the trigger with your thumb and pressing and releasing the trigger you can smoothly bring the trigger to the "intermediate "the position in which he does not touch the striker while the shutter and the trigger are blocked - this is what is called a safety cocking.
            1. Alexey Lobanov
              Alexey Lobanov 22 February 2016 13: 59
              +1
              Quote: gross kaput
              Miracle lever ZZ has nothing to do with the safety platoon

              I seem to understand why the comrade Tjeck had problems in the cold with the TT, he simply "removed" it from the "safety" by pressing the slide stop. Yeah. And the button to the left of the trigger is "turning on the laser designator" wassat belay laughing The Swedes "burn"!
          2. Grandfather Luka
            Grandfather Luka 22 February 2016 06: 54
            +1
            Perhaps the problems in the cold are not the problems of the "instance", there is the problem of dumb gun oil freezing in the cold.
      2. PKK
        PKK 21 February 2016 14: 59
        +2
        TTs were replaced by Makarov in order to go to a different caliber. Civilians without exception had TTs. It was necessary to separate the state from crime. But TTs are still one of the best in terms of bronics. Asks for health. Who knows, they immediately run away after hearing TTs during the shootings.
      3. cherrybuster
        cherrybuster 21 February 2016 18: 00
        +1
        I’ll tell you a secret that only a bullet that has hit the right place has a stopping effect.
    2. Alexey Lobanov
      Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 09: 40
      +4
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Summary.
      TT is lighter, smaller, thinner, more reliable, more technologically advanced and more cartridges.
      And so in everything.

      Easier, smaller, more technologically advanced - yes. As for reliability - it is very controversial, perhaps because of the fewer parts in the design. Two colt fuses against the TT half-input - Colt is safer of course.
      Let's not forget that the TT was adopted 32 years later than the Colt.
      In general, the TT-33 is a very successful, massive and technologically advanced reworked clone of the colt, albeit with an original solution for the trigger coil spring device. The main differences are the ammunition, the trigger spring and the absence of fuses, the rest is a clone. But the LEGENDARY clone, according to celebrity, is completely competing with the Colt itself.
      1. Tjeck
        Tjeck 21 February 2016 10: 15
        +1
        In general, so. I would also add that much depends on the model of the tshnik himself, the Serbs still produce TTs and managed to modify it more than once to remove all the flaws, but if we are talking about the original t-33 there are quite a few flaws. The main advantage of the TT is the price, while the Colt models cost more than Kalash.
      2. gross kaput
        gross kaput 21 February 2016 11: 36
        +2
        Quote: Alexey Lobanov
        The main differences are the ammunition, the trigger spring and the absence of fuses, the rest is a clone.

        Another expert from the series "I myself have not read Pasternak, but I condemn" laughing
        Just disassemble the Colt and TT to the screw, put the details next to it and realize that there are slightly more differences than the mainspring and cartridge laughing
        And if you take a little more interest in the topic, it will turn out that the vast majority of pistols have designs embodied and patented by John Moses in the late 19th and early 20th centuries laughing
        1. Alexey Lobanov
          Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 12: 35
          +3
          Quote: gross kaput
          Quote: Alexey Lobanov
          The main differences are the ammunition, the trigger spring and the absence of fuses, the rest is a clone.

          Another expert from the series "I myself have not read Pasternak, but I condemn" laughing
          Just disassemble the Colt and TT to the screw, put the details next to it and realize that there are slightly more differences than the mainspring and cartridge laughing
          And if you take a little more interest in the topic, it will turn out that the vast majority of pistols have designs embodied and patented by John Moses in the late 19th and early 20th centuries laughing

          Oh, the famous mentor tone and "learn math" !!! That is, you can't even imagine that I was sufficiently "interested" in the topic? laughing
          Photos for an article with almost identical trunks are not enough for you?
          1. gross kaput
            gross kaput 21 February 2016 13: 49
            +2
            Quote: Alexey Lobanov
            It cannot even occur to you that I was sufficiently "interested" in the topic

            It can be seen, they forgot to add that the PM is a clone of Walter PPK, then it will definitely be clear that you are in the subject laughing
            Quote: Alexey Lobanov
            Photos for an article with almost identical trunks are not enough for you?

            Class, doctors should be invited to study gynecology with photos in a playboy laughing
            In TT there is not a single knot completely copied from the Colt, although for some "in the subject" it will be a shock, clone 11 can be called Spanish Asters
      3. carbine
        carbine 21 February 2016 11: 57
        -4
        Quote: Alexey Lobanov
        In general, the TT-33 is a very successful, massive and technological recycled colt clone,

        Lucky for what? Let me remind you that Borchard's cartridge was originally made for "weapons for travelers". Those. shoot a trifle for dinner and drive the native away (do not overwhelm). Therefore, this cartridge is categorically not suitable for the army. So are the weapons on it.
        Quote: Alexey Lobanov
        But the LEGENDARY clone, according to celebrity, is completely competing with the Colt itself.

        Oh yeah. There have always been serious problems with small arms in the USSR. More or less conscious actions in this area can be noted only from the 70s of the last century. True, the weapons of those times can hardly be called good. But the legends to create, this is please. Right from the start. On any topic.
        1. Alexey Lobanov
          Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 12: 41
          +8
          Quote: carbine
          Lucky for what?

          Successful for cheap and mass production, even in a terrible war ...

          Quote: carbine
          Oh yeah. There have always been serious problems with small arms in the USSR.


          That is why our rifleman during the war is considered one of the best at that time. Already at least PPSh, PPS and SVT recognized as masterpieces all sane experts.
          1. AK64
            AK64 21 February 2016 13: 03
            +1
            Successful for cheap and mass production, even in a terrible war ...


            Than 9mmx25, or 9mm Para would be worse "in the conditions of a terrible war"?

            That is why our rifleman during the war is considered one of the best at that time.

            Who are the judges?
            Who is "recognized"?

            Well, yes, yes, yes --- much better than the Argentinean, and even, perhaps, Spanish.

            Already at least PPSh, PPS and SVT recognized as masterpieces all sane experts.

            Can I have the names of "experts"?
            PPP, mind you, the Finns and Spaniards for some reason redesigned a pair of 9mm: Well, aren't they fools?
            1. gross kaput
              gross kaput 21 February 2016 13: 59
              +2
              Quote: AK64
              PPP, mind you, the Finns and Spaniards for some reason redesigned a pair of 9mm: Well, aren't they fools?

              Patamashta laughing 9X19 was their standard cartridge and therefore it is easier and cheaper to remake the design for it than to introduce another cartridge globally in TTX that does not differ from the standard one.
              1. Grandfather Luka
                Grandfather Luka 22 February 2016 07: 30
                0
                The reason is that 7.62 \ 25 is cheaper in production, and at that time a 9mm cartridge was not developed. And the technology of its manufacture was not implemented in production. There was no time in the war. The time has come and developed 9 \ 18.
                1. carbine
                  carbine 22 February 2016 09: 25
                  -1
                  Quote: Grandfather Luka
                  The reason is that 7.62 \ 25 is cheaper in production, and at that time a 9mm cartridge was not developed. And the technology of its manufacture was not implemented in production. There was no time in the war.

                  The cartridge 7,62x25 mm TT differed from the cartridge 9x25 mm Mauser Export only a bullet. And their shells were the same. Bullet, this is a penny. So your guess is wrong.
            2. 4thParasinok
              4thParasinok April 1 2016 14: 37
              0
              Quote: AK64
              Than 9mmx25, or 9mm Para would be worse "in the conditions of a terrible war"?

              And due to the fact that 9x19 was definitely "better" than 7,62x25 lol , in 41-42 years in the infantry units of the Wehrmacht, the soldiers had two types of weapons at the same time: a carbine and pp. The second sample was kept by the "train" and the weapon was chosen depending on the task facing the subunit ... The PPSh had an aimed shot range of more than 500 m, and it was almost impossible to get from the MP even at 150. The 9x19 bullet was too steep and had a huge spread.
              at 9x25 the bullet was too heavy in an unsuccessful form, so there was too much recoil for the free shutter and again the wrong trajectory. And in Russia there were no these test cartridges, they were not produced already for lack of demand.
              Yes, in theory, changing the bullet to Parabellum, in theory, you should get an excellent cartridge for heavy PP, but definitely not with a free shutter ...
              PPP, mind you, the Finns and Spaniards for some reason redesigned a pair of 9mm: Well, aren't they fools?
              And why produce and adopt another highly specialized cartridge?
          2. carbine
            carbine 21 February 2016 13: 59
            -3
            Quote: Alexey Lobanov
            Successful for cheap and mass production, even in a terrible war ...

            Those. you think that if the "hole" in the tube (barrel) were 8,8 mm in diameter, not 7,62 mm, and the bullet would weigh 8,3 g (the 9x25 mm Mauser Export cartridge on the same case as and a TT cartridge), instead of 5,52 g, would it be somehow very expensive and too heavy for mass production? I want to upset you, this very production would not care. But the fact that such a weapon would save a lot of lives is very important.
            Quote: Alexey Lobanov
            That is why our rifleman during the war is considered one of the best at that time.

            By whom? You and the couch field marshals? Don't make me laugh. Terrible Soviet ersatz and tsarist weapons of WW1, here is your "one of the best at that time." Soviet agitprom foreve. I'm even scared to imagine how many lives ADDITIONALLY The USSR paid for this "one of the best at the time."
            Quote: Alexey Lobanov
            Already at least PPSh, PPS and SVT recognized as masterpieces all sane experts.

            These "sane experts" should drink brilliant green. And stand on your head. So that it flows down to the head and the wounds heal there.
            But it would be nice for you to think about why this brilliant weapon would have been dismissed immediately after the war by your knee in the ass. That's right in 1945. They took it, and removed it from production. Due to excessive masterpiece?
          3. gross kaput
            gross kaput 21 February 2016 14: 23
            +1
            Quote: Alexey Lobanov
            PPSh, PPS and SVT recognized as masterpieces all sane experts

            What is there so masterpiece? PPSh is quite an ordinary machine - with a lot of its sores that were treated until the end of the release, PPS is an open brainchild of war - a technological and simple but not brilliant performance characteristics. SVT is a separate story, the design is interesting, in fact the best of what Tokarev created with very interesting solutions but also with a bunch of problems - but Tokarev was not to blame for them, but the military who issued TTZs for a self-loading rifle with strict requirements for weight and barrel length (in the final In this case, the mass without a bayonet is no more than the mass of a mosquito with a bayonet) as a result, it was designed at the limit as a result of which to reduce the mass of the box Tokarev had to maximize the shutter speed and since the box, due to the same mass requirements, had a minimum the automation margin had to be made essentially unstressed, which necessitated the use of a gas regulator by five positions, reducing the mass of the shutter resulted in a minimum ratio of the mass of the stem of the shutter to the attached mass of the skeleton, which also negatively affects reliability. In general, CBT is very pleasant and easy to self-charge but requires care and knowledge of its structure.
      4. Alexey Lobanov
        Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 12: 00
        0
        Quote: Alexey Lobanov
        that the TT was adopted 32 years later than the Colt

        Sorry, typo, of course for 22 years!
    3. AK64
      AK64 21 February 2016 11: 25
      -3
      TT is lighter, smaller, thinner, more reliable, more technologically advanced and more cartridges.

      Exactly the opposite
      And so in everything.

      just about (though the other way)
      1. Alexey Lobanov
        Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 12: 44
        +1
        Quote: AK64
        Exactly the opposite

        Yes, the numbers are not important to you, the main thing is to express an opinion ...
        1. AK64
          AK64 21 February 2016 13: 10
          +2
          Yes, the numbers are not important to you, the main thing is to express an opinion ...

          You might think you brought at least one "tsiferka", which "is not important to me"

          But okay, let's talk about the "numbers", you know, I am PASSED by sofa "experts" who compare "numbers" instead of real samples of the product.

          I understand, I understand everything: comparing the "numbers" in the plates is much easier than comparing the product.
          Here are just the "tsiferki" VZ, and even Moskvich 412, no worse than Fiat, and even, perhaps, Volkswagen Golf. If by "numbers".

          Excuse me for the harshness - but you do not understand what it is about! TT is a pistol in which ... the magazine dropped out regularly - is this "reliability"?
          In the TT, the cartridge in the range could not be worn, without the risk of getting a bullet in your leg, and then also shooting from the tribunal for the crossbow.
          And you call this "reliable"?
          1. gross kaput
            gross kaput 21 February 2016 17: 01
            +4
            [img] [img] https://i.yapx.ru/rSi.jpg [/ img] [/ img]
            Quote: AK64
            you know, I am PASSED by sofa "experts" who compare "tsiferki" instead of real samples of the product.

            Those. Are you infuriating yourself? laughing
            Quote: AK64
            TT is a pistol in which ... the magazine dropped out regularly - is this "reliability"?

            Old tale of the main laughing on a working pistol with a non-deformed magazine and a non-sharpened latch, the magazine doesn’t fall out - you won’t knock it out of the frame without pressing the latch smile
            Quote: AK64
            In TT, the cartridge in the range could not be worn, without the risk of getting a bullet in your leg

            They already tried to explain pre-feed to you, but not to feed the horse.
            In general, when it comes to TT, for me the measure of how many people are familiar with Totoshka "personally" and not according to articles is the knowledge of TT sores - all specialists in shooting from the couch into the monitor know about the store and about insecurity. laughing those who really have experience of "close" communication immediately call the drummer's check as a sore spot - because the split spring check used to fix the drummer has very thin feathers that have the property of breaking - especially when "idle" as a result, when firing, the drummer simply flies out and the weapon comes out building, therefore, when inspecting, disassembling and cleaning this part, they pay special attention to installing it with a slot along the shutter, and if one feather breaks off, it is necessary to immediately change it to a new one without waiting for it to break completely. we look at the photo with the check already half dead and realize the full depth of our depths laughing
          2. glasha3032
            glasha3032 22 February 2016 00: 59
            +1
            About the store - the owners studied the materiel poorly - there is an adjustment screw for adjusting the retention of the store. And what they couldn’t regulate at the factory normally - well, so the war, women and teenagers collected weapons.
            1. gross kaput
              gross kaput 22 February 2016 20: 17
              0
              Quote: glasha3032
              there is an adjusting screw for adjusting the retention of the store

              Where ?! Madame, probably you yourself would not hurt, it would not hurt to study the material of the TT does not have a single threaded connection, what many consider a "screw" is the spring petals of the button with which it engages with the latch. in the photo above, it lies with a paintbrush.
              1. The comment was deleted.
    4. Maksus
      Maksus 21 February 2016 11: 55
      +4
      Colt 1911 - perhaps the best of the classic pistols. The TT is much more convenient in the hand. Plus now it is not only made under .45 but also under 9mm - and there are bullets to choose from ... But, admittedly, it’s heavy.
      1. would
        would 22 February 2016 00: 36
        +1
        But I must admit - heavy.


        And this is a plus and minus. Plus, if you are going to shoot from it, a heavy gun better dampens recoil. But it’s more pleasant to wear with some kind of mostly polymer which is much easier.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • bionik
    bionik 21 February 2016 08: 46
    +5
    The TT cartridge has more penetrating power than the 45 "Colt". The "Colt" has a large stopping power, this is its strong point.
    1. Leprekon
      Leprekon 21 February 2016 09: 59
      +3
      Is it clear now. Initial at TT 420, and at Colt 260. Only Colt has several models and modifications, including under different cartridges. There are modern modifications
    2. AK64
      AK64 21 February 2016 11: 32
      -3
      The TT cartridge has more penetrating power than the 45 "Colt". The "Colt" has a large stopping power, this is its strong point.

      Colt KILLS where the TT is flashing --- that's how it should be said
    3. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 14: 18
      +1
      Quote: bionik
      TT cartridge has high breakdown power

      Before the era of the Broniks, this did not matter much.
    4. The comment was deleted.
  • Bagnyuk selo
    Bagnyuk selo 21 February 2016 09: 03
    -14 qualifying.
    TT parasha complete .. at least who wore it? put on the fuse? the store just flies so constantly ... and colt is such a fool that the edge ... I personally couldn’t fit in my brush .. I still thought it was easier for me to kill a person without shooting, but just hitting him in the head with a blow .. He is simply huge and very, very heavy! and yes .. the best gun for me is Walter PP .. well, of those that I held in my hands .. and Makarov is the norm ... just a comment on removing the store .. well, it twitches specifically in the hand after the shot ... APS in this plan is better, also sucks ... a whopper just for show ... and why I praise him I don’t understand honestly!
    1. USSR 1971
      USSR 1971 21 February 2016 09: 36
      10
      Have you used pneumatic copies of these samples? Having some experience in the use of service weapons, I would not say that "APS - sucks". Weapons are assessed not by their appearance, but by the effectiveness of their use, reliability and labor costs for production. Russian and Soviet small arms have repeatedly proved their suitability, and not in shooting ranges, but in real wars.
      By the way, Walter PP (and PPK) is a police weapon, APS is a combat weapon.
      1. lukke
        lukke 21 February 2016 11: 29
        +1
        By the way, Walter PP (and PPK) is a police weapon, APS is a combat weapon
        and a lot of you from APS shot in battle? I’ll tell you right away - you will shoot a little more than with Walter PPK.
        1. Bagnyuk selo
          Bagnyuk selo 21 February 2016 11: 55
          +1
          also did not understand why the PP sucks? as for me it’s so ideal gun!
          1. USSR 1971
            USSR 1971 21 February 2016 12: 04
            0
            Lord, it’s not sucks, but DIFFERENT. Appointment MISCELLANEOUS.
          2. carbine
            carbine 21 February 2016 14: 51
            -1
            Quote: BagnyukSelo
            also did not understand why the PP sucks? as for me it’s so ideal gun!

            He does not suck. For the police, he is exactly what the doctor ordered. But the army has other goals and objectives. The soldiers are not faced with the task of detaining the enemy for investigation and trial.
        2. USSR 1971
          USSR 1971 21 February 2016 12: 14
          +1
          I will not hide, not much, the main service weapons we had were PM and ASKU, earlier in the youth of the AC-74. It was possible to shoot from the APS - shot.
          But I somehow realized that the appointment of APS is a melee weapon. And not for the motorized rifle company on the offensive. There are weapons that are equipped with either specialists or those who do not have much space for storing personal weapons in equipment. In the USSR, APS is mainly for special forces.
          Yes, and an article about the weapons of his time. Naturally, everything becomes obsolete with time. Nagan was also once popular, and not only with Sonya-golden pen.
          1. lukke
            lukke 21 February 2016 15: 09
            0
            Nagan was also once popular, and not only with Sonya-golden pen.
            why once ?!) in some cases where there is no need to leave shells - it is still popular) - pluses: reliability and accuracy, cons: long reloading, not common ammunition.
            small remark: AKS-74U and AK-74)
          2. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Bagnyuk selo
        Bagnyuk selo 21 February 2016 11: 55
        -3
        no, they were all ordinary .... I didn’t talk about labor costs, I don’t have a clue about them .. I spoke like a layman .. it’s just what and how it was in my hand and how it was shot ... as for me it’s so easy ... with an APS shot at a target with a burst of 50 meters ... it seemed to me that the hits were purely random .. I respect Makarov most of all .. it’s great from 25 meters .. and from 15, high-speed shooting is so easy class !!!!!
        1. carbine
          carbine 21 February 2016 14: 42
          -3
          Quote: BagnyukSelo
          I respect Makarov the most .. it’s good at 25 meters .. and at 15, high-speed shooting is so easy class !!!!!

          Even at point blank range does not bring down. It gets, if you adapt, but it doesn’t bring down. And he should bring down, if he called himself army. And even from 50 m.
          1. cherrybuster
            cherrybuster 21 February 2016 18: 33
            0
            who is it, interestingly, in the army pounding with a pistol from 50 m?
            1. carbine
              carbine 21 February 2016 19: 02
              -2
              Quote: cherrybuster
              who is it, interestingly, in the army pounding with a pistol from 50 m?

              Where there are pistols, there they shoot.
              1. cherrybuster
                cherrybuster 22 February 2016 05: 55
                0
                Obviously, you are close to places like the army were not. The gun is a melee tool.
                1. carbine
                  carbine 22 February 2016 09: 26
                  -2
                  Quote: cherrybuster
                  Obviously, you are close to places like the army were not. The gun is a melee tool.

                  And it is quite obvious to me that you have not seen the army pistol in the eye. And if fired, then from all sorts of non-army weapons.
                  1. Maksus
                    Maksus 22 February 2016 18: 00
                    0
                    And how does the army PM differ from the police? Do not enlighten?
                    1. carbine
                      carbine 22 February 2016 18: 07
                      0
                      Quote: Maksus
                      And how does the army PM differ from the police?

                      Nothing. PM, which is actually a typical police pistol in TTX differs from an army pistol. Beretta 92FS (M9), Glock 17, Walter P38 (new), ПЯ - these are all army pistols.
                  2. cherrybuster
                    cherrybuster 1 March 2016 21: 02
                    0
                    From the army, my son, from the army itself. I already wrote to you above that I shoot mostly from the G17 4Gen. In addition, from ПЯ and ГШ. And besides the pistol, I also work with R15 and AK 101. Therefore, believe me, I know the difference in scope and in striking ability.
                    So, 50 m for a pistol exists only in sports, in reality shooting to kill from such a distance has few prospects. It is difficult, in principle, to imagine a real situation when there is a need to shoot a pistol at a distance of 50 m (of course, excluding that when you are alone with a pistol, and in the distance - Hitler)). I hope you do not argue that for each work you need your own tool?
                    1. carbine
                      carbine 3 March 2016 11: 42
                      0
                      Quote: cherrybuster
                      the difference in both the scope and the striking ability I know

                      Where from? Are you a pathologist shooting at corpses?
                      Quote: cherrybuster
                      So, 50 m for a pistol exists only in sports, in reality shooting to kill from such a distance has few prospects

                      UP on PY 2010 (white paper) disagrees with you. You confuse an army pistol with police farting type PM.
                      Quote: cherrybuster
                      From the army, my son, from the army itself.

                      What kind of experience is this?
                      Quote: cherrybuster
                      I hope you do not argue that for each work you need your own tool?

                      I won’t. Therefore, for a range of 100 m, for example, make PP.
          2. aiw
            aiw 24 February 2016 09: 46
            +1
            "It doesn't even knock down at close range. It hits if you adapt, but doesn't knock down. But you have to knock down if you already called yourself an army. And even from 50 meters."

            Judging by your comments, they hit you.
          3. The comment was deleted.
        2. Maksus
          Maksus 21 February 2016 15: 10
          -4
          Yeah, high-speed firing from PM - yes - 8 cartridges, a kuruzuy barrel and constant poking.
          1. Viktor.N.Aleksandrov.
            Viktor.N.Aleksandrov. 21 February 2016 20: 33
            +4
            This is to what state it is necessary to bring the PM, so that "constant sticking" appears? PM is one of the most reliable machines if it is used for its intended purpose, and not hammer in nails.
            1. Maksus
              Maksus 21 February 2016 21: 19
              -1
              Which was issued (1959 of the year) - such was. Shot about 200 rounds of ammunition from it - the jabs were regular ... PM is not a Kalash, but there have never been any problems - at least shoot fire on the floor of the horn (though it could be shot on the head for that)
              1. Viktor.N.Aleksandrov.
                Viktor.N.Aleksandrov. 21 February 2016 21: 23
                +2
                Well, the family is not without a freak. By the way, pistols from the sixties were much better than pistols from the 80s. I shot more ammunition from PMa and maybe more, but there have never been any problems.
                1. Maksus
                  Maksus 21 February 2016 22: 19
                  -3
                  It seems that once at a time is not necessary. Although I cleaned mine regularly (when I first looked into the trunk - there only frogs did not jump). Maybe in the cartridges it was? In our area, few people liked to shoot pistols.
                  1. 4thParasinok
                    4thParasinok April 1 2016 14: 59
                    0
                    Quote: Maksus
                    It seems that once at a time is not necessary.

                    it depends on the owner’s hands ... Personally, I first shot from the PM in the 80s, in the army. It’s not at my officers’s place that nothing has ever popped up and jammed, more than 10 packs were shot.
                    The second time he shot in the 90s, when he studied at the guard. According to the training program, 200 rounds per student, and there were more than 20 of us, not a single misfire, sticking, etc. You can calculate for a change how many rounds we shot.
                    And believe me, this was not the last time I had to shoot from the PM, and there were never any problems with it.
      4. Maksus
        Maksus 21 February 2016 11: 59
        +4
        APS is a rather strange gun. If you shoot from it in bursts without a butt - it either needs to be a horse ram or a robocop. And Makar is painfully jumping.
        1. carbine
          carbine 21 February 2016 14: 47
          -1
          Quote: Maksus
          APS is a rather strange gun.

          I would even say more than strange. In general, there is an idea how this miracle with the PM and the PM cartridge came into being. The theory is rather insane, but given the actions of the USSR in the rifleman in those years, you can assume anything. And in fantasies you can not limit yourself. The Soviet Union saw weapons more puzzling.
        2. hohol95
          hohol95 21 February 2016 22: 22
          0
          Did you shoot from the Beretta 93R? Is she better than APS ???
      5. carbine
        carbine 21 February 2016 14: 52
        -1
        Quote: USSR 1971
        By the way, Walter PP (and PPK) is a police weapon, APS is a combat weapon.

        I would clarify that APS is an ersatz of army weapons. Moreover, it’s not a policeman, like PM.
    2. Alexey Lobanov
      Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 09: 46
      +4
      Quote: BagnyukSelo
      put on the fuse?

      Let me ask you what kind of TT you "wore" with a fuse? laughing
      Chinese, Romanian or Yugoslav?
      1. Bagnyuk selo
        Bagnyuk selo 21 February 2016 11: 58
        0
        I don’t have any idea ... they just let us shoot ... but I didn’t like it .. in the dash I really had to push up all the time before shooting and go through the corridor just before shooting .. I thought what a foolishness .. but then the instructors explained that this type of tension should create in the muscles .. load imitation, as I understand it ...
    3. Tjeck
      Tjeck 21 February 2016 10: 01
      +2
      Well, u, right now, they’ll start carpet bombing for you. Apparently you don’t know that the weapon of victory gives +50 accuracy, reliability and skill laughing
    4. AK64
      AK64 21 February 2016 11: 41
      +1
      TT parasha complete .. at least who wore it? put on the fuse? the store just flies so constantly ...

      In

      and colt is such a fool that the edge ... I personally did not fit in the brush ..

      What kind of brush do you have? I was comfortable.
      I like Colt very much: after the shot she returns to the aiming line very well, if you don’t change the target, you can shoot the store very quickly.
      Powerful but not overly

      he is simply huge and very, very heavy!

      I am not a hero, but I am subjectively "just"

      and yes .. the best gun for me is Walter PP .. well, of those that I held in my hands ..

      Purely aesthetically - it's a miracle what kind of gun. But ... power, IMHO, even at 9mm, is not enough: a weapon of self-defense, and no more. Is of pluses - you can put it in your pocket (for this it is done). Well, very reliable Walter PP


      and Makarov is the norm ...

      I do not like in every sense.
      And somehow most of those who have the same opinion.
      For some reason, in a hand
      1. Victor Demchenko
        Victor Demchenko 21 February 2016 14: 42
        -1
        Quote: AK64
        For some reason, in a hand

        I agree! it’s log, and if from the factory then the descent is worthless, stepped and long, just horror!
    5. Leprekon
      Leprekon 21 February 2016 17: 37
      +1
      This is not a selection criterion. From the position of a shooter, I can express my opinion that with your approach you can say that shooting from a sports revolver is the coolest of all, just say that this is the best personal weapon!
  • La-5
    La-5 21 February 2016 09: 41
    +4
    The only serious drawback of the TT is the lack of a fuse, and so the gun fully met the requirement of its time.
    1. AK64
      AK64 21 February 2016 11: 49
      0
      The only serious drawback of the TT is the lack of a fuse, and so the gun fully met the requirement of its time.


      The most serious flaw: he did not kill well. A bullet pierced right through.

      From the unmentioned: TTs are known for dropping out of the store. (Here it was mentioned only once in the comments, and TT has such a property)

      About fuses: you guys can’t imagine how much he didn’t have fuses ... But there weren’t so many that there was even a manual for medical examination to distinguish between gunshots and victims of a spontaneous shot. Like this.
      1. fzr1000
        fzr1000 21 February 2016 12: 07
        0
        But cheap. In the 90s he did the job and threw $ 100 into the garbage chute.
        APS at the time at the showdown was just a godsend.

        Just kidding
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. gross kaput
        gross kaput 21 February 2016 12: 24
        +6
        Quote: AK64
        that there was even a manual for medical examination to distinguish between gunshots and victims of spontaneous shots.

        Don’t give a reference? laughing In general, as usual, I heard a ringing ... on self-arrows, official instructions concerned wounds with B. Geschoss sighting and incendiary bullets

        And so it went. No one paid attention to the fact that the majority of self-mutilators categorically denied their guilt, claiming that the wound was received in battle. Only in the summer of 1943 did forensic doctors of the Stalingrad Front (among them V.I. Aleksievich, now the head of the department of forensic medicine, a professor who told me this story) notice that after each battle dozens began to arrive from the right bank of the Volga, and then hundreds of wounded with signs of a close shot. It was scary not only to say about this scale of self-mutilation, but also to think.
        A detailed study of the X-ray of the hand of the next "coward and self-mutilator" showed that in the soft tissues along the wound channel there are metal fragments that turned out to be parts of a German rifle explosive bullet. When the wounded man said that the bullet had broken the bed of the PPSh, it became clear why the palm was covered with soot, although the entrance wound was located on the back of the hand. After all, the explosive device went off after the bullet passed it, breaking down on a denser barrier.
        As a matter of urgency, letters were sent to the State Defense Committee with relevant information, and recommendations were developed for front-line commissions. A wave of repeated commissions began to rehabilitate those who were still alive. For obvious reasons, there was no question of post-mortem rehabilitation, since hundreds of dead bodies would have to be exhumed, who were often buried without indicating the place.
        Now no one can count how many Red Army soldiers wounded by German explosive bullets were shot by our ordinary ones. Only a little reassuring is the realization that, thanks to the inquisitiveness and high professionalism of forensic experts, starting in the second half of 1943, more than one hundred fighters were saved from unfounded accusations of the most serious sin - treason.
        1. AK64
          AK64 21 February 2016 12: 57
          -2
          Don’t give a reference? laughing Generally, as usual I heard the ringing ... on self-arrows, official instructions concerned wounds with B. Geschoss sighting and incendiary bullets


          What a fool
          Here. Study.
          http://www.juristlib.ru/book_6392.html
          There inside
          1. gross kaput
            gross kaput 21 February 2016 13: 52
            +2
            Quote: AK64
            What a fool

            The young man and what is the relation of conducting a medical examination of gunshot wounds
            Quote: AK64
            as far as he didn’t have fuses ... But he didn’t have them so much that there was even a manual for medical examination to distinguish between self-guns and victims of a spontaneous shot.
            has to the subject of discussion?
            for those who think hard, the description of determining the distance of a shot from a firearm has nothing to do with TT self-arrows - so go our forest dreamer.
  • klopik1
    klopik1 21 February 2016 09: 47
    -17 qualifying.
    atomic bomb stolen, rocket stolen, stolen machine gun, pistol and that slam laughing
    1. screw cutter
      screw cutter 21 February 2016 10: 27
      +3
      Who do you mean by this? The Americans? Who still can't invent their own rocket engine, or F117 with its "invisibility", or maybe Sikorsky's Helicopter? And what kind of "automatic" do you mean, the one that even on state flags and coats of arms depicted?
      1. klopik1
        klopik1 21 February 2016 15: 49
        -3
        yeah the same
        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 21 February 2016 19: 26
          +1
          which is small yes smelly
      2. cherrybuster
        cherrybuster 21 February 2016 18: 37
        -5
        Kiselev told you that the Americans can’t come up with a rocket engine, right?)))
        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 21 February 2016 19: 39
          +3
          no, someone Ashton Carter (Secretary of Defense) and then another director of national intelligence spoke about this
          1. cherrybuster
            cherrybuster 22 February 2016 05: 57
            -1
            Can you give an example with a line of engines that "the Americans can't do"? Or should I poke you with a stigma?
            1. Generalissimo
              Generalissimo 22 February 2016 12: 03
              0
              RD-180, NK-32 ... you first push your
              1. cherrybuster
                cherrybuster 1 March 2016 21: 09
                0
                And heavy and light rockets with which dvigol fly, do not tell me?
    2. fzr1000
      fzr1000 21 February 2016 12: 01
      +8
      But its own hydrogen, a home-grown truth-teller. Korolev developed without Brown, but the United States really just used the experience of the Germans. The USA on lasers, space, hypersound, microwave, so much stolen from the USSR in the 90s, that for this I would have shot a bunch of people involved in this from both sides. Further laziness to explain.
      1. Generalissimo
        Generalissimo 21 February 2016 12: 36
        +1
        nuclear is also its own, but the Americans have German (like missiles)
        1. klopik1
          klopik1 21 February 2016 15: 52
          -4
          and keto are Julius and Ethel Rosenberg
          1. Generalissimo
            Generalissimo 21 February 2016 16: 29
            0
            two designated victims of propaganda that the USSR is only copying, and a pair of perverts who were not sorry to chop off their heads
      2. klopik1
        klopik1 21 February 2016 15: 49
        -2
        learn history
        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 21 February 2016 16: 30
          +1
          who wrote it?
    3. Alexey Lobanov
      Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 12: 58
      +1
      Quote: klopik1
      atomic bomb stolen, rocket stolen, stolen machine gun, pistol and that slam laughing


      Where did you all get out today, experts? laughing
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Disant
        Disant 22 February 2016 02: 15
        +1
        we know where ..
    4. Nekarmadlen
      Nekarmadlen 21 February 2016 23: 06
      0
      Why reinvent the wheel, if it has long been invented))))
    5. The comment was deleted.
    6. Disant
      Disant 22 February 2016 02: 35
      0
      .
      klopik1 atomic bomb stolen, rocket stolen, stolen assault rifle, gun and that slam laughing

      .
      forgot to add poisonous substances and biological weapons.
      .
      Can you imagine what will happen, what time will come when the peace-loving Russians will still be forced to come up with fundamentally new models of weapons of mass and individual destruction?
  • uzer 13
    uzer 13 21 February 2016 10: 21
    +1
    These cartridges were produced in the USSR for Mauser, which at one time were purchased in a fair amount. I really like them, I think many would not refuse a pistol for this ammunition, and even a submachine gun too. The experience of use in local conflicts is positive. Currently, such a cartridge is sold for hunting PPSh. The cartridge is imported for some reason, it is quite expensive, about 30 rubles, which is completely incomprehensible. There are a lot of them in warehouses, but it’s customary for our enemies to destroy them, while spending money on disposal Citizens cannot sell these cartridges in any way, otherwise they’ll get fat, saving part of the family budget. The TT pistol has a problem with a war spring hidden in the trigger. It can break at the most inopportune moment, for all the advantages of such a removable trigger.







    saving part of the family budget.
    1. gross kaput
      gross kaput 21 February 2016 11: 46
      +4
      Quote: uzer 13
      atron for some reason imported

      Because the only TT and Nagan cartridges production line left after the adoption of the PM was in Yuryuzani and was poached in the early 90s, so now only import or AKBS is sold in stores, which is much closer to criminal samopal than to factory ammunition, because it remained in the warehouses mainly ammunition from the post-war years of release, and more than once, all the rules for storage time and putting them on sale in this form simply can’t be plus a ban on the sale of army ammunition to civilians.
      1. Alexey Lobanov
        Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 12: 25
        +1
        There is another answer: cartridges 7.62x25 with a lead-core bullet were discontinued in 1953, then they were made only with a steel core ... But such cartridges in civilian (hunting) weapons are prohibited here, as far as I know ...
        1. gross kaput
          gross kaput 21 February 2016 12: 27
          0
          Quote: Alexey Lobanov
          then produced only with a steel core

          read carefully
          Quote: gross kaput
          a ban on the sale of army ammunition to civilians.
    2. 4thParasinok
      4thParasinok April 1 2016 15: 15
      0
      Quote: uzer 13
      These cartridges were produced in the USSR for Mauser, which at one time were purchased in a fair amount. I really like them, I think many would not refuse a pistol for this munition

      7,92x22 is more suitable for a pistol. bullet speed is slightly less, but sufficient. As a result, there is less impact on the ability to create a lighter and more compact pistol without losing accuracy, for combat at the same distances. , but I forgot, the bullet is 1g heavier, and the speed is 360m \ s instead of 420.
      The 7,62x25 cartridge was not created as a pistol, but as a cartridge for a rifle for travelers: lightweight, compact, rapid-fire and with the ability to reach a medium distance.
  • carbine
    carbine 21 February 2016 10: 47
    0
    Quote: Laszlo Tolvaj
    He developed a cartridge shortly before, in order to provide his first submachine gun (originally created under the cartridge 7,62x38 of the Nagan Ravolver) with higher firepower and reliability.

    Quote: Laszlo Tolvaj
    The “Soviets”, on the other hand, looked more from the point of view of supply — they wanted to have a pistol using the same cartridge as a submachine gun.

    In tyrnet nonsense is often found. But to be so frank, it is infrequent.
    Quote: Laszlo Tolvaj
    The combat qualities of pistols and submachine guns of the same caliber (PCA and Thomson 1928) will be considered in the next issue.

    I'm even afraid to guess what will be there.
    Quote: Laszlo Tolvaj
    "Automatic Colt Pictol" .38ACP caliber

    Another "specialist". TT must be compared with the Colt-Browning М1911A1 / .38 mod. 1929 on .38 Super. From there, legs grow.
    1. Alexey Lobanov
      Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 13: 08
      0
      Quote: carbine
      Quote: Laszlo Tolvaj
      "Automatic Colt Pictol" .38ACP caliber
      Another "specialist". TT must be compared with the Colt-Browning М1911A1 / .38 mod. 1929 on .38 Super. From there, legs grow.


      Do not tell me the dimensions of the cartridges .38ACP and .38Super? laughing
      1. AK64
        AK64 21 February 2016 13: 21
        0
        Do not tell me the dimensions of the cartridges .38ACP and .38Super? laughing


        Have you been banned in Google? For what?
        Well, I'll tell you: the diameter of the sleeve is the same as that of the TT, but in general the cartridge in the assembly is 3mm shorter than the TT.

        These 3mm are the most complete nonsense, but actually, in short, in this case, "better" - because it's more compact
      2. carbine
        carbine 21 February 2016 13: 25
        -1
        Quote: Alexey Lobanov
        Do not tell the dimensions of the cartridges .38ACP and .38Super

        And where does .38ACP? Or right now you want to declare that Colt-Browning M1911A1 / .38 mod. 1929 was done NOT on the cartridge .38Super? I do not recommend it. Just even categorically.
        For reference, cartridge .38Super arr. 1929 is a reinforced version of the old cartridge .38 Colt Auto mod. 1900
        1. Alexey Lobanov
          Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 14: 19
          0
          You do not seem to understand the sarcasm of the question of size. The cartridges are outwardly the same, they have the same bullet, only the initial speed is different (due to gunpowder).
          And sarcasm, or, if you want - the irony was about your quote:
          "" Automatic Colt Pictol "caliber .38АСР
          Another "specialist". TT must be compared with the Colt-Browning М1911A1 / .38 mod. 1929 on the .38 Super ... "
          1. carbine
            carbine 21 February 2016 14: 32
            -2
            Quote: Alexey Lobanov
            And sarcasm, or, if you want - the irony was about your quote:
            "" Automatic Colt Pictol "caliber .38АСР
            Another "specialist". TT must be compared with the Colt-Browning М1911A1 / .38 mod. 1929 on the .38 Super ... "

            Yes, now I noticed that I had not copied the phrase a little further, to "under the more powerful .45АСР".
      3. 4thParasinok
        4thParasinok April 1 2016 15: 34
        0
        Quote: Alexey Lobanov
        Do not tell me the dimensions of the cartridges .38ACP and .38Super?

        9x23mm, cartridge length 32,5mm and length 7,62x25- 35mm
        The initial bullet speed of .38 ACP was 320 m / s, and .38 Super - 390 m / s. A 7,5 g shell shell develops an initial velocity of 425 m / s, a mass of 8 g - 410 m / s and 9,7 g - 350 m / s. In terms of the initial velocity of the bullet, the maximum pressure in the barrel when firing and the flatness of the trajectory of the bullet, the .38 Super cartridges surpass 9mm Parabellum
        Today .38 Super cartridges are used mainly in various versions of the M1911 pistol, produced by a variety of manufacturers. Such pistols generally have a magazine capacity of 9 to 11 rounds.

        before posing as an idiot, look for info.
  • Sasha75
    Sasha75 21 February 2016 10: 48
    +3
    All is well, just remind what battle in the Second World War was won with the help of TT. or colt. Correctly not what the VIS 35 Poles had, that they won the war. But PPSh under this cartridge drove the Germans to the invention of an intermediate cartridge. But what about the 45 gauge in small-range pistol guns is good, but Thompson’s 20 rounds of ammunition in the store and all reloading is not an instant 100-round cartridge say so you saw that disk a little smaller than that of the DP. M-3 general song butt bent parts broke off and even fought mainly against the Japanese, where the automatic weapons are not a cat, and the mouse did not cry. The adoption of the cartridge 7.62X25 is such a bike pushed the NKVD only they had about 50 thousand Mauser pistols in service and supplying their cartridges from abroad was unprofitable. And what is the M96 M1939 at that time a dream, and now))). The penetrative ability of this cartridge was known at that time by many of the top command leadership, as they fought with them in the civilian. In 1941, the Voevodin pistol was tested and in XNUMX it was supposed to be adopted, so that the TT. was just a passing gun for us
    1. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 11: 18
      -5
      Quote: Sasha75
      But PPSh under this cartridge drove the Germans to the invention of an intermediate cartridge.

      Yes? What, directly drove? Directly to the invention? And what was this invention about?
      Quote: Sasha75
      And what about 45 caliber in small-range pistols with machine guns

      Thomson’s PP of the war years (with a .45 ASR cartridge) - DPRVF 190 m, DEP 280 m. PPSh DPRF 260 m, DEP 30 m. Which is more effective at long distances?
      Quote: Sasha75
      M-3 generally the song butt bent over parts broke off

      And in general, the Americans are bad.
      Quote: Sasha75
      And what is a M96 MXNUMX at that time a dream, and now)))

      The army needs to fight, not dream. In its armament before the TT was not just the C96, but the Mauser-Bolo. A contraption that is completely unsuitable for the army for a number of reasons. But status. Something like a souvenir. It was because of this souvenir that the 7,62x25 mm TT dolbopartron first appeared in the Red Army, and then the dolbo-weapon on it. Then all this "happiness" in the army was abandoned. But I had to fight in WWII with this squalor.
      Quote: Sasha75
      The penetrative ability of this cartridge was known at that time by many of the top command leadership, as they fought with them in the civilian.

      1. The special penetration ability of the pistol cartridge was then useless. There were no bronziers then.
      2. They did not know, because the Mauser-Bolo is an ersatz-product of already defeated Germany, which is under the sanctions of the Versailles Peace. In Civil in Russia there were other Mauser models.
      Quote: Sasha75
      In 1939, the Voevodin pistol was tested and in 1941 it was supposed to be adopted, so that the TT. was just a passing gun for us

      Well, of course. They planned to take the PV into service for tankers, as TT did not fit into the embrasures. Then they decided that it was not up to them, enough of them and Nagans. And so PV is the same g ... as TT. The cartridge was the same.
      1. carbine
        carbine 21 February 2016 16: 07
        -1
        Quote: carbine
        Thomson’s PP of the war years (with a .45 ASR cartridge) - DPRVF 190 m, DEP 280 m. PPSh DPRF 260 m, DEP 30 m. Which is more effective at long distances?

        I’ll decrypt, just in case. For a better understanding.
        DPVRF - the distance of a direct shot at a growth figure.
        DEP - effective damage range.
      2. Droid
        Droid 21 February 2016 17: 01
        +2
        Thomson’s PP of the war years (with a .45 ASR cartridge) - DPRVF 190 m, DEP 280 m. PPSh DPRF 260 m, DEP 30 m. Which is more effective at long distances?


        Nonsense is complete. To begin with, there are simply no DEPs. There is a DES which has a very specific definition regulated by GOST, but it can be concluded that a weapon with more DPV has a greater DES and this is not Thompson.
        DPV for thoracic and not growth, if I correctly deciphered DPVRf, Thompson has about 160 m, and for PPSh - about 220 m, i.e. a PPSh fighter can simply set sight 2 and forget before melee in the NP where you can set sight 1. Thompson’s scope is graduated with a pitch of 25 yards for a reason, it can argue with a mortar along its trajectory, DPV 300 yards in height (275 m), and at PPSh 300 m DPV in the waist. I'm not talking about the flight time of a bullet which varies by 200 times by 1,5 meters - 0,54 with PPSh against 0,81 with Thompson.
    2. gross kaput
      gross kaput 21 February 2016 12: 38
      +1
      Quote: Sasha75
      here PPSh under this cartridge drove the Germans to the invention of an intermediate cartridge.

      The first development of an intermediate cartridge and weapons for it in Germany began in the 30s, in 1935 an automatic Volmer M35 carbine appeared chambered for 7,75X40, in 1938 the Polte firm finalized the 7,92X33 "short-cartridge" and a contract was signed with "Hanel" for the development of an automatic carbine for it, since 1940, Walter was included in the work - as a result, what happened became known as MP-43 / StG44 laughing So PPSh here absolutely did not influence from any side.
    3. 4thParasinok
      4thParasinok April 1 2016 15: 40
      0
      Quote: Sasha75
      In 1939, the Voevodin pistol was tested and in 1941 it was supposed to be adopted, so that the TT. was just a passing gun for us

      I will add. The competition for a new pistol was announced back in 1936, after a bunch of shortcomings of the TT were revealed, the elimination of which led to a radical alteration of production.
  • Sasha75
    Sasha75 21 February 2016 11: 43
    0
    Thomson’s PP of the war years (with a .45 ASR cartridge) - DPRVF 190 m, DEP 280 m. PPSh DPRF 260 m, DEP 30 m. Which is more effective at long distances?


    Do you believe that the main thing is that 290 meters per second and 490 meters per second are one and the same main faith, and the logic is, why didn’t the believer read this diagnosis?
    1. AK64
      AK64 21 February 2016 12: 08
      -2
      Do you believe that the main thing is that 290 meters per second and 490 meters per second are one and the same main faith, and the logic is, why didn’t the believer read this diagnosis?

      And you, than to grind your teeth, would look at the diagrams of the fall of the velocity of the bullet.
      And the effect of getting the bullet into the body.

      So hitting a slow 0.45 bullet causes much worse consequences for the body than a "fast" 7.62

      But why do you need this, right?

      On the whole, the 7.62x25 cartridge is really, not just bad, but wrecking just: this is the most unreasonable thing you could think of.
      1. carbine
        carbine 21 February 2016 12: 31
        -3
        Quote: AK64
        On the whole, the 7.62x25 cartridge is really, not just bad, but wrecking just: this is the most unreasonable thing you could think of.

        I would call him "smart". Cool erazats like Mauser-Bolo had to shoot something. It was for such smart users that they bought a line for the production of 7,65x25 mm Mauser cartridges. Well, I would have bought it. Count how many Mauser tables are in the Red Army, what is their residual shot, make as many cartridges and close the topic. And then make a cartridge 9x25 mm Mauser Export. Fortunately, the sleeves are the same. And under the Mauser Export cartridge, remake the Colt-Browning М1911A1 / .38, since the caliber will already be the same.
        If you want, don’t redo anything at all, shorten the sleeve slightly and release the .38 Super cartridge along with the Colt-Browning М1911A1 / .38.
        And already on the basis of the new 9-mm cartridge produced (in fact, in the USSR such cartridges were considered 8,8-mm), make not only a gun, but also a submachine gun.
        But no. the most unfortunate solution of all possible was chosen. What should I do. There were a lot of "genius gunsmiths" in the USSR. There are a million marshal generals. And a real army pistol on a modern Para cartridge for the army was made only in the Russian Federation. Such are the things.
      2. Alexey Lobanov
        Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 13: 13
        +1
        Quote: AK64
        On the whole, the 7.62x25 cartridge is really, not just bad, but wrecking just: this is the most unreasonable thing you could think of.

        In conditions of mass production of a pistol, submachine gun and rifles of the same caliber, this is the most reasonable thing that could have been invented.
        1. AK64
          AK64 21 February 2016 13: 33
          -1
          In conditions of mass production of a pistol, submachine gun and rifles of the same caliber, this is the most reasonable thing that could have been invented.


          / very surprised /

          WHAT FOR? The cartridges are still different, so why?

          No need to look for excuses for absurdities. In reality, the caliber has already been explained: first, for some reason, they purchased from the Germans a production line for the 7.63x25 Mauser cartridges. What for? To what? How many of those Mausers were in the USSR at that time, and WHO needed them?
          WHY buy a whole line?

          So, having bought this line - then already under it, under the line, they began to create weapons.

          Such is the game.
          1. Alexey Lobanov
            Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 14: 07
            0
            Quote: AK64
            / very surprised /

            WHAT FOR? The cartridges are still different, so why?

            You will be even more surprised if you find out that the pitch of the rifling and their number are the same for the three-ruler, SVT, TT, PPSh and PPS. Machine tools, mass production, etc. Everything is unified. And the cartridges, yes, are naturally different.
            1. AK64
              AK64 21 February 2016 17: 01
              0
              You will be even more surprised if you find out that the pitch of the rifling and their number are the same for the three-ruler, SVT, TT, PPSh and PPS. Machine tools, mass production, etc. Everything is unified. And the cartridges, yes, are naturally different.

              Using the same equipment for rifle barrels and a short barrel is not economically feasible.

              By the beginning of WWII in the USSR, the trunks were cut by dornning. "Thus" there could only be a mandrel. Making different mandrels for rifles and a short barrel is such a trifle ... (after the war we switched to 9mm, by the way)

              The same cutting step for a short barrel and rifles is not good: and rifles could be made more gentle cutting, which would reduce friction, with all that it implies.

              Well, in general ... that’s all nonsense.

              You rest because you do not understand how kono happened. But in fact, they first bought the line - and then they began to sculpt weapons under the line.
              Well, after the war this weapon ... was given to the Chinese, and to the Koreans.

              Are you not surprised that after the war weapons under such a wonderful cartridge were not created at all?

              However, I see you arguing for the sake of argument. It’s not interesting for me, so I, with your permission, will ignore you
              1. Alexey Lobanov
                Alexey Lobanov 22 February 2016 14: 20
                0
                Quote: AK64
                Using the same equipment for rifle barrels and a short barrel is not economically feasible.

                For me, it’s very advisable. Economically.

                Quote: AK64
                By the beginning of WWII in the USSR, the trunks were cut by dornning. "Thus" there could only be a mandrel. Making different mandrels for rifles and a short barrel is such a trifle ... (after the war we switched to 9mm, by the way)

                This is not about that, just imagine a long blank in which rifles are made, then they are cut to the length of one PPSh-shny barrel and two or three TT-shnyhs. And only then the PPSh barrel and TT trunks are grinded out of these discs. Is it not more efficient and faster than drilling and cutting them individually?
                1. The comment was deleted.
                2. carbine
                  carbine 22 February 2016 14: 41
                  0
                  Quote: Alexey Lobanov
                  Imagine a long disc in which rifling is made, then sawed to the length of one PPSh-shny barrel and two or three TT-shnyh. And only then the PPSh barrel and TT trunks are grinded out of these discs. Is it not more efficient and faster than drilling and cutting them individually?

                  And what prevented the "long blank" for TT and PPSh from making a 9 mm caliber? It would be all the same to production. And the soldiers are far from all the same.
                  In addition, the TT is not very suitable for your technology, see its trunk in the article. Only if separately separate from PPSh. But for PPSh, this technology could also be used separately.
                3. AK64
                  AK64 22 February 2016 21: 21
                  0
                  For me, it’s very advisable. Economically.

                  This is not about that, just imagine a long blank in which rifles are made, then they are cut to the length of one PPSh-shny barrel and two or three TT-shnyhs. And only then the PPSh barrel and TT trunks are grinded out of these discs. Is it not more efficient and faster than drilling and cutting them individually?

                  You're an engineer?

                  Making a long rifle barrel is quite difficult. Making a 60cm barrel is much more difficult than 10 trunks of 10cm each.
                  Just understand that long thin drilling, and then deployment, scraping, grinding - these are very complex operations. And therefore, making one long, and cutting it into short ones is a terrible absurdity.

                  And to use the equipment making rifle trunks for the short barrel is also absurd, because it was already loaded already beyond all limits.

                  Take a cut with a mandrel: drag 15 cm or 60 cm - don't you really feel the difference? Even in heating there will be a difference.

                  For me it is quite obvious.

                  Korotkostrel do at home, literally. In small workshops, on Chinese shitty equipment. Nobody even tries to make an acceptable rifle in the garage, so this is a difficult task.

                  Another thing is that on a short barrel (including PP), it would be possible to launch a rifle marriage. But I have some doubts ....
                  And besides, even a rifle defect for a short barrel (7.62 to 8.8) can be bored (removing 0.6 mm is much easier than drilling from scratch), and even stretching (mandrel, 3-4 runs with increasing diameters, with annealing.)

                  From about the 43rd, the Germans generally did cold forging trunks for PP. (in peacetime - barbarism.) For rifles / machine guns, they did not do this ...
              2. 4thParasinok
                4thParasinok April 1 2016 15: 54
                0
                Quote: AK64
                By the beginning of WWII in the USSR, trunks were cut by mandrel cutting.

                invented according to various sources in 1939-1942 ... And before that they were cut. And one barrel took a lot of time. And considering that a "universal" step was chosen, which allows to shoot both heavy and light 7mm bullets quite accurately in a huge range of speeds. And given that few pistols were produced, it was enough to use the rejection of rifle barrels for their production.

                For your information, now in the USA rifle barrels are often used to make pistol barrels at 7,65 × 17.
            2. The comment was deleted.
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. carbine
            carbine 21 February 2016 15: 37
            -2
            Quote: AK64
            first, for some reason, they purchased from the Germans a production line for 7.63x25 Mauser cartridges

            A line, if it’s inexpensive, it’s rather good than bad. Let me remind you, the line was under the production of a flangeless cartridge. Those. precise production. In the USSR, with such equipment then it was not very. So the line is rather +. But the rest ...
            And than. Where to go? Without the Germans, the USSR could not be at all. For example, the main Soviet cannon artillery of the Second World War (the "legendary division" ZIS-3, anti-tank magpie, all non-automatic anti-aircraft artillery) came from there. Everything, except for the ZIS-3, was produced at the "German" plant No. 8 in Podlipki near Moscow. Also invested, bought equipment. But without this, there would be nothing to beat planes above 6700 m. Generally. And the tanks so often beat with "divisions", and not with forty-fives. In this case, the ZIS-3 mod. 1942, this is a Soviet rehash of the German 7,5 cm PaK 97/38 arr. 1941 But it was no longer made by the Germans, just in line with their ideas.
            1. AK64
              AK64 21 February 2016 17: 09
              -1
              A line, if it’s inexpensive, it’s rather good than bad. Let me remind you, the line was under the production of a flangeless cartridge. Those. precise production. In the USSR, with such equipment then it was not very. So the line is rather +. But the rest ...

              the line is certainly good - the line without the concept is bad.
              At that time, only Nagan was produced in the USSR - so what kind of pistol did you buy a line for? This cartridge was only for Mauser - because Mausers were not produced. Why buy a line for a gun that is not produced in the country?

              That is, the line is good. Lack of concept is bad.


              And than. Where to go? Without the Germans, the USSR could not be at all. For example, the main Soviet cannon artillery of the Second World War (the "legendary division" ZIS-3,
              ........
              But it was no longer made by the Germans, just in line with their ideas.


              Excuse me, but you don’t understand artillery.
              So do not.
              I will say simply: what is written about guns is very untrue. Very much.
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. The comment was deleted.
              3. carbine
                carbine 21 February 2016 18: 59
                -1
                Quote: AK64
                Excuse me, but you don’t understand artillery.
                So do not.
                I will say simply: what is written about guns is very untrue. Very much.

                What confuses you in my words? As for the writing, I am ready to argue with you. Specifically, what are the issues?
                1. AK64
                  AK64 21 February 2016 19: 32
                  -1
                  What confuses you in my words? As for the writing, I am ready to argue with you. Specifically, what are the issues?


                  There’s nothing to argue about: it’s wrong with you, that's all.

                  For example, ZIS-3 has not the slightest relation to the German PAK (of course).
                  ZIS-3 is corny SPM (division mod 1939) put on the carriage ZIS-2.
                  Well, since the USV barrel fit into the ZIS-2 carriage in almost no way, I had to crank the barrel and screw the muzzle brake.

                  It turned out ... a poor product. Frankly unimportant: for example, the Germans did not use Zosu. (They used SPM, 7,62 cm FK297 (r). And even F-22 they used.) SPM, in turn, is a development along the straight line F-22.

                  And according to its intended purpose: the ZIS-3 division, and the basis of divisional artillery, and the German PAK is an anti-tank gun, the Germans did not need "low-power" divisional guns.
                  1. carbine
                    carbine 21 February 2016 21: 01
                    -1
                    Quote: AK64
                    For example, ZIS-3 has not the slightest relation to the German PAK (of course).
                    ZIS-3 is corny SPM (division mod 1939) put on the carriage ZIS-2.
                    Well, since the USV barrel fit into the ZIS-2 carriage in almost no way, I had to crank the barrel and screw the muzzle brake.

                    Well, I'll start from the beginning. Russian 76 mm divpushka arr. 1900, she is the daughter of the French 75 mm divpushki arr. 1897. Well, it just so happened that everywhere there were some daughters, and in some places granddaughters. Speaking of granddaughters. Russian 76 mm divpushka arr. 1902, she is already like a granddaughter of a French cannon. And the Soviet 76-mm divpushka arr. 1902 / 30g, she’s already a great-granddaughter.
                    But the divpushka arr 1936. (many innovations), she is already the seventh water on jelly. And about the same place, divpushka arr. 1939 (the barrel was shortened, the carriage was simplified, other anti-roll bars, etc.).
                    What is Pak 97/38? This is the same French Canon de 75 mle 1897, only on a Pak 38 anti-tank gun carriage and with a muzzle brake (so that the carriage does not fall apart from recoil). I don't know who the author and developer of the "great idea" is, but the muzzle is confusing. It is clearly not German, so there are variations. You can think of anyone, from the French to the Poles and the Czechs. There is evidence that this anti-tank gun in November 1941. was presented to the Wehrmacht. After that, she, apparently, was tested, and its serial production began in 1942. Then she appeared quite widely among the troops.
                    As for the ZIS-3, until the very end of 1941. it did not exist even in the idea. All forces were devoted to increasing the output of SPM and ZIS-2. But with ZIS-2 this did not work, because it could not work out in principle (it was so ingeniously conceived). And with SPM it turned out, but not in the volumes that were required from the plant. And only closer to the end of 1941, work began on the ZIS-3, because ZIS-2 was discontinued, and it was extremely difficult to increase the SPM. Moreover, Stalin personally asked Grabin and Elian in August-September to come up with something like that. It was requested, which is extremely interesting. And at the end of autumn he again reminded them of his request.
                    I do not know for sure if the Grabin Pak 37/38, which was from November 1941. passed military tests. And if he had heard of her. But the coincidences are amazing. First of all, Grabin also took the gun carriage from the anti-tank 57-mm ZIS-2. Further, he took the trunk pipe from the battalion arr. 1902 / 30g, breech, bolt, as well as IVDS recoil devices. And, most importantly, he crowned the barrel with a muzzle brake, which was generally a rarity in the Red Army, and was never serially used for divan guns. Moreover, the muzzle was not a Soviet "pepper shaker", but quite a German muzzle brake.
                    Considering that the Soviet gun was made later than the German one and coincided with it "ideologically", like 2 drops of water, it can be assumed that Grabin with Pak 97/38 was somehow familiar. Actually, in the ZIS-3 there is no Grabin's sole merit, structurally a gun is like a cannon. As we can see from Pak 37/38, it is quite common, with very mediocre performance characteristics. But the joint merit of Yelyan, Grabin and the technologists of the plant # 92 is enormous. It was through joint efforts that they turned the ZIS-3 into a conveyor assembly product. That is, to put it simply, they were crushed by a number. As in almost all other areas of weapons. And it is right. Any means were good then.
                    1. AK64
                      AK64 21 February 2016 21: 49
                      -1
                      Sorry, but these are legends and myths.

                      You have something like this: they have a cannon and we have a cannon - and ours appeared later - that means they have a cannon. And what can we say in a French woman's rate of fire, as it were, is not twice as high as in arr. 1902 (in general, the shutter was very fast, even faster than Krupp's Klinov) - so it doesn't matter to you: it's still a "daughter".

                      Overlapping on another carriage was quite common and "mastered": look at "triplex" and "duplex".
                      (I’m silent about the 152mm howitzer on the M-30 carriage.)
                      1. carbine
                        carbine 21 February 2016 22: 07
                        -1
                        Quote: AK64
                        Sorry, but these are legends and myths.

                        I wrote that this is an assumption. Based on the absolute similarity of the design and the fact that the German product was ready before and theoretically could well get to Grabin during the development of ZIS-3. But the reverse could not be.
                        Quote: AK64
                        in a Frenchwoman, the rate of fire is, as it were, not twice as high as in the arr. 1902

                        Initially, everywhere there was a piston shutter and the same rate of fire. The Frenchwoman received an eccentric shutter during the modernization of either 33, or 38 years. Soviet three-inch in 1936. also got a wedge bolt.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Overlapping on another carriage was quite common and "mastered": look at "triplex" and "duplex".
                        (I’m silent about the 152mm howitzer on the M-30 carriage.)

                        I do not remember such serial products. Except that the ZIS-3 on the ZIS-2 carriage.
                      2. AK64
                        AK64 21 February 2016 22: 47
                        -1
                        Initially, everywhere there was a piston shutter and the same rate of fire. The Frenchwoman received an eccentric shutter during the modernization of either 33, or 38 years.

                        Yes, what are you saying!
                        The whole charm of the 75-heel was precisely the rate of fire almost phenomenal for that time. (Only with semiautomatic devices, these 20 rounds per min began to be issued)

                        Good, good, here's a photo for you. What is the PMV no doubt? Is the shutter visible?



                        Examples of overlapping someone else's carriage:
                        D-1 (shortened barrel M-10 on a gun carriage M-30)

                        A-19 is a barrel of a 122mm gun arr 1931 on a ML-20 carriage.

                        Br-2, Br-5, this is a cannon and mortar on a B-4 howitzer carriage

                        PS: I met in the English literature the opinion that Pak 40 (75mm) was made under the strong influence of F-22.
                        I won't give a tooth, as they say, but this opinion was expressed "not with us," so there were probably reasons.
                        The fact that the Germans limited the F-22 to a "heavy" anti-tank and highly respected in this capacity, as it were, is well known
                      3. AK64
                        AK64 21 February 2016 23: 15
                        0
                        And where is the photo ???

                        Okay, I’ll insert it again
                      4. The comment was deleted.
                      5. carbine
                        carbine 21 February 2016 23: 48
                        -1
                        Quote: AK64
                        Good, good, here's a photo for you. What is the PMV no doubt? Is the shutter visible?

                        The shutter is visible, similar to an eccentric.
                        There are doubts about the time of filming. Therefore, it is not clear that this is Canon de 75 mle 1897, Canon de 75 Mle 1897/33 or Canon de 75 modèle 1897 modifié 1938-1940.
                        As for the time the shutter was adopted, I won’t argue, because I have no confidence in this matter. And without confidence, I usually do not argue.
                        Quote: AK64
                        D-1 (shortened barrel M-10 on a gun carriage M-30)

                        This was after the ZIS-3.
                        Quote: AK64
                        A-19 is a barrel of a 122mm gun arr 1931 on a ML-20 carriage.

                        Here I agree with you, overlooked. And the gun is not massive. And beyond the division artillery, I usually do not look.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Br-2, Br-5, this is a cannon and mortar on a B-4 howitzer carriage

                        Well, I’m not at all interested in such guns. Not my topic.
                        Quote: AK64
                        I met in the English literature the opinion that Pak 40 (75mm) was made under the strong influence of F-22.

                        How can this be, where did the Germans come from in 1940. take it? Yes, and why? I would not say that the F-22 was something very good. Pak 36 (r) was quite different from her in many ways.
                        As for the comparison of Pak 40 and Pak 36 (r), the first was clearly better. Although it had a little worse (96-99% depending on the standard introductory) armor penetration.
                        Quote: AK64
                        The fact that the Germans limited the F-22 to a "heavy" anti-tank and highly respected in this capacity, as it were, is well known

                        That's it, that heavy. 20% heavier and noticeably longer.
                      6. AK64
                        AK64 22 February 2016 10: 35
                        0
                        There are doubts about the time of filming.

                        Well then, there is only one way out: already you have to find a photo of a French woman with a piston. (But since they are not ...)

                        I didn’t look for this photo at all: there is a wonderful German propaganda postcard from the times of WWI, where the French and German 75mm are nearby, a view from the treasury.
                        I don’t know what exactly the Germans promoted - but the gates are clearly visible.

                        Here I agree with you, overlooked. And the gun is not massive. And beyond the division artillery, I usually do not look.

                        Nevertheless, as we see, Grabin did not need the Germans to seek the idea of ​​laying a barrel on an existing carriage.

                        How can this be, where did the Germans come from in 1940. take it? Yes, and why?

                        In this case, I "bought for what". But one must be wary of German development dates: in their names they often not the ones date

                        Pak 36 (r) was quite different from her in many ways.

                        Perhaps we are talking about the idea of ​​76mm PTP

                        As for the comparison of Pak 40 and Pak 36 (r), the first was clearly better.

                        Hehe ... The universal is not good. But the F-22 hit the tanks existing before 1943 no worse than the "88" (in 1943, the armor-piercing of the latter exceeded the real need), and the price and weight were much lower.
                        There weren't so many "88s" in the divisions to put them against tanks. And they cost well. And the alteration of the F-22 was minimal (the sector was cut off and the steering wheels were transferred to one side).
                        In 1941, the Germans had 2 (!!) Cancer-38s per division, so ... The Pak-97/38 you mentioned was also forced.
                        However, the existence of the latter as it were suggests that the Germans had a lot to get the idea of ​​the 75mm anti-tank gun from, and the F-22 was unnecessary for this.


                        That's it, that heavy. 20% heavier and noticeably longer.

                        This is when you have Pak-40 in quantities. And when you have Pak-38 only two each to the division (real summer of 1941), then there’s nothing to compare with.
                      7. carbine
                        carbine 22 February 2016 13: 07
                        0
                        Quote: AK64
                        Nevertheless, as we see, Grabin did not need the Germans to seek the idea of ​​laying a barrel on an existing carriage.

                        Is that some kind of idea there? The novelty of the idea was completely different; for the first time in the history of the USSR, a field gun received a DT. This has never happened before. At the same time, in a strange way, this and everything else coincided with the German PaK 97/38.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Perhaps we are talking about the idea of ​​76mm PTP

                        Well, they could not in 1938. make PaK 38, and then freeze, picking a finger in his nose. Moreover, in 1939 a great war began. Obviously, they did something to replace PaK 38. Even if it was a reserve.
                        As for the choice of caliber, the caliber 75-76 mm was the standard next caliber after the European 47-50 mm. The only one who tried to make it non-standard was the USSR with a caliber of 57 mm, but in 1941. nothing came of it.
                        Quote: AK64
                        But the F-22 hit tanks existing before 1943 no worse than the "88"

                        Do not fantasize. Even noticeably worse than 3-K / 51-K. And much worse ZIS-2. But the Germans did not need more. The T-34 armor was 40-45 mm all the way.
                        Quote: AK64
                        (1943 the last armor piercing of the latter exceeded real need)

                        There is no such term. It was invented by sofa marshals to justify failure with the ZIS-2 arr. 1941 In fact, the higher the armor penetration, the more you can hit a target from great distances. It is advisable to do this from a safe distance.
                        Quote: AK64
                        The Pak-97/38 you mentioned is also forced.
                        However, the existence of the latter as it were suggests that the Germans had a lot to get the idea of ​​the 75mm anti-tank gun from, and the F-22 was unnecessary for this.

                        PaK 40 went into production even a little earlier than PaK 97/38. In November 1941 PaK 97/38 entered military trials, and PaK 40 went into production in February 1942. Would not have time to develop. In addition, PaK 40 should have been tested before production.
                        Quote: AK64
                        This is when you have Pak-40 in quantities.

                        I am not saying that the Germans did not need Pak 36 (r). In the end, they and Pak 39 (r) did not disdain. But if you choose between Pak 36 (r) and Pak 40, then I would choose Pak 40. Despite the fact that the armor penetration of the Pak 36 (r) was slightly better.
                      8. AK64
                        AK64 22 February 2016 21: 09
                        0
                        OK, my answer is gone, and I am too lazy to repeat.

                        Let it be unanswered
                    2. 4thParasinok
                      4thParasinok April 1 2016 16: 21
                      0
                      Quote: AK64
                      And the alteration of the F-22 was minimal (the sector was cut off and the steering wheels were moved to one side).

                      2 for knowledge of the material. The Germans also drilled the "chamber" as they used their shells with a large volume of gunpowder, and, accordingly, a larger diameter.
          4. carbine
            carbine 21 February 2016 22: 38
            -1
            As for the products of plant number 8 in Podlipki.
            Soviet 76-mm anti-aircraft gun 3-K, this is a cut-to-length German 88-mm anti-aircraft gun with a "hole" of a smaller diameter (76,2 mm). And a chamber of the original form. The Germans were skittish, to put it simply. But everything is being done for the best. First, in 1939. this fact was discovered in the USSR and the "hole" was drilled up to 85 mm, having previously lengthened the workpiece, changed the chamber and placed a diesel fuel on the barrel. This allowed the USSR to get, as it were, a new gun with more or less acceptable performance characteristics. And then the Germans, in the course of the war, drilled out both 85-mm and 76-mm guns for their own cartridges. At the same time, diesel fuel was installed on the former 76-mm.
            With a 45 mm cannon, the story is funnier. The USSR bought a sample and a license from the Germans for the production of a 37 mm anti-tank gun. And she stood in service under the Intex - tank B-3 (5-K) and PTP 1-K arr. 1930.
            But in the USSR they wanted to add ammunition supplies to the Hotchkiss 47-mm naval guns. All the same Germans were instructed to do this. In fact, the 45-mm cannon 19-K model 1932 is a masterpiece. Yes, she had flaws. But in terms of ballistics, it was a "bomb" for its time. And her gun carriage is not from a German anti-tank gun (as they say in tyrnet), but a completely new one, only an old shield. The difference in recoil impulses is more than 2 times. And the weight is more than 1/4. The carriage from the 37-mm cannon would have crumbled to smithereens.
            Of course, for 1941. the forty-five was already rather weak. But in 1932. it was something. Only 47 mm Belgian anti-tank gun FRC Mod.31 could argue with her. 1931 The rest were just resting. The Germans did this part of their task in good faith. It is not clear why the semiautomatic was not completed.
            1. AK64
              AK64 21 February 2016 23: 09
              +1
              And about the anti-aircraft guns, "it was not so."

              Boffors (well, actually, of course, the Germans) produced a 75mm anti-aircraft gun. It was she who became the prototype of the Soviet 76mm anti-aircraft guns arr of 1931.
              88mm appeared in numbers a little later (don't be fooled by the number "18", it's a trick.).
              How much "88" influenced the Soviet arr. 38 and 52-K I do not understand: at the time of creation, ours seemed to be unable to get a sample, but the similarity of the gun carriage (in 76mm model 38 and in 52-K it is the same) makes one think.
              But the one that arr. 31 is Boffors (i.e.Rheinmetal)
            2. carbine
              carbine 22 February 2016 00: 22
              -2
              Quote: AK64
              It was she who became the prototype of the Soviet 76mm anti-aircraft guns arr of 1931.

              No, the 88-mm anti-aircraft gun was the prototype. 1928 (L56). But it was not Flak 18, which appeared in 1932, this is its prototype. In addition, in 1930. Germans generally abandoned the 75 mm anti-aircraft caliber.
              Quote: AK64
              but the similarity of the gun carriage (at 76mm arr 38 and at 52-K it is the same) suggests.

              So 52-K, this is 51-K, only the barrel stock is a little more authentic (but of the same thickness), the other chamber, apparently the shutter, is DT. The carriage is exactly the same.
              Quote: AK64
              How much "88" influenced the Soviet arr. 38 and 52-K I don't understand:

              Not at all. These anti-aircraft guns have a common ancestor, 88-mm anti-aircraft gun arr. 1928 And Flak 18 is not far from her.
              Quote: AK64
              But the one that arr. 31 is Boffors (i.e.Rheinmetal)

              No. In this case, the Germans would not have been able to drag them into 88 mm caliber. Bofors and Krupp, this is not Tagunov and Grabin in those days. They knew how to count the barrel and such blunders as Tagunov with 3-K and Grabin with F-22 could not be expected from them.
            3. AK64
              AK64 22 February 2016 10: 57
              +1
              Here is a photo of a 75 mm anti-aircraft gun.

              http://forum.axishistory.com/download/file.php?id=193363

              (I could not install, sorry.)

              In addition, there is a military museum in Santa Cruz de Tenerife: there are either one or two of them ("88" is also there). All of this is said to be German, not Swedish (Boffors). I saw it myself, so for sure. (By the way, their carriages are different from "88". And in the photo the carriage is like "88")

              Well, that is, it is clear that "God forbid that I don't like it," but nevertheless there were such guns.

              About the "common ancestor", the fact is that the German origin is from 1931. But her carriage is completely different, two-wheeled, like the German prototype. And the 1938 and 51-K carriages are the same, 4-wheeled, like the "88" (and the one in the picture)
            4. carbine
              carbine 22 February 2016 12: 38
              -1
              Quote: AK64
              About the "common ancestor", the fact is that the German origin is from 1931. But her carriage is completely different, two-wheeled, like the German prototype. And the 1938 and 51-K carriages are the same, 4-wheeled, like the "88" (and the one in the picture)

              Yes, where does the gun carriage? I give you an argument that clearly says that the 3-K was redone from an 88-mm gun. The barrel of the former normal 75-mm gun, converted to a caliber of 76,2 mm, cannot then be bored to 85 mm (in the USSR) and 88 mm (in Germany). This is not for you the USSR, where Grabin could not count the F-22 barrel, but Tagunov when accepting the 3-K barrel. Grabin later learned, and the ZIS-3 barrel was of normal thickness. But Tagunov, unknown, was shot.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • 4thParasinok
    4thParasinok April 1 2016 16: 10
    0
    Quote: AK64
    At that time, only Nagan was produced in the USSR - so what kind of pistol did you buy a line for? This cartridge was only for Mauser - because Mausers were not produced. Why buy a line for a gun that is not produced in the country?

    Learn history, a line was purchased for "small-scale" production of cartridges. After the experiments on the creation of light self-loading carbines and PP under the Naganov cartridge came to a dead end (too weak cartridge, the presence of a rim) and the decision to switch to another cartridge. In this caliber, the Mauser turned out to be the best for the PP, and for the 7,65x22 Parabellum pistol. But under the first in the country there were both weapons and a ready line. It was decided to Mass-produce the cartridge and COPY the line with minor changes to the cartridge itself, in order to avoid royalties and make the equipment ourselves, and not pay currency for it.
  • gross kaput
    gross kaput 21 February 2016 20: 41
    +4
    Quote: AK64
    for the first time, the Germans bought a production line for the 7.63x25 Mauser cartridges from the Germans.

    Will you show the documents for this mythical line? This line, almost secretly dismantled in the workshops of DVM, periodically pops up in articles of the level of the magazine "maxim" only now more serious researchers somehow "keep silent" about it, though not forgetting to tell that until 1929 Mauser Bolos were supplied to the USSR. TOGETHER with cartridges - probably because the Bolsheviks could not master the equipment? Further, the 7,62X25 cartridge is not a complete copy of the 7,63 Mauser, even if you do not touch the primer, it is different in geometry but not fatal and the cartridges are interchangeable - perhaps this is the Russian air that influenced the equipment so much? And if you read serious sources, then suddenly it turns out that by 1929 the Podolsk plant mastered the production of four pistol cartridges 6,35 and 7,65 Browning 9X23 Stayer and 7,63 Mauser, all these ammunition, although they were interchangeable with their relatives, were still different - remember " the meeting place cannot be changed "and the bayard with a non-native patron. And in 1929 he was finally chosen as a pistol cartridge 7,62X25, although in fact the decision had already been made in 1928. In general, everything is as usual with you - I heard a ringing ...
  • carbine
    carbine 21 February 2016 13: 35
    -3
    Quote: Alexey Lobanov
    In conditions of mass production of a pistol, submachine gun and rifles of the same caliber, this is the most reasonable thing that could have been invented.

    A gun single caliberand 76,2 mm is the best you could think of in artillery? Imagine what would happen in this case? And why doesn’t it cause rejection in the rifleman? This is obvious absurdity. How can one even argue on this topic?
    1. Alexey Lobanov
      Alexey Lobanov 21 February 2016 14: 09
      0
      see answer to friend above ...
      1. carbine
        carbine 21 February 2016 14: 26
        0
        Quote: Alexey Lobanov
        that the pitch of the rifling and their number are the same for the three-ruler, SVT, TT, PPSh and PPS. Machine tools, mass production, etc. Everything is unified.

        It is not true. Those. just your speculation and delusion.
        Cutters are made for a certain number of passes. They don't care what diameter they are.
        Machine tools also do not care what the outer diameter of the trunks.
        Therefore, you are just fantasizing. Yes, and they did them even if at the same factory, then all the same in different workshops. All in one heap is never done.
        1. AK64
          AK64 21 February 2016 17: 14
          -2
          It is not true. Those. just your speculation and delusion.
          Cutters are made for a certain number of passes. They don't care what diameter they are.
          Machine tools also do not care what the outer diameter of the trunks.
          Therefore, you are just fantasizing. Yes, and they did them even if at the same factory, then all the same in different workshops. All in one heap is never done.


          Speculation and misconception (the result of an uncritical visit to the forums) - but Nanag began to be produced at the Tula plant, and copiers could use the same copiers for trimming as they used for trilines.

          That is, all the savings - to pile a new copier (which is needed for a short barrel and a short one)



          Well, when they started to rebook, then in general ... There is not the slightest sense to limit the range of weapons to the range of mandrels.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  • carbine
    carbine 21 February 2016 12: 14
    -2
    Quote: Sasha75
    Most importantly, believe that 290 meters per second and 490 meters per second are one and the same

    You still compare the grams of gunpowder. There are strict criteria for ballistics. And the cries about 250 m / s (not 290) in Thompson's wartime and 500 m / s (not 490) in PPSh are not appropriate here.
    Quote: Sasha75
    the believer is a diagnosis.

    You see how you briefly wrote everything about yourself. Well done.
  • Sasha75
    Sasha75 21 February 2016 12: 54
    0
    The faith of people like you, the main thing that you would do without it, because then the mind doesn’t need to rest, and the 5,45X39 cartridges are also not good for anything, and what you were told and you believe at least look at the aiming range of 45 which is 100 meters and you're there to me if you want to prove, learn the part of the child.
    1. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 16: 28
      -2
      Quote: Sasha75
      and 5,45X39 cartridges are also not where no good

      Unimportant. Not powerful enough. It was adopted for service specially weakened for the poorly balanced AK-74. And now, even if we replace the "ingenious mechanism" with a normally balanced one, the accuracy will improve, but the DEP will not. It remains only to pull the trunk lengthwise. But even if it reaches the level of the RPK-74, then the maximum will be possible to "reach" the removed from service М16А1. But such a barrel for a machine gun is nonsense. Therefore, even with a balanced mechanism and an elongated barrel, a machine gun on a 5,45x39 mm cartridge will be inferior to machine guns on a small NATO.
      Quote: Sasha75
      at least see the aiming range at 45 which is 100 meters

      Especially for people like you wrote that the direct range of the growth figure of the pre-war Thompson is 190 m. And the post-war 205 m. Write how much using the rear sight?
      Range of effective destruction of pre-war Thompson 280 m, post-war 400 m.
      In PPSh, the RPFRF of 260 m, DEP of 35 m (less, but rounded up).
      At MP40, if interested, the DPRF is 235 m, and the DEP is 60 m.
      The best European 2MV submarine of the Hungarian Danuvius 43M (by the way, on a 9x25 mm Mauser Export cartridge) has a DPRF of 255 m and a DEP of 130 m.
      Quote: Sasha75
      learn the mat part of the child.

      The steepness of couch marshals never ceases to amaze. Like their amateurism.
      1. Droid
        Droid 21 February 2016 17: 48
        -1
        But even if it reaches the level of the RPK-74, then the maximum will be possible to "reach" the removed from service М16А1. But such a barrel for a machine gun is nonsense. Therefore, even with a balanced mechanism and an elongated barrel, a machine gun on a 5,45x39 mm cartridge will be inferior to machine guns on a small NATO.

        The shooting efficiency of the AK74 is higher than that of the M16A2, enough already to tell tales.
        1. carbine
          carbine 21 February 2016 18: 05
          0
          Quote: Droid
          The shooting efficiency of the AK74 is higher than that of the M16A2, enough already to tell tales.

          Those. right now, having gained full chests of compressed air, you want to tell everyone that a weapon firing the same type of ammunition with DE 1377 J is more effective than a weapon with DE 1738 J? However, you are a great science fiction. And why then did RPK-74 with DE 1567 J? Indulged in?
          In the meantime, "admire" the effectiveness of different types of weapons visually. If it is not clear, then in black, these are wound channels.
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. Droid
        Droid 21 February 2016 17: 49
        -2
        Effective Damage Range

        There is no effective damage range.
        1. carbine
          carbine 21 February 2016 18: 14
          -1
          Quote: Droid
          There is no effective damage range.

          Of course, you know nothing about this. So it does not exist.
    2. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 16: 28
      -2
      Quote: Sasha75
      and 5,45X39 cartridges are also not where no good

      Unimportant. Not powerful enough. It was adopted for service specially weakened for the poorly balanced AK-74. And now, even if we replace the "ingenious mechanism" with a normally balanced one, the accuracy will improve, but the DEP will not. It remains only to pull the trunk lengthwise. But even if it reaches the level of the RPK-74, then the maximum will be possible to "reach" the removed from service М16А1. But such a barrel for a machine gun is nonsense. Therefore, even with a balanced mechanism and an elongated barrel, a machine gun on a 5,45x39 mm cartridge will be inferior to machine guns on a small NATO.
      Quote: Sasha75
      at least see the aiming range at 45 which is 100 meters

      Especially for people like you wrote that the direct range of the growth figure of the pre-war Thompson is 190 m. And the post-war 205 m. Write how much using the rear sight?
      Range of effective destruction of pre-war Thompson 280 m, post-war 400 m.
      In PPSh, the RPFRF of 260 m, DEP of 35 m (less, but rounded up).
      At MP40, if interested, the DPRF is 235 m, and the DEP is 60 m.
      The best European 2MV submarine of the Hungarian Danuvius 43M (by the way, on a 9x25 mm Mauser Export cartridge) has a DPRF of 255 m and a DEP of 130 m.
      Quote: Sasha75
      learn the mat part of the child.

      The steepness of couch marshals never ceases to amaze. Like their amateurism.
  • unknown
    unknown 21 February 2016 13: 31
    -6
    In the 30s, the USSR purchased samples of equipment and weapons for subsequent mass production. Samples are more complex structurally and technologically than a pistol. What, you couldn't get a license for a pistol? Normal, not worsened by the "brilliant" Tokarev. The states would not have been sold, Spain would have sold ("Star" was produced, including under the 7,63 mm Mauser, for China).
    What about SVT? In the same series of films about the Victory weapon, SVT and ABC were compared. Advantage for ABC.

    The story with PM is not clear either. Why was the city fence with a new cartridge. Based on the then accepted concept of using pistols, it was possible and necessary to use a 9mm Browning short.
    1. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 13: 43
      -1
      Quote: ignoto
      The story with PM is not clear either. Why was the city fence with a new cartridge.

      PM is very good. Only in the police not in the army. How he got there (into the army) made his mind incomprehensible. It would also be nice army service a pistol on the PM serial sleeve and TT TT serial pool (it was not manufactured, I didn’t even hear about such tests).
      But the army pistol had to be done anew. They were made in small batches, PMM and SPS are more or less tolerant. The problem was in expensive ammunition. The first truly serial army pistol was a pa on the cartridge of Para.
  • Denimax
    Denimax 21 February 2016 13: 57
    0
    Somewhere I met that the caliber on the Colt was chosen by the military from the condition "stop the horse with one shot."
    1. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 14: 05
      -1
      Quote: Denimax
      the caliber on the Colt was chosen by the military from the condition "stop the horse with one shot"

      May be so. Because he brought down the soldier from such distances from which it is possible to get only by chance. In principle, in a war without horses, this is also a drawback. Weapons should be calculated accurately, no less, but preferably no more. Therefore, the .45 ACP cartridge for 2MB is also not ideal. Although this is the best pistol that was then.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. gross kaput
      gross kaput 21 February 2016 14: 49
      0
      Quote: Denimax
      Somewhere I met that the caliber on the Colt was chosen by the military from the condition "stop the horse with one shot."

      About this horse to Nagan smile ours demanded that the revolver could fill up the horse, and the .45 caliber returned to the US Army after the American-Philippine War, in 1892, the Americans switched to 9mm caliber with the Colt M1892 .38 Long Colt revolver but according to the results of the battles in the Philippines 1896- 1898 concluded that the nines had insufficient stopping power and returned to the .45 caliber in individual weapons.
    4. AK64
      AK64 21 February 2016 17: 22
      -1
      I think I fell it.

      Smith-Wesson 4 lines "Russian" (with black powder!) Felled a bear or a wild boar, and so they did not get up. There was even a genre to go hunting with him.

      They didn’t go hunting with Nagan, somehow there weren’t anyone who wanted to. (And this despite the fact that Nagorno-Karabakh’s Nagorno’s half as much - I’m too lazy to check the digital - is higher than that of Smith-Wesson)
      1. gross kaput
        gross kaput 21 February 2016 20: 17
        0
        Quote: AK64
        fell a bear or a wild boar, and so no longer got up

        Come and shoot yourself? or is it a family tradition from time immemorial? laughing
        1. AK64
          AK64 21 February 2016 21: 02
          -3
          That's a bit of a bum ...

          Do you have any health problems, dear? And somehow it causes concern
          1. gross kaput
            gross kaput 21 February 2016 21: 53
            0
            Quote: AK64
            You have no health problems, dear? And somehow it causes concern

            Clown go wild boar in the frost from the TT to bring down, but completely forgot, the TT gives a misfire - definitely requires SmithWesson laughing
            Do you have something to say on the topic? Although I suspect everything that you learned from the comp. games you already reported laughing
    5. 4thParasinok
      4thParasinok April 1 2016 16: 28
      0
      Quote: Denimax
      Somewhere I met that the caliber on the Colt was chosen by the military from the condition "stop the horse with one shot."

      only shooting was carried out on cows and pigs ...
  • Nazaroff
    Nazaroff 21 February 2016 14: 07
    0
    To the TT-shnik there would be a two-row store, with an approximate capacity of 15-16 rounds, a fuse and a slightly more comfortable handle to make - he would not have a price! Army pistol would be what you need good
    Moreover, it is relevant in this version would be in our time.
    1. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 14: 33
      -5
      Quote: NAZAROFF
      To the TT-shnik there would be a two-row store, with an approximate capacity of 15-16 rounds, a fuse and a slightly more comfortable handle to make - he would not have a price! Army pistol would be what you need

      What about the whole world? Why not grab him and the like with both hands? Fools?
      Quote: NAZAROFF
      Moreover, it is relevant in this version would be in our time.

      DEP he, as it was 0 m, at a rate of 50 m, and remained. Even the USSR with its unfortunate specialists removed it from service.
  • lupus
    lupus 21 February 2016 15: 07
    0
    Reliable pistol-"TT", even today there was (God forbid) a big cataclysm. That enormous number of barrels are kept in storage until now.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. AK64
      AK64 21 February 2016 17: 35
      -1
      Reliable pistol-"TT", even today there was (God forbid) a big cataclysm. That enormous number of barrels are kept in storage until now.


      Have you personally seen this "storage"?
      These bikes go along the Net. And that the teaching staff "in warehouses" - there are also stories about this.
      In fact, the remnants of the faculty after the war were transferred to China and Korea (when there was a mess). I won’t be surprised if TT-shki also went there.

      Even in Vietnam, the faculty fought, but they got there already from China.
      All gendarmes in Iraq had PCA (Americans with trophy posed).

      All the TT with which killers in the 90s massively operated in China
      1. Chisayna
        Chisayna 21 February 2016 17: 52
        0
        Are you related to GRAU? Or served in the service of the RAV, some kind of district?
      2. gross kaput
        gross kaput 21 February 2016 20: 05
        +3
        Quote: AK64
        In fact, the remnants of the faculty after the war were transferred to China and Korea (when there was a mess). I won’t be surprised if TT-shki also went there.

        So it’s in your country in Espania, in the Russian Federation everything is somewhat different - it will probably be a shock for you that in Ukraine and in Ukraine the teaching staff, which were massively given to the Chinese, are no less mass converted into MMGs, and these are the cheapest MMGs even cheaper than the guidance MMG AKs, and PPSh, not only at MMG, are being remade, but also riveting pneumatics out of them, and even for the hunters, they were fenced off quite a little by Papash, in his native caliber for as much as 18000 rubles or as much as 240 American denez laughing none other than from the Chinas claimed back laughing
        Quote: AK64
        All gendarmes in Iraq had PPSh

        What a horror! Is it nothing so that in 1943 the USSR built a factory for the production of PCA in neighboring Iran? laughing
        Quote: AK64
        All the TT with which killers in the 90s massively operated in China

        After this phrase, you can immediately understand how far you are from the topic of discussion, "a huge number of criminal TTs of Chinese production" existed only in the inflamed brains of journalists, do not believe it, but over 10 years some statistics on seized trunks have accumulated from me - most of TT held in our region of Polish production, dragged them according to gray schemes also through proud and independent Lithuania and Latvia, where they were already illegally and massively imported into the Russian Federation across the drawn border, in second place are domestic TTs, both warehouse and dug, China somewhere in the penultimate place before the DPRK - which I saw only one extremely ushatanny and with a sawn-off store from the domestic TT. In general, illegal operations with fire. weapons in China are very fraught - there, even for a samopal, it is quite possible to get a tower, so that what entered the Russian Federation went according to very crooked patterns and in very small quantities. Well, the fact that you now have China on the official market - Duc is not only you it is all over the world.
  • Hecate
    Hecate 21 February 2016 15: 28
    0
    Mauser and Suleika pistols used a cartridge of 7,63, and a TT of 7,62.This is a completely different weapon. The Mauser didn’t walk like a pistol, but like a compact carbine, with magazines of 10 and 20 rounds, with a sighting range of 1000 meters and a wooden kabur-butt, and it was not very pistol in size. could fire automatically, in short bursts, three rounds each. As a pistol, Mauser was too big, but as a carbine he had poor accuracy of fire when firing at long ranges, due to the weak cartridge for a carbine. The TT was a typical self-loading pistol, with a magazine for 10 rounds, for arming officers and those soldiers who did not need a rifle, such as tankers.
    1. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 15: 44
      -4
      Quote: Hecate
      The TT was a typical self-loading pistol, with a magazine for 8 rounds, for arming officers

      Show one more "typical" one? And not in underdeveloped countries, but in normal, developed ones. Where else were weapons in a 3-inch caliber pistol cartridge used in the army as the main army?
      Quote: Hecate
      and those soldiers who did not need a rifle, such as tankers.

      For such servicemen there are service army pistols. In the Red Army, it was a revolver of Nagan. All would have nothing ballistic for him, only it was a revolver, not a gun. But this is a design, not ballistics.
      1. Hecate
        Hecate 21 February 2016 16: 32
        +4
        Have you ever held Nagan in your hands, wise guy ?! Did you try to charge Nagan ?! If you had Nagan in your hands and loaded it at least once, you would understand what a lousy weapon it is and how unsuitable it is for the army. If modern revolvers have a folding drum, which is loaded with a cartridge, and older revolvers have a special, with a skirt, revolving cartridge, but with the same folding drum and extractor, which allows you to immediately remove all fired cartridges, then Nagan has nothing of this kind, it’s primitive 19th century.In Nagan, the drum does not recline, only the side bracket leans back and to remove the spent cartridges, you need to turn the drum and a special mechanical extractor, which is fixed under the Nagan barrel, one at a time, remove the cartridges and also charge cartridges one at a time. it took a lot of time. A Nagan drum for 7 rounds and the cartridges themselves are primitive, with low characteristics.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. carbine
            carbine 21 February 2016 16: 54
            -1
            Quote: Mordvin 3
            But for some reason my grandfather, the foreman-mechanic, had neither TT nor Nagan.

            It's my fault? The state was supposed to be Nagan.
            1. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 21 February 2016 17: 41
              +2
              Well, damn it, as I knew that you were hooked, although Hekatu wrote, therefore, he deleted the comment almost immediately (reluctance to argue). And when are you all in time? Hello comrade eighth hi There, higher than the Druid, something with your abbreviations does not like Thompson either. Go clarify.
              1. carbine
                carbine 21 February 2016 18: 19
                0
                Quote: Mordvin 3
                Well, damn it, as I knew that you were clinging on, although Gekatu wrote, therefore, he deleted the comment almost immediately (reluctance to argue). And when are you all in time?

                I'm not on purpose. I thought that to me. I wrote about the service weapon. It is just for mechanical drivers. So it happened. I won’t do it again. soldier
              2. The comment was deleted.
        2. carbine
          carbine 21 February 2016 16: 51
          -2
          Quote: Hecate
          Have you ever held Nagan in your hands, wise guy ?! Did you try to charge Nagan ?! If you had Nagan in your hands and loaded it at least once, you would understand what a lousy weapon it is and how unsuitable it is for the army.

          Boy, do you understand Russian? He is not native to you, is that why the problem? I just wrote about the same to you. Read it again and try to understand what is written.
          Quote: Hecate
          and the cartridges themselves are primitive, with low characteristics

          TTX (in terms of ballistics) Nagan for army service weapons are sufficient. Not much worse than PM.
        3. The comment was deleted.
  • klopik1
    klopik1 21 February 2016 16: 19
    0
    Quote: screw cutter
    And what "machine gun" do you mean, the one that is depicted even on state flags and emblems?

    [media = http: //andrew-vk.narod.ru/public/AK_47/AK_47.htm]
    1. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 16: 45
      -5
      Quote: klopik1
      http://andrew-vk.narod.ru/public/AK_47/AK_47.htm

      It is not known how true this is. Although it is written quite convincingly. BUT:
      1. Regardless of the authorship, the adoption of the 7,62x39 mm cartridge and weapons on it was an adventure and a clear mistake by the GAU leadership.
      2. We feel the consequences of that story to this day. In 1947. the AK-74 was adopted not with a normally balanced, but all with the same "ingenious automation". Especially for this balance (or rather the imbalance), a low-power cartridge 5,45x39 mm was made. And today it turned out a trap, normal full-fledged performance characteristics from weapons on this low-power cartridge cannot be squeezed out in any way.
      1. AK64
        AK64 21 February 2016 17: 30
        +1
        In 1947. the AK-74 was adopted not with a normally balanced, but all with the same "ingenious automation".


        Not to argue, namely to ask: And what about the balance?
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. carbine
          carbine 21 February 2016 17: 53
          -1
          Quote: AK64
          In 1947. the AK-74 was adopted not with a normally balanced, but all with the same "ingenious automation"

          Ooh ma Mixed up. In 1974 The AK-74 was adopted.
          Quote: AK64
          Not to argue, namely to ask: And what about the balance?

          And the balance is not good there. The "ingenious mechanism" does not allow to properly balance the weapon for automatic firing. Now in AK-12 it has been replaced with a lightweight one. But, in my opinion, this is nothing more than a half measure. Accuracy has improved, but the DEP has not changed. From balanced automation and barrel lengthening to about 500-520 mm, you can't go anywhere. Because a new cartridge is not an option.
          In a series plate of 20 shots bursts. 17x20, this is 17 bullets out of 20. The number at the top is the diameter of the circle in inches.
          1. carbine
            carbine 21 February 2016 18: 24
            -2
            Quote: carbine
            And what about the balance?

            And here is the accuracy with single shots. There, automation also plays a role.
            Let me remind you, you should mainly be interested in figures at 400 m.
            1. AK64
              AK64 21 February 2016 18: 49
              -1
              And here is the accuracy with single shots. There, automation also plays a role.


              Thank you.
              And, it’s you that too large masses run too far back and forth ...
              The amers, of course, have a mass of moving parts much lower - but they brought the M16 up to 20 years. (And he, they say, is still not for the massive little-trained fighter.)

              It is also clear that in the USSR for 30-40 years they could at least consider options, instead of this "monopoly" on "the only correct mechanism" ...
              1. carbine
                carbine 21 February 2016 19: 00
                -1
                Quote: AK64
                And he, they say, is still not for the mass little-trained fighter.)

                They lie. Nothing too complicated.
                Quote: AK64
                And, it’s you that too large masses run too far back and forth ...

                Not that they just run. And the unbalanced ones run. From this "wobble".
                Quote: AK64
                It is also clear that in the USSR for 30-40 years they could at least consider options, instead of this "monopoly" on "the only correct mechanism" ...

                And now with this, too, not very.
              2. Droid
                Droid 21 February 2016 19: 13
                0
                The amers, of course, have a mass of moving parts much lower - but they brought the M16 up to 20 years. (And he, they say, is still not for the massive little-trained fighter.)

                This is not true. The masses of the moving parts differ slightly. And accuracy AK74 automatic fire is better than M16
              3. gross kaput
                gross kaput 21 February 2016 21: 59
                +1
                Quote: AK64
                In amers, of course, the mass of moving parts is much lower

                No words - just an expert! laughing
                I forgot to add "sho gases are discharged directly into the receiver" for a full action set laughing It’s rare to meet a person with such bloated FWS and who knows so little about what is broadcasting laughing
              4. carbine
                carbine 23 February 2016 19: 44
                -1
                Quote: AK64
                In amers, of course, the mass of moving parts is much lower

                Moving parts are also not easy. Kalash gas mechanism has 2 problems:
                1. The removal of gases through the hole in the wall of the barrel.
                2. The design of the gas frame.
                If with the first problem today most likely you will have to accept (although there are also "options"), then it is desirable to somehow solve the second problem. There may be several solutions:
                1. Facilitate existing mechanisms. Their weight will become less, and the moments of forces that affect the imbalance of the weapon during firing will become less from this (see AK-12).
                2. Introduce additional counterweights into the design. The weight of the mechanism will become more, but the balance of the machine will become better.
                3. Make a completely new machine with a different mechanism. Maybe even without a gas engine. But this is from the realm of fiction, it will be too much money to rearm on it.
              5. The comment was deleted.
            2. The comment was deleted.
        3. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Droid
        Droid 21 February 2016 17: 50
        +2
        2. We feel the consequences of that story to this day. In 1947. the AK-74 was adopted not with a normally balanced, but all with the same "ingenious automation". Especially for this balance (or rather the imbalance), a low-power cartridge 5,45x39 mm was made.

        Stop talking nonsense.
        1. carbine
          carbine 21 February 2016 18: 15
          -2
          Quote: Droid
          Stop talking nonsense.

          My dear, no one is stopping you from personally reading my comments. But I don’t have to shut my mouth.
          1. Generalissimo
            Generalissimo 21 February 2016 22: 49
            +2
            Well, you personally do not write nonsense, and everyone will be happy.
            1. carbine
              carbine 21 February 2016 23: 13
              -3
              Quote: Generalissimo
              do not write nonsense, and everyone will be happy

              And you do not read. You still do not understand what it is about, why do you spoil your eyes?
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 21 February 2016 23: 33
          0
          How little is needed in order not to interfere with carrying nonsense - just bring a normal opponent into the emergency! :-)
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Generalissimo
      Generalissimo 21 February 2016 19: 48
      0
      and how is it you "I have been working for [media = http: //www.lepse.com/] for 30 years, veteran of labor, honored mechanical engineer of the Russian Federation, 6th grade: hourly wage rate of 57 rubles." Such a "competent" is kept in such a place, although it is clear why you did not leave ... 8-)))
      1. klopik1
        klopik1 21 February 2016 23: 58
        -2
        What do you mean hold? Where have I not gone? Are you a narik?
        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 22 February 2016 13: 36
          0
          Well, where do those who like to "feel sad" for a shamayser usually go? unless of course they are needed there because of their qualification <:-)
          and you?
  • DesToeR
    DesToeR 21 February 2016 19: 57
    +2
    Quote: carbine
    But it would be nice for you to think about why this brilliant weapon would have been dismissed immediately after the war by your knee in the ass. That's right in 1945. They took it, and removed it from production. Due to excessive masterpiece?

    Or maybe due to the fact that the USSR adopted a modern complex of small arms under the latest cartridge 7,62x39? Plus we held the first "tender" for the ATM for this ptron. The Simonov self-loading carbine for 10 rounds and the Degtyarev light machine gun are not you considering? And why produce weapons of the 30s after 1945, if there was enough of it in warehouses?
    Quote: carbine
    1. Regardless of the authorship, the adoption of the 7,62x39 mm cartridge and weapons on it was an adventure and a clear mistake by the GAU leadership.

    It is not the first time and not from the first person (although not from one "nickname") that I read about the "inferiority" of the 7,62x39 cartridge and, as a consequence, the inferiority of weapons based on it. I just want to insert a quote from a famous Hollywood action movie: "What is your evidence?
    "
    Quote: carbine
    2. We feel the consequences of that story to this day. In 1947. the AK-74 was adopted not with a normally balanced, but all with the same "ingenious automation".

    What are the terms "not with a normally balanced", who defines this notorious normality and balance? Is 30m for PPSh all yours? Stop talking nonsense at last. AK-74 and M-20, which appeared 4 years later, are twin brothers. Moreover, the Americans actually buried their M-16 to please the M-4 CARABIN. What is the difference between the M-4 and the AK-74 in terms of combat capabilities? They are twin brothers.
    1. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 21: 32
      -3
      Quote: DesToeR
      Or maybe due to the fact that the USSR adopted a modern complex of small arms under the latest cartridge 7,62x39?

      What, right in 1945?
      Quote: DesToeR
      Simonov's self-loading carbine for 10 rounds and the Degtyarev light machine gun are you not considering?

      So they were not in 1945. And then, why the ingenious change to HZ what?
      Quote: DesToeR
      I just want to insert a quote from a famous Hollywood action movie: "What is your evidence?

      1. Such a "genius weapon" has never been mass-produced in any developed country in the world. Except for Germany in the form of ersatz weapons and not for long.
      2. A similar "brilliant weapon" in the 70s was dismissed all at once.
      3. The very idea of ​​massively equipping an army with a self-loading, weakened (in another way assault) rifle with the function of automatic fire on a cartridge with a classic bullet is stupid to insanity. This is even a more stupid idea than the idea with ABC-36. At least there was a real rifle, and not a weakened one (assault).
      Quote: DesToeR
      What are the terms "not with a normally balanced", who defines this notorious normality and balance?

      Should I teach you the basics of kinematics? One man with a beard sits in a test tent and issues a certificate of balance. With stamp and signature.
      Quote: DesToeR
      30m for PPSh is this your everything?

      33 m, to be exact. But do not strain, you will not understand the meaning of this. If you do not even understand "balance".
      Quote: DesToeR
      Stop talking nonsense at last.

      I have no such habit.
      Quote: DesToeR
      The AK-74 and the M-20, which appeared 4 years later, are twin brothers.

      Just in case, I inform you that M4A1 is automatic rifle (they also write automatic short rifle or carbine, but this is already clarification). And the AK-74, this is a fully automatic assault rifle. Have you noticed? Nothing in common. Automatic versus fully automatic. Assault rifle vs rifle. You need to learn. Military affairs and in the present way. And do not enter into disputes, exposing yourself in a disadvantageous light.
      Yes, there you go. M4A1 will soon be replaced, apparently did not fit, overheating. The index has not yet been invented. The trunk will be 409 mm. Maybe M4A2.
      Quote: DesToeR
      Moreover, the Americans actually buried their M-16 to please the M-4 CARBINE.

      Yeah Right, undertakers of some kind. You read less rumors in the internet. M16 has not gone anywhere. It blooms and smells.
      Quote: DesToeR
      What is the difference between the M-4 and the AK-74 in combat capabilities? These are twin brothers.

      These weapons of completely different categories have practically nothing in common. See above for more details.
  • DesToeR
    DesToeR 21 February 2016 20: 14
    +2
    Quote: carbine
    And the balance is not good there. The "ingenious mechanism" does not allow to properly balance the weapon for automatic firing.

    Where do you get this nonsense from? What balance criterion do you apply? The force vector in newtons? Pulse? Instant speed center? What say already. Have you ever looked at the tables you laid out? At a distance of up to 300m, there is no difference between the AK and the M-16. Then the question is why you need exactly 400m?
    Quote: carbine
    Let me remind you, mainly you need to be interested in the numbers at 400 m

    The answer is simple - you have nothing to object to the AK system at ranges up to 300m, and no matter what cartridge Kalashnikov shoots. Conclusion - the Kalashnikov assault rifle is better, because with the same accuracy, AK at these ranges exceeds M-16 due to operational characteristics. Shooting at 400m is not needed by anyone, 300m is more than enough for modern combat from individual weapons. I'll tell you more - most of the modern clashes occur at a distance of 100 ... 200m.
    1. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 21: 51
      -1
      Quote: DesToeR
      Where do you get this nonsense from?

      In TASS messages. Slahali, recently there was a contest in Russia on the balance of machines? Guess why the fuss? From the perfection of the design of the AK-74? In addition, somewhere around here I put the signs of accuracy. Do not disdain, read.
      Quote: DesToeR
      At a distance of up to 300m, there is no difference between the AK and the M-16. Then the question is why you need exactly 400m?

      It's not me, it's him. Scoundrel eye. And mother nature. So everyone basely arranged that on an open sight the eye can accurately aim at only 400 m.
      Quote: DesToeR
      you have nothing to object to the AK system at ranges up to 300m, and no matter what cartridge Kalashnikov shoots.

      You see, my dear. I agree with you, with two hands. Only now 300 m, this is the combat range of weakened (i.e., assault) rifles. And normal (army) rifles, they are at war at 400 m. This is how M16 or M4. This is the whole hitch.
      Quote: DesToeR
      Conclusion - a Kalashnikov assault rifle is better, because with the same accuracy, AK at these ranges exceeds M-16 due to operational characteristics

      Very very superior. That is why it is much cheaper. This is like a Volkswagen and a Mercedes. Volkswagen is also superior. Probably.
      Quote: DesToeR
      Nobody needs 400m shooting, 300m is more than enough for modern combat with individual weapons

      Of course. And in the North. Korea and beyond 100 m is not needed. It's just that there are a lot of PPPs in service. And, as you know, for standard submachine guns the standard distance is 100 m. Or do you need this? not is it known?
      Quote: DesToeR
      I'll tell you more - most of the modern clashes occur at a distance of 100 ... 200m.

      You see. I told you so. You do not get in touch with us from there? And then, I wanted to advise you Cristobal M2. And what, just automatic carbine, just a maximum of 200 m. Again, they haven’t let out for a long time, equipment can be bought for nothing.
      But seriously, do not write nonsense. And do not make up numbers.
  • hohol95
    hohol95 21 February 2016 22: 17
    +3
    Many readers are professionals in terms of using short-barreled weapons! IS THERE AT LEAST ONE DESIGNER - A DEVELOPER ??? Scarlet Fedorov; Tokarev; Degtyareva; Simonov; Stechkina; Korovin; Goryunova; Kalashnikov; Berezina; Shpagina; Shpitalnaya; Nudelman; Sudaev and those who are many in their shadow are many !!! And these are many that have developed ??? What did RI produce from small arms according to its own developments? Revolver - NAGAN brothers (BELGIUM)! Rifle (from KRNK and BERDAN) to Nagan / Mosin! Machine gun - Maxima American! What was YOUR DEVELOPMENT !!! NOTHING!!! You don’t have to KNOW what YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO REALIZE IN LIFE !!!
    1. carbine
      carbine 21 February 2016 23: 06
      -4
      Quote: hohol95
      Revolver - NAGAN brothers (BELGIUM)! Rifle (from KRNK and BERDAN) to Nagan / Mosin! Machine gun - Maxima American! What was YOUR DEVELOPMENT !!! NOTHING!!! You don’t have to KNOW what YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO REALIZE IN LIFE !!!

      What did you want? RI has always been the backward outskirts of Europe. What other options could she have?
      Quote: hohol95
      Scarlet Fedorov; Tokarev; Degtyareva; Simonov; Stechkina; Korovin; Goryunova; Kalashnikov; Berezina; Shpagina; Shpitalnaya; Nudelman; Sudaev and those who are many in their shadow are many !!!

      Well, tell us. And give examples. Successful designs of these authors. Since there was only one more or less conditioned cartridge in the USSR, in a strange way this is the "royal" 7,62x54 mm R, then list the weapon on it. After all, it makes no sense to list weapons on substandard cartridges, right? The final product from this will not be successful, even though the designer would not try, right?
      I'll start, if you please. For example DP, I consider it quite a good product for its time. Yes, he had flaws. But overall, the product was not bad. And I am very sorry that the concept of LMG + self-charging in the USSR was not implemented due to unsuccessful self-charging. The concept was quite advanced and successful, in my opinion. By the way, good self-loading on the 7,62x54 mm R cartridge has not been done to this day. Failed. SVD is about the same "happiness" as SVT. Only in profile.
      Continue?
      1. hohol95
        hohol95 21 February 2016 23: 21
        -1
        You write that the DP-27 was not a bad product! And at the same time, ask me to describe successful designs above the DESIGNERS described (among them Degtyarev)! Why is the DP-27 bad against Finnish Lahti? German MG-13? Japanese Type 99? Cech - vz 26-30? And even more so amerovskogo BAR M1918? With which the Poles fought in 1939 !!!
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 21 February 2016 23: 32
          +5
          For hohol
          If the Mosin rifle is Nagan, then explain to me how it so happened that the tests were Mosin rifle and Nagan.
          1. hohol95
            hohol95 21 February 2016 23: 41
            0
            Read the literature - in order not to offend (fence) Naganov, it was decided to call the rifle the Nagan / Mosin system! If I'm wrong - prove the opposite! And I agree! She became a mosquito under the USSR (RSFSR)!
            1. AK64
              AK64 21 February 2016 23: 46
              0
              Nope. Named without names:

              1891 three-line rifle
              1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Generalissimo
              Generalissimo 21 February 2016 23: 47
              -1
              Who decided? ... Understandably 8-) But Fedorov who stole his machine from whom?
            3. The comment was deleted.
              1. hohol95
                hohol95 22 February 2016 00: 03
                0
                And there were many OWN ??? Before the revolution ??? Who will answer ?????
              2. Generalissimo
                Generalissimo 22 February 2016 00: 14
                0
                Those. just to enclose, dawn and lower your own, which for different rennenkamps are actually strangers ... :-)
                Again, because of the hillock, the rollback is more, and the money there is better
              3. The comment was deleted.
            4. gross kaput
              gross kaput 22 February 2016 11: 13
              +1
              Quote: hohol95
              Read the literature - not to offend (fence)

              So read at your leisure, the Mosin rifle was put into service as a "3-line rifle arr. 1891."
              Quote: hohol95
              She became a mosquito under the USSR (

              Under the Soviet Union, it became the "7,62mm rifle model 1891/30".
              Quote: hohol95
              If I'm wrong - prove the opposite

              Prove? this topic has long been sucked to the bones, all the archives have been rummaged and on this topic so many articles have long been published where everything has been sucked almost by cogs and minutes - the last article on this topic was published in "weapons" No. 15-16 2015, by the way there an explanation is also given why the name of the author did not appear in the title, but only a faceless arr. 1891 .. Well, if we return to Nagan, then the GAU Armory Department in its report written before it was put into service put everything on the shelves
              From Nagan there The idea of ​​putting a feeder on the door of the store, a clip and a way to fill the store from it - and that’s all, this is precisely the report of contemporaries with which Nagan himself agreed.
              PS and she became Mosin-Nagan in the west, although the same light elves for some reason do not call Colt 1911 - Colt Browning and Springfield 1903 Springfield Mauser.
          2. hohol95
            hohol95 21 February 2016 23: 45
            0
            We decided that the Nagan firm helped Mosin to bring his three-line to the "mind"!
          3. hohol95
            hohol95 22 February 2016 00: 12
            0
            The authorship of the new rifle was clearly formulated by the then Minister of War P.S. Vannovsky in his resolution on the adoption of the model for service:

            In the new sample being manufactured, there are parts proposed by Colonel Rogovtsev, the commission of Lieutenant General Chagin, Captain Mosin and the gunsmith Nagan, so it is advisable to give the developed sample the name: Russian 3-lin. rifle sample 1891.

            On April 16, 1891, Emperor Alexander III approved the model by deleting the word "Russian", so the rifle was adopted for service under the name "three-line rifle of the 1891 model."
            VIKA
            1. Generalissimo
              Generalissimo 22 February 2016 00: 37
              0
              absolutely precisely Herr Nagant was then deleted from the name, and it was right
              nobody renamed Maxim's machine gun :-)
        2. carbine
          carbine 21 February 2016 23: 55
          0
          Quote: hohol95
          eat bad DP-27 against Finnish Lahti? German MG-13? Japanese Type 99? Cech - vz 26-30? And even more so amerovskogo BAR M1918? With which the Poles fought in 1939 !!!

          Actually, I described to you successful, in my opinion, designs of Soviet weapons. What I wrote about. And he suggested continuing the list. What did you do?
      2. hohol95
        hohol95 21 February 2016 23: 31
        -1
        And what is the best BREN machine gun? What is the best gun NAMBU? Or submachine guns of Mussalini ITALY? Or is STEN better than PPSh, PPS or even PPD? The British BREN copied from the Czech VZ! But they didn’t even re-launch their BESA machine gun (ZB-53) and released the Mauserian cartridge 7,92 along with their 7,7 !!!
      3. hohol95
        hohol95 21 February 2016 23: 53
        -1
        You answer me - why the Soviet small arms created in the country after the First Imperialist; Civil war is worse than the small arms of the countries, where there was no civil! UNITED KINGDOM! USA! CZECHOSLOVAKIA! JAPAN! FRANCE! HOLLAND! NORWAY! SWITZERLAND! ITALY!
        1. carbine
          carbine 22 February 2016 00: 07
          0
          Quote: hohol95
          You answer me - why the Soviet small arms created in the country after the First Imperialist; Civil war is worse than the small arms of the countries, where there was no civil! UNITED KINGDOM! USA! CZECHOSLOVAKIA! JAPAN! FRANCE! HOLLAND! NORWAY! SWITZERLAND! ITALY!

          You somehow think globally. And absolutely absolute categories. Either white or black. Who told you that all the weapons created abroad were good? I did not say that. Why should I answer this question?
          And in the USSR, all the suffering was primarily due to shit patrons. Clear? The penultimate normal cartridge of normal caliber on the classic pool, adopted for service in the Republic of Ingushetia / USSR / RF was the cartridge of 7,62x54 mm R. And the last one is the cartridge of Para, several years ago. About the 5,45x39 mm cartridge standing apart, I already wrote somewhere in this thread, look.
          1. hohol95
            hohol95 22 February 2016 00: 21
            -1
            Then what the hell the Finns used it and use it! CARTRIDGE 7,62x54? Or the cartridge 7,62x39? Why are they a super-developed country with these barbaric shit-cartridges?
        2. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 22 February 2016 00: 16
          -2
          Where did you get that from? There was nothing better than a mosquito. Then there was nothing better than SVT. Then there was no better Kalash, and so far there is nothing.
  • Droid
    Droid 21 February 2016 22: 23
    +1
    Especially for carbine, stopped seeing your messages. Are you there with a blacklist not indulging? And it’s strange to receive messages in the mail about comments, but not to see them on the site, especially when they are addressed to me. Fortunately, you can exit and under an unregistered user everything is immediately visible.

    Well, my answers ...
    Quote: carbine
    Those. right now, having gained full chests of compressed air, you want to tell everyone that a weapon firing the same type of ammunition with DE 1377 J is more effective than a weapon with DE 1738 J? However, you are a great science fiction. And why then did RPK-74 with DE 1567 J? Indulged in?
    In the meantime, "admire" the effectiveness of different types of weapons visually. If it is not clear, then in black, these are wound channels.

    Those. You do not understand anything about the effectiveness of shooting.
    Quote: carbine
    Of course, you know nothing about this. So it does not exist.

    Of course it does not exist. No need to invent a gag filling it with some secret meaning.
    Quote: carbine
    And the balance is not good there. The "ingenious mechanism" does not allow to properly balance the weapon for automatic firing. Now in AK-12 it has been replaced with a lightweight one. But, in my opinion, this is nothing more than a half measure. Accuracy has improved, but the DEP has not changed. From balanced automation and barrel lengthening to about 500-520 mm, you can't go anywhere. Because a new cartridge is not an option.
    In a series plate of 20 shots bursts. 17x20, this is 17 bullets out of 20. The number at the top is the diameter of the circle in inches.

    As usual, you carry full crap. There is no shooting in bursts there, there are groups of 20 single-shot fires. You already posted this picture under a different nickname and carried the same crap, only your bursts were 20 shots in length.
    Quote: carbine
    And here is the accuracy with single shots. There, automation also plays a role.

    There is no accuracy there, there is the probability of hitting one shot.
    Quote: carbine
    Slahali, recently there was a contest in Russia on the balance of machines? Guess why the fuss?

    There was no such thing. The competition was for a new machine, and not for the balance of machines.
    Quote: carbine
    In addition, somewhere around here I put the signs of accuracy. Do not disdain, read.

    You first learn to understand what is written, and then post.
    1. Generalissimo
      Generalissimo 21 February 2016 23: 51
      -2
      http://topwar.ru/91182-veterany-rodstvenniki.html#comment-id-5599746
      and climbs, and climbs from ...
      "What did you want? RI has always been a backward outskirts of Europe. What other options could it have?"
      "By the way, good self-loading on the 7,62x54 mm R cartridge has not been done to this day. We could not. SVD, this is about the same" happiness "as SVT. Only in profile."
      It's a disease...
    2. carbine
      carbine 22 February 2016 01: 58
      -1
      Quote: Droid
      Those. You do not understand anything about the effectiveness of shooting.

      Where to me.
      Quote: Droid
      No need to invent a gag filling it with some secret meaning.

      I won’t. As you say.
      Quote: Droid
      There is no shooting in bursts there, there are groups of 20 single-shot shots

      You might wonder how a single shot differs from a group shot. Already argue with obvious things.
      Quote: Droid
      There is no accuracy there, there is the probability of hitting one shot.

      And what does the probability of hitting mean? PPC.
      Quote: Droid
      The competition was for a new machine, and not for the balance of machines.

      How are you feeling? Have you decided to refute all obvious things? And what new main machine should have possessed?
      Quote: Droid
      You first learn to understand what is written, and then post.

      Ok, I’ll learn. If you don’t write to me again. Good?
    3. 4thParasinok
      4thParasinok April 1 2016 16: 48
      0
      Quote: Droid
      Especially for carbine, I stopped seeing your messages. Are you there with a blacklist not indulging? And it’s strange to receive messages in the mail about comments, but not to see them on the site, especially when they are addressed to me. Fortunately, you can exit and under an unregistered user everything is immediately visible.

      I don’t see him either, fortunately ... wink
  • carbine
    carbine 22 February 2016 00: 26
    -1
    Quote: hohol95
    Then what the hell the Finns used it and use it!

    Who?
    Quote: hohol95
    Why are they a super developed country

    You will soon call Zimbabwe superdeveloped, apparently. In the heat of the moment.
    1. hohol95
      hohol95 22 February 2016 00: 41
      0
      Russian! And Soviet cartridges !!!
      1. carbine
        carbine 22 February 2016 01: 18
        -1
        Quote: hohol95
        Russian! And Soviet bullets

        So Russian or Soviet?
    2. hohol95
      hohol95 22 February 2016 00: 41
      0
      With Zimbabwe, the USSR or RI did not fight!
      1. carbine
        carbine 22 February 2016 01: 19
        -1
        Quote: hohol95
        With Zimbabwe, the USSR or RI did not fight!

        Really? I didn’t know. Thank you for report.
        And why such an argument as "did not fight"?
  • DesToeR
    DesToeR 22 February 2016 00: 27
    +3
    Quote: carbine
    What, right in 1945?

    Before: 1943-1944
    Quote: carbine
    33 m, to be exact. But do not strain, you will not understand the meaning of this. If you don't even understand "balance"

    And I don’t bother - this is something from the Thompson SGM series and mortar shooting at 400m. Those. rave.
    Quote: carbine
    You need to learn.

    For the sake of cleverness, you called in English what is actually a carbine. A fuli or seven automatic and other short riefl does not affect accuracy. Do not let the quotes matter - speak shorter, otherwise 90% of your words are blah blah blah ...
    Quote: carbine
    M16 has not gone anywhere. It blooms and smells.

    This is also a lie. The Marine Corps abandoned the M-16 in favor of the "short rifle" or, more simply, the M-4 carbine. This is not the first time when I ask you the question: WHY? There is no answer, but for some reason you are comparing the AK with the M-16. Where is the comparison with M-4, i.e. with the most modern and most importantly actual weapons in military conflicts?
    Quote: carbine
    In TASS messages. Slahali, recently there was a contest in Russia on the balance of machines?

    In Russia, they can do whatever they want - the military chooses - that is their right. What does this prove? Absolutely nothing. By the way, "balanced" automation has not yet won this competition. And if you are so strict, then where do you see the balanced automatics on the M-16 or M-4?
    Quote: carbine
    So everyone basely arranged that on an open sight the eye can accurately aim at only 400 m.

    Again a lie! Not "at 400m", but up to 400m, and after 300m the accuracy drops sharply. That is why most collisions are fought at a distance of 100-200m. 400m you want it so much, but the reality is different. 400m is the distance between machine guns chambered for a rifle cartridge and sniper rifles, but not machine guns.
    Quote: carbine
    But seriously, do not write nonsense. And do not make up numbers.

    You take the numbers from the ceiling and try to drag facts into your ears. M-16, AK-74 and M-4 - these are approximately equivalent weapons. About 400m there is no question. Of course, you can shoot and you can shoot, only no one will do this in the war for a hundred reasons. And the most important of them is the low probability of hitting.
    1. carbine
      carbine 22 February 2016 01: 16
      0
      Quote: DesToeR
      Before: 1943-1944

      Do not fantasize.
      Quote: DesToeR
      it's something from the SGM Thompson series and mortar shooting at 400m.

      Actually SMG (submachine-gun).
      Specify why there is a rear sight in the sights. Very surprised.
      Quote: DesToeR
      A fuli or seven automatic and other short riefl does not affect accuracy.

      But it affects the rate of fire. Simply put, a fully automatic assault rifle means an automatic weapon with a combat rate of 80-100 rounds per minute and an effective combat distance of 300 m. If it is not clear, then this is me about the AK-74. Because AK is correctly called selective-fire assault rifle, which means a self-loading weapon with a combat rate of 40-60 rounds per minute and an effective combat distance of 300 m, which at close distances can be used as an automatic weapon.
      Quote: DesToeR
      The Marine Corps abandoned the M-16 in favor of the "short rifle" or, more simply, the M-4 carbine.

      Again invent.
      Quote: DesToeR
      Where is the comparison with the M-4, i.e. with the most modern and most importantly relevant weapons in military conflicts?

      Sure? Oh well. However, if you are so interested, then this is an automatic weapon with a combat rate of 60-80 rounds per minute and an effective combat distance of 400 m.
      Quote: DesToeR
      By the way, "balanced" automation has not yet won this competition.

      Take an interest in A-545.
      Quote: DesToeR
      And if it’s so strict to approach, then where do you see balanced automation on the M-16 or M-4?

      Everywhere. This is evident by the accuracy of fire.
      Quote: DesToeR
      Not "at 400m", but up to 400m, and after 300m the accuracy drops sharply

      See attached table.
      Quote: DesToeR
      That is why most of the collision battles go at a distance of 100-200m.

      Ask how far apart the trenches are from each other.
      Quote: DesToeR
      400m is the combat distance of machine guns under a rifle cartridge and sniper rifles, but not assault rifles.

      Again past, about 600 m.
      Quote: DesToeR
      these are roughly equivalent weapons

      Well, if you are looking for something roughly equivalent, then I can recommend RPK-74, M16A1 and M4A1 to you. The difference is only in the rate of fire, and in range is approximately the same.
      Quote: DesToeR
      And the most important of them is the low probability of hitting.

      See attached table.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • hohol95
    hohol95 22 February 2016 00: 31
    -1
    I did not serve and did not shoot! But I honor the weapons of those who gave me the opportunity to be born! And everyone who is trying to mix with cow dung the weapons of the Red Army, which brought liberation to our homeland and Europe from the BLACK-BROWN PLAGUE, I will answer in a barbaric straightforward - YOU lived at that time? Worked at those plants and factories ??? Did you create SOMETHING that allowed the country to WIN? NO? Then do not Puff into your mustache with pipe smoke !!! And quietly rejoice at your BIRTH after 1945! And to me personally, to one place from which pistol Tokarev copied or improved the mechanism or the whole "machine"! She was OUR and I think saved many lives! And it took away from the enemies the same is not SMALL!
    1. Generalissimo
      Generalissimo 22 February 2016 00: 41
      -1
      according to your comments above you can see what and how you honor
      1. hohol95
        hohol95 22 February 2016 00: 43
        -1
        Of course I am far from the GENERALISIMUS !!! Just EFREYTOR! Do you have a complaint?
        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 22 February 2016 01: 19
          0
          the same corporal? :-)
      2. hohol95
        hohol95 22 February 2016 00: 54
        -1
        I’m not a friend with you and didn’t drink with you, so that you would poke me!
        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 22 February 2016 01: 18
          -1
          how can this be between the generalissimo and the jewish man?
    2. carbine
      carbine 22 February 2016 01: 25
      0
      I suggest you think about those who were not born after 1945. from the fact that the weapon was not very. And also that there would be better weapons, then by 1945. more people would survive.
      And there’s nothing to cheek. For this big mind is not necessary.
      1. Alexey Lobanov
        Alexey Lobanov 22 February 2016 12: 17
        0
        Quote: carbine
        I suggest you think about those who were not born after 1945. from the fact that the weapon was not very. And also that there would be better weapons, then by 1945. more people would survive.
        And there’s nothing to cheek. For this big mind is not necessary.

        With your approach, for example, you can think about those - you and me - who, thanks to the best weapons in the world, were still born after 1945.
        Only people fought and people defeated, fought for the truth and won thanks to fortitude.
        So your approach is fundamentally wrong.
        1. carbine
          carbine 22 February 2016 12: 28
          0
          Quote: Alexey Lobanov
          who thanks to the best weapons in the world

          To argue with an incompetent fanatic like you, only time to lose. Zealots, they firmly memorize mantras, and from there they can no longer be picked out.
          Quote: Alexey Lobanov
          Only people fought and people defeated, fought for the truth and won thanks to fortitude.
          So your approach is fundamentally wrong.

          I somehow did not understand the meaning of your maxim. Is it that if they had a quality weapon, they would not have won?
    3. The comment was deleted.
  • Droid
    Droid 22 February 2016 08: 57
    0
    Quote: carbine
    Where to me.

    To school for a start.
    Quote: carbine
    You might wonder how a single shot differs from a group shot. Already argue with obvious things.

    We look above. You also cannot read, not a group shot, but a shot group. And the turn in English is burst.

    At the same time, in general, take an interest in what the accuracy of firing by bursts looks like. Because to carry such crap with aplomb that only those who do not understand anything at all can shoot bursts on the plate. I am writing now not for you, but for others, so that they see reality behind the numbers. The best polygon arrows give accuracy from AK74, with emphasis, short bursts, Sv * Sat = 15 * 15 cm per 100m. The core is the best half of hits, the full size of the group is 2-3 times larger. The military arrows give the order of Sv * Sat = 30 * 30 cm. All the stories that in the plate for the AK74 are 7,25 inches (19 cm) per 100 meters are a circle containing 100% of the hits in bursts and even 20 shots have complete crap .
  • Alexey Lobanov
    Alexey Lobanov 22 February 2016 12: 07
    +2
    Quote: carbine
    Because AK is correctly called selective-fire assault rifle, which means a self-loading weapon with a combat rate of 40-60 rounds per minute and an effective combat distance of 300 m, which at close distances can be used as an automatic weapon.


    selective-fire assault rifle - assault rifle with a choice of fire mode, and more. Do not invent another meaning, especially if it is not there. laughing Self-loading (or semi-automatic) weapons fire single shots, automatic - bursts. Even the Americans! laughing laughing laughing
    1. carbine
      carbine 22 February 2016 12: 23
      -2
      Quote: Alexey Lobanov
      selective-fire assault rifle - assault rifle with a choice of fire mode, and more. Do not invent another meaning, especially if it is not there. laughing A self-loading (or semi-automatic) weapon fires single, automatic - bursts.

      Nope. Self-loading is called semi-automatic weapon. Automatic - automatic weapon. A self-loading with the ability to conduct automatic fire (usually in such a weapon this is a defective, stripped down option) is called selective-fire weapon. Full of examples, these are Soviet ABC, ABT, American M1-Carbine.
  • Tjeck
    Tjeck 22 February 2016 12: 19
    -3
    Quote: PKK
    And TT is still one of the best in terms of bronics. It asks for hello. Who knows, they immediately run away after hearing TT during the shootings.


    If 7.62 / 25 penetrates armor, then 7.62 / 39 penetrates tanks? laughing No, maybe a protective suit from piercing strikes and breaks, but certainly not even a low-class armor. 7.62 / 25 is not 7.62 / 54 to flash armor.
  • mamont5
    mamont5 22 February 2016 18: 20
    -1
    "The talented gunsmith Fyodor Vasilyevich Tokarev, who was 16 years younger than Browning, developed a pistol for" his "cartridge 7,62x25 by order of the military leadership. He had developed a cartridge shortly before that."

    What nonsense? The TT cartridge was taken by Tokarev from a Mauser pistol, with which they are completely interchangeable, only called him 7,62 in our caliber (Mauser was 7,63).
  • lshka
    lshka 24 February 2016 23: 00
    0
    started with one, but ended with another ... the cartridges are different and made for your goals, this is how to compare the PT-art, the Germans and not only before WWII believed that 37-45 caliber for the PT was enough, but miscalculated
  • Filxnumx
    Filxnumx 25 February 2016 18: 49
    0
    Quote: Masya Masya
    Does not matter...

    I agree completely, but provided that the cartridge in the barrel and the distance is more than 3 - 4 meters.
  • cherrybuster
    cherrybuster 4 March 2016 19: 16
    0
    Oops, Carbine Annihilated bully
  • Zaq
    Zaq 5 March 2016 21: 19
    -1
    TT is quickly outdated, but Colt is a classic like a Kalashnikov assault rifle.
    1. hardrokc
      hardrokc 8 March 2016 20: 55
      0
      Quote: Zaq
      TT is quickly outdated, but Colt is a classic like a Kalashnikov assault rifle.

      Interesting "analysis". Those. fighting qualities on the side. How do weapons become classics, if not a secret? Maybe just on the basis of his fighting qualities?
      AK is far from the classics. The AK-47 / AKM only lasted a quarter century. Those. he doesn’t even draw on a normal model, not like a classic. For comparison, the same unsuccessful TT stood in production for 21 years.
      With the AK-74 / AK-74M is more difficult. Not to say that he is directly very successful. But it has been in production for over 40 years. He would probably have been replaced already. But things are still there. The secret however is simple, rearmament, it is very expensive. At the same time, 40 years, this is also not a classic.