SKS Vs. CZ 52/57

Skippy

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 97.4%
110   3   1
Location
Ontario
I've never handles a 52/57, but have had plenty of experience with the SKS.

I'm just interested in an overall assessment of the two from those who have had experience with both rifles.

What say you, overall where do these rifles differ, and which would you sooner trust if you had to choose?
 
if that's the cz52/57 i'm thinking of , sure it's 7.62 in the original configuration, but it's case is NOT 39mm, it's 45- unless it's been re-barreled, or you have the INSERT , you MIGHT have a heck of a time finding ammo for it- even rolling your own might be a problem insofar as cases and dies are concerned
 
if that's the cz52/57 i'm thinking of , sure it's 7.62 in the original configuration, but it's case is NOT 39mm, it's 45- unless it's been re-barreled, or you have the INSERT , you MIGHT have a heck of a time finding ammo for it- even rolling your own might be a problem insofar as cases and dies are concerned

The VZ 52 is 7.62x45. The VZ 52/57 is 7.62x39
 
I found the Cz.52 (or 52/57 - no weight or balance difference) a clunky, heavy tank that I wouldn't willingly carry into harms way..that said, I still wish I kept one of the 5 I sold....
 
As a battle gun SKS hands down! As a civi range gun VZ52/57

Heres why
SKS is simple to feild strip and clean
SKS is Lighter
SKS is cheaper to build
SKS parts are more rugged
 
The VZ 52 is 7.62x45. The VZ 52/57 is 7.62x39

Yeah that is my understanding. Ha ha I am clueless with no understanding of these rifles but here is a pic
CopyofVz52_Vz52_57Magazines.jpg





But my question is, Why is it sometimes called VZ and other times CZ? That is confusing me!
 
I found the Cz.52 (or 52/57 - no weight or balance difference) a clunky, heavy tank that I wouldn't willingly carry into harms way..that said, I still wish I kept one of the 5 I sold....

Don't worry Dave, the one you sold me is in good hands.:D
 
Yeah that is my understanding. Ha ha I am clueless with no understanding of these rifles but here is a pic
CopyofVz52_Vz52_57Magazines.jpg





But my question is, Why is it sometimes called VZ and other times CZ? That is confusing me!

The commercial company Česká Zbrojovka sells its line of "civilian" arms as various "CZ" model numbers.

The Czech military designates it's weapons using the abbreviation "Vz" which is short form for the word "vzor" or "model" Variations of this word exist throughout the Slavic family of languages - eg "wzor" in Polish etc.

For example:

Cz 75 - a 9 mm pistol sold commercially by Česká Zbrojovka

Vz 52/57 - the Czech military self loading rifle model 52/57
 
The commercial company Česká Zbrojovka sells its line of "civilian" arms as various "CZ" model numbers.

The Czech military designates it's weapons using the abbreviation "Vz" which is short form for the word "vzor" or "model" Variations of this word exist throughout the Slavic family of languages - eg "wzor" in Polish etc.

For example:

Cz 75 - a 9 mm pistol sold commercially by Česká Zbrojovka

Vz 52/57 - the Czech military self loading rifle model 52/57
Absolutely correct - with Czech made military firearms, Cz and, (usually correctly) Vz. is used interchangeably...so there you have Cz 52 (correctly Vz.52), Cz 59 (again, Vz.59) and so on...
 
I sold my CZ52, not because I didn't like it, but there were no mags to be found and regular 7.62X39 stripper clips are the wrong size for the guide. The rifle itself was very accurate and never jammed in my experience with it (about 3.5 cases of ammo). I had no problem ringing the 300m gong at the range with it. I also found that it had a few awkward small parts that were a pain when putting it back together after a good cleaning. Given a choice between the two? A tough one. Both have their pros and cons, but probably a good SKS would be my choice.
 
The 52/57 rifles, although better built and usually more accurate are a lot more finicky with diet. They are also more difficult to tear down and keep clean. That being said, they are the Cadillac of 7.62x39 semi auto rifles to shoot.

I only shoot hand loads in mine, I don't want to take any chances with it. They are getting expensive for a reason and there don't seem to be any more coming soon if ever.

If you can find or have an option on a decent one, grab it now. In five years they will be few and far between unless someone finds a hidden warehouse somewhere.
 
The commercial company Česká Zbrojovka sells its line of "civilian" arms as various "CZ" model numbers.

The Czech military designates it's weapons using the abbreviation "Vz" which is short form for the word "vzor" or "model" Variations of this word exist throughout the Slavic family of languages - eg "wzor" in Polish etc.

For example:

Cz 75 - a 9 mm pistol sold commercially by Česká Zbrojovka

Vz 52/57 - the Czech military self loading rifle model 52/57


Thank you for sharing your knowledge. :) I was wondering because I didn't know if a Cz and a Vz would have interchangable parts (of the same model) but from this I see that they would.

Hypothetically speaking *cough* if one were looking to buy a Cz 52/57 (or Vz) where would they find one?
 
The engineering and design on the VZ is relally elegant. Very neat and "different". If I had to use it in earnest, I would feel confident about doing so, but for ease of use, reliability, etc etc I would use my SKS if my choice was between the two. I would never sell my VZ however.
 
I prefer my Vz 52/57 to my SKS. The Vz has a much nicer trigger pull and the safety is more conveniently placed if you are used to shooting the M-1 Garand or M-14. The Vz seems to be a bit more accurate than the SKS, but the difference is hard to see with most of the crap M-43 surplus ball we have access to. I must admit to having a preference for Czech weapons, I never met one I didn't like. Yes, the Vz is very front heavy and all that weight makes shooting it a pleasant experience. Also, almost everybody has an SKS (which is a good thing, BTW) but shooting a Vz sets you apart from the crowd.
 
I sold my CZ52, not because I didn't like it, but there were no mags to be found and regular 7.62X39 stripper clips are the wrong size for the guide. The rifle itself was very accurate and never jammed in my experience with it (about 3.5 cases of ammo). I had no problem ringing the 300m gong at the range with it. I also found that it had a few awkward small parts that were a pain when putting it back together after a good cleaning. Given a choice between the two? A tough one. Both have their pros and cons, but probably a good SKS would be my choice.

The VZ-52/57 has a ''detachable'' box magazine (troops were issued two). It was primarily intended for stripper clip loading and makes use of five-round clips which are not very common unless you find someone who bought pre 1958 Czech ammo.
Past that point the ammo came on usual 10 round clips which fit the VZ-58 and 858. You can fill a 30-round VZ-58 mag very fast by using the clips.
Cleaning is not as easy as with the VZ-58 and SKS but once you get the hang of it, it is quite fast and straight forward.
A properly fed VZ-52/57 is a killer on oranges at 100 yards.
PP. :)
 
Annie, just for your information, there never were a lot of them in the country. To aggravate the situation further, parts and accessories are almost unobtainable. Parts are out there, but a lot of looking is necessary.

If you are planning on buying a clunker and fixing it up, just remember model 52 and 52/57 rifles have personalities unique to themselves. The 52 is an extremely reliable rifle and actually outperforms the 52/57 accuracy wise. It's obvious drawback is lack of available ammunition. It has a case that isn't shared by anything else and is a hand loading proposition when you can find the cases. The cases are also berdan primed and that is another pain. The ammo I had for the one I used to own wasn't corrosive and the several thousand rounds fired (7.62x45) didn't cause any undue problems. Others say different things.
The 52/57 is a fine rifle as well. It has its hiccups as it was a modified design made to accept the shorter 7.62x39 cartridge. This has led to some feed issues with earlier rifles. If you hand load for the 52/57, keep the loads on the high end or they have a tendency to stovepipe, ruining brass and concentration.

I like mine as I said before, it has proven itself to be accurate and reliable, as long as its diet is acceptable. The SKS on the other hand is a junkyard dog. Totally reliable in most cases and easily repairable. Lots of variations though the most notworthy being threaded and press fit barrels in the receivers.

I've seen naysayers ranting about press fit barrels, but I don't think anyone has actually had or seen one come loose. That press fit is as solid as a weld, maybe even more so. It is also extremely rigid, basicly like makeing the barrel and receiver out of a solid piece of metal. Again just MOHO.

The SKS also has a lot of parts and accessories available, both aftermarket and surplus. This stuff is available in many local gunshops and from many of the headered sponsors at the top.

If you're new to the game, go for the SKS. The Russians are the rage at the moment and quite cheap but, the Chinese copies made by Norinco are very good as well. They are in a similar price range right now and the Russian may or may not be the better investment. The Russian will eventually be a desirable collector where the commercial Norincos will languish and lose value. The type 56 Chinese milsurp is another story and can be had with a synthetic, issued stock.

Other options are the Yugo milsurp SKS offerings. There are two models generally available one with and one without a grenade launcher. As new Yugos command a higher price and are considered to be some of the best SKS rifles out there.

There are many other countries that produced the SKS but they are usually harder to find and may or may not be as desirable as collectors or shooters.

bearhunter
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom