7.63 Mauser vs 7.62 Tokarov

[unspellable]

For those of you using these cartridges (I use both)


While researching the question of Luger recoil springs at the Wolff Gunspring site I came across mention of neck seperations when using hot loaded 7.63 Mauser cartridges in a Tokarov chamber.


This surprised me as I would have assumed the Mauser cartridge would just fire form to the Tokarov chamber.


The shoulder is a bit further forward on the Tokarov for a greater headspace while the neck is shorter than the Mauser.


unspellable

[Kyrie]

Hi unspellable,


The 7.63x25 Mauser and the 7.62x25 TT-33 cartridges are essentially identical, as are the chamber headspace of C96 Mausers and TT-33 Tokarev pistols. If a fellow is getting case neck separations firing 7.63 Mauser in a TT-33, the TT-33 isnâ??t chambered for 7.62x25 Tokarev, or the pistol has a chamber problem, or there is a problem with the cartridge cases of the 7.63 Mauser ammunition (embrittlement due to age or chemical contamination are prime suspects).


Hope this helps!


Best regards,


Kyrie

Moderator - Cruffler_Forum on Yahoo Groups

"The flame free C&R Forum."

[unspellable]

It is a common misconception that these two cartridges are identical. I have seen an English translation of the Soviet design committee's report on the 7.62 Tokarov and the changes made to the Mauser cartridge to arrive at the Tokarov starting with a change in bullet diameter so as to use the same barrel gauges for both the service rifle and the pistol. I shoot both and there is a difference. The Tok does have a larger headspace (shoulder further forward), a shorter neck, ect. Some of the differences are visible to the eye when they are placed side by side.


It is possible to find examples of Tokarov cartridges that will not chamber in a C96.


unsepllable

[unspellable]

The neck seperations occured when firing hot loads in Mauser diminsioned cases in a CZ52. The is as reported by Wolff Gunsprings.


Lacking Tokarov dies, one can load it by using a Mauser sizing die backed off a bit to get the headspace correct and then using a 7.65 Parabellum seating die to accomodate the shorter neck.


unspellable

[Kyrie]

Hi unspellable,


Alas, and absolutely no offense intended, the myth is there is any difference between the 7.63x25 Mauser cartridge and the Soviet 7.62x25 TT-33 cartridge :-(


The change in â??gaugeâ?� is a mistranslation of a change in â??nomenclatureâ?�. Both the 7.63x25 Mauser cartridge and the Soviet 7.62x25 TT-33 cartridge use bullets of .309 inch diameter - the Soviets simply adopted the 7.63 Mauser under the nomenclature â??7.62 Tokarev Pistolâ?�, aka â??7.62 Type Pâ?�. The differences between these two cartridges are only manufacturing variations - they are the same cartridges, and are interchangeable. And yes, thatâ??s the voice of experience - Iâ??ve been shooting firearms chambered for oth cartridges for over forty years


Thatâ??s the short story; Iâ??ll attach the long history at the bottom of this note for those interested


Best regards,


Kyrie

Moderator - Cruffler_Forum on Yahoo Groups

"The flame free C&R Forum."


Is 7.62x25 the same cartridge as 30 Mauser?


The short answer is:


"Yes, but it may not be safe to fire in a C96 Mauser".


Don't you just love clear and unambiguous answers The long answer requires a little history...


The Imperial Russians fell in love with both the 7.63 Mauser cartridge (aka .30 Mauser) and the Mauser Military Pistol, and were one of Mauser's best customers for same. The October Revolution did not change this fondness for the C96 and the 7.63 Mauser cartridge (it is said a C96 was one of the firearms used in the murder of the Tzar and the Royal Family), and both pistol and cartridge remained in general use in the early years of Communist rule.


In the late 1920's, the Soviets made the decision to replace the standard issue Model 1895 Nagant revolver with a self-loading pistol. A requirement for this new pistol was that it be chambered for the 7.63 Mauser cartridge and the pistol selected in the 1928-1929 pistol trials was the Tokarev pistol.

Upon adoption, Tokarev's pistol was designated the "TT-30" and its cartridge was designated the "7.62 Tokarev Pistol". The TT-30 design was modified in the 1931-1932 time frame to simplify production, and this modified pistol was designated the "TT-33".


This is a subject covered by Fred Datig in his â??Soviet Russian Tokarev â??TTâ?? Pistols and Cartridges 1929 - 1953â?�.Here is a quotation from page 131 that may be of some interest, â??As has been mentioned in Chapter Four, to quote, â??in 1929, the designers Korovin and Prilutskiy converted (redesigned) their (prototype) pistols to the 7.62mm caliber caliber cartridge (after) the Artillery Committee proposed developing them for the 7.63mm caliber Mauser (pistol cartridge â?¦â?�


â??Except for that which one may consider manufacturing tolerances, the 7.62 mm Tokarev and the 7.63 Mauser pistol cartridges are relatively identical and interchangeable.â?�


This has also been covered in Janeâ??s â??Ammunition Handbookâ?� thusly:


â??7.62 x 25 mm


Synonym. 7.62 mm Tokarev; 7.62 Soviet pistol; Russian; 0.30 Mauser; 7.63 x 25mm


Armament

Tokarev TT33 automatic pistol; various obsolete Soviet sub-machine guns (PPD, PPSH, PPS); Chinese Type 85sub-machine gun and Type 80 pistol. Most pistols and steel sub-machine guns chambered for the 7.63 mm Mauser cartridge will probably operate satisfactorily with this round and vice versa.


Development

This cartridge actually began life as the 7.63 mm Mauser automatic pistol cartridge. It was taken into use by the Russian forces in the early 1900s and the pistol remained popular with the Bolshevik armies, one model being produced specifically for the Soviet As a result manufacture of the Mauser cartridge began in Russia, and when in due course the Tokarev automatic pistol was developed, it was designed around the Mauser cartridge. For manufacturing convenience the barrel of the Tokarev was 7.62 mm calibre, thus the Soviet cartridge lost its Mauser designation and became known as the 7.62 mm Tokarev. The dimensional differences between the Soviet round and the original Mauser specifications are minute and largely due to the manufacturing processes. It can therefore be expected that any weapon originally using the Mauser cartridge will work with the Soviet pattern and vice versa. This cartridge has been manufactured in China and various countries of the former Warsaw Pact, but always to the Soviet specification. The Chinese pattern (below) is stated to be for the automatic pistols Type 54 sub-machine guns and Type 80 and for the Type 85 light sub-machinegun. Like the 7.63 x 25 mm cartridge from which derived, the 7.62 x 25 mm performs very well against 7.62 soft body armour and light metal, such as automobile bodies.


Description

The case is rimless and bottlenecked. The standard ball bullet is round-nosed and lead cored with a steel jacket.


Specifications Ball Type P

Round length: 34.56 mm

Round weight (nominal)- 10.65 g

Case length: 25.14 mm

Rim diameter: 9.91 mm

Bullet diameter, 7.82 mm

Bullet weight: 5.57 g

Muzzle velocity: 505 m/s

Muzzle energy: 709 J


Abridged ballistic table: 7.62mm Tokarev, 5.57g ball


Range Velocity Energy


0 m 505 M/S 709 J


10m 500 M/8 695 J


25m 496 mls 684 J


50 m 485 m/s 654 Jâ?�


So the answer is "yes, the 7.63 Mauser and the 7.62x25 are the same cartridge".


But that's isn't the end of the story. While the 7.63 Mauser and the 7.62x25 cartridge are the same cartridge, it may *not* be safe to fire any kind of milsurp 7.62x25 in a C96 and it may *not* be safe to fire all kinds of 7.62x25 ammunition in a Tokarev pistol. Here is why.


Eastern European Military 7.62x25


Most Eastern European military 7.62x25 is loaded to approximately the same pressures as the 7.63 Mauser cartridge and *may* be safe to fire in a C96 which is in sound mechanical shape. But there are several problems. Chief among these problems is determining if a specific C96 is sound. I highly recommend that anyone who has a C96 which they wish to fire have it checked out by either Mentor Arms or Briklee trading company. If problems are found have them corrected, or hang the pistol over the mantle.


Even if a C96 is in shootable shape, there are potential problems with milsurp ammunition. Ammunition may be sold as surplus for a number of reasons. 7.62x25 ammunition of recent manufacture which has been sold just because it was in excess of current or anticipated need is generally fine to fire in a C96. But ammunition which has been sold because it was overage or had become unreliable due to improper storage should *not* be considered safe to shoot in any firearm, especially a C96. Such ammunition may generate pressures that are excessive in any handgun. We have had reports of Eastern European milsurp 7.62x25 ammunition developing muzzle velocities well in excess of what one would normally expect from 7.62x25 (with some reported muzzle velocities in excess of 1600 fps!). This is a strong indicator this ammunition is unsafe to fire, regardless of the firearm.


So the problem here is that it is usually impossible to tell *why* ammunition was sold off. It is possible to make an educated guess at why a specific lot of ammunition was sold as milsurp by considering the country of origin and the head stamp date. But remember that this is, at best, a guess. My best advice is don't shoot any ammunition in any pistol if you have any doubts about the condition of either.


Czech 7.62x25 ammunition


The Czech ammunition may be a special case. It is reported In Ezellâ??s â??Small ares of the Worldâ?� that the Czech â??M48â?� ammunition loaded specifically for the Vz-52 pistol was â??20% hotterâ?� than the standard Soivet M30 7.62x25. It is not known how much of this ammunition may have been produced, whether all Czech 7.62x25 ammunition made between 1952 and 1955 was loaded to this higher pressure, or what all of the head stamps applied to this ammunition may be.


Itâ??s not even known for sure that any Czech M48 ammunition actually exists. The only M48 to which I can find a reference in Czech sources is an experimental 9 m/m Luger cartridge, intended for use in a pistol that never advanced past the prototype stage. In the absence of solid information, use of Czech ammunition in any pistol other than the Czech Vz-52 is probably a bad idea.


ChiCom 7.62x25 ammunition


The ChiCom 7.62x25 ammunition is a little different story. The vast majority of the ammunition is not "military surplus" in the normal sense of the phrase. Rather it is current military production ammunition which has been sold commercially for hard currency. As such, it would usually be considered safe to fire in any pistol chambered for the 7.62x25 or the 7.63 Mauser, providing that the pistol in question was in sound mechanical condition.


But there is a fly in this ointment too. I have found the ChiCom 7.62x25 to be inconsistent in terms of recoil and muzzle blast (and by implication, chamber pressure). The vast majority of the rounds of Chicom 7.62x25 I've fired were indistinguishable from 7.63 Mauser. But every once in a while there will be a round with an unusually large muzzle flash and a perceptibly higher felt recoil. If this muzzle flash/felt recoil do indicate a higher pressure, these rounds might well damage a C96.


Mentor Arms (which does a lot of C96 rehab work) used the Chicom ammunition to test fire their pistols and recommended its use up until a year or two ago. They stopped doing so when they began receiving pistols sent in for repair which had been damaged by the Chicom ammunition. Mentor now recommends that ChiCom ammunition *not* be used in C96â??s.


That's the story, and I'm sorry to be so long winded. The bottom line to all of this comes in 3 parts:


1) the 7.63 Mauser and the 7.62x25 cartridges may be considered interchangeable,


2) while most Eastern European military 7.62x25 is suitable for use in a C96 Mauser, some is not, and


3) it can be next to impossible to tell the difference between which 7.62x25 ammunition is suitable for the C96 and which is not.


My bottom line recommendation is to fire only ammunition which is head stamped "7,63 Mauser" or ".30 Mauser" in a C96 chambered for the 7.63 Mauser. And even then use caution, as there is a lot of very old 7,63 Mauser out there. After all, itâ??s been in production for over 100 years


If anyone is interested, the following sources provide information on either/both the TT pistols and the 7.62x25 cartridge:


"Small Arms of the World", Ezell

"Pistols of the World", Ezell

â??Soviet Russian Tokarev â??TTâ?? Pistols and Cartridges 1929-1953â?�, Fred Datig

Janeâ??s â??Ammunition Handbookâ?�


Arenâ??t you glad we all took up the simple hobby of C&R firearms ?


Best Regards,


Kyrie

[unspellable]

Kyrie,


I'll have to check out the C&R Forum, it's a new one to me.


As for the Mauser vs. Tokarev thing you quote a number of "authorities" but I was quoting the actual Soviet design committee that came up with the thing. If they state they made thus and such a change in the original Mauser cartridge then I assume they changed it. I would consider the design committee report as closer to gospel than Datig, et al.


One cannot take everything in print as set down by "authorities" as gospel. I have a rifle chambered for the 400-360 2-3/4 Nitro Express. For years, everything I could find in print about this cartridge was absolutely dead wrong! Including almost all the dimensions. And I mean wildly wrong!


Your own quotes are inconsistent as they mention the change from 7.63 to 7.62 as merely nomenclature and then go one to mention that for "manufacturing convenience it was changed to 7.62." The latter is consistent with the design committee's report. The change in nominal diameter is admittedly quite small and normal manufacturing tolerances are probably bigger than the nominal difference so the diameter question will be primarily of interest to those who have there Mauser sights cranked up to 700 meters and are shooting at prairie dogs.


There is also the mention of some lots of "old" Tok ammo cranking up 1600 fps, possibly indication deterioration and high pressures while at the same time the Soviet load is listed at 505 m/s which is over 1600 fps. This sounds high to me, I have always heard the Soviet round cranked out 1200 or 1300 fps.


The critical question is the headspace and neck length question.


I have on hand Winchester, S&B, Chincom, and various kinds of surplus Tok ammo. I have on hand Fiocchi, Remington, and surplus Mauser ammo. In every case the headspace is greater on the Tok stuff and the neck is shorter on the Tok stuff. Now this would be guilty of quoting authorities, and sure enough I have a box of Hanson ammo marked 7.63 Mauser/7.62 Tokarev. But all the problems I've heard of with shooting or loading these cartridges have been consistent with the Tok having a longer headspace.


It would be fun to really dig into this, but I've already committed myself to doing so with the 7.65 mm Parabellum. It has turned into a really big project. Another one like it and I'll end up kicked out of the house. In the case of the 7.65 mm Parabellum I am rapidly finding out that "authorities" ain't necessarily so. Keep your micrometer and your chronograph handy.


This project has expanded to the point where I am now designing some sort of fixture to measure the strength of Luger recoil springs. I'm trying to research Luger recoil springs. I'm ordering up a second thousand pieces of brass. I'm doing a research project on the methods used to measure velocity a hundred years ago. I'm running another research project on pressure factors. There is an effort in the area of pistol design and load matching. I am looking at ordering bullets in 1000 piece lots and also thinking of having some custom made. I've been begging parts off Ruger for this project. I'm digging into the old US army trials. Every answer raises six new questions. If I try firing some of my prewar Winchester corrosive hollow points, will the velocity mean anything or has the powder changed too much while it was aging?


All this will definitely keep me from roaming the streets at night.


If you guys are really serious about finding out the real scoop on this cartridge come around and mow my lawn for me. This project isn't leaving time for me to do it.


unspellable

[Kyrie]

Hi unspellable,


As a point of order, and I intend no offense, you were not quoting â??quoting the actual Soviet design committeeâ?� - you were sharing with us your memory of â??an English translation of the Soviet design committee's reportâ?�. Your memory is correct - but the English translation was incorrect. Please note that the Soviet usage of â??7.62â?�, when used in the context of the 7.62x53R, the 7.62x25 Tokarev, and the 7.62 Nagant actually refers to three *different* true bullet diameters! The â??7.62â?� in the names of these three cartridges is identifying nomenclature and not an expression of true bullet diameter. The change in nomenclature from â??7.63 Mauserâ?� to â??7.62 Tokarev: was just that - a change in nomenclature and nothing more. The 7.63 Mauser and 7.62 Tokarev cartridge both use bullets of .309 diameter. Having measured the bullets myself, I can confirm this is true. There was no change in bullet diameter when the Soviet adopted the 7.63 Mauser as the 7.62 Tokarev.


In terms of the 7.62 Tokarev muzzle velocity, the 505 m/s is from a pressure test barrel. Per Soviet manuals, muzzle velocity from a TT-33 is 420 m/s (1378 fps). This velocity is consistent with the muzzle velocity give in Barnesâ?? â??Cartridges of the Worldâ?� and my own experience.


Regarding headspace, please be aware that cartridges do not have headspace - headspace is an attribute if a firearm and not a cartridge. I understand you have examined various kinds of ammunition and have seen differences in neck and shoulder. These differences are manufacturing variation and are not related to headspace. Firearm headspace cannot be determined from the examination of cartridges.


7.62x25 Tokarev is just another name for 7.63 Mauser. Datig has observed this from Soviet sources. Janeâ??s â??Ammunition Handbookâ?� observes this also. And I can confirm it from my forty plus years of shooting both 7.63 Mauser and 7.62 Tokarev in C96â??s, TT-33â??s, and a number of other firearms chambered for this cartridge. If anyone has a problem chambering a round of 7.62x25 Tokarev in a C96, or conversely chambering a round of 7.63 Mauser in a TT-33, he has a maximum allowable dimensioned cartridge and a minimum dimensioned chamber.


This is an unusual circumstance, and is not limited to 7.63 Mauser/7.62 Tokarev. I have a Browning P.35 with a minimum dimensioned chamber that will not chamber South African 9x19 Luger ammunition (though I have no problems with this ammunition in any of my other 9x19 firearms). This experience has not lead me to conclude South African 9x19 Luger is a different cartridge from US produced 9x19 Luger ammunition


Best regards,


Kyrie

[Steve]

After reading this and other posts in the past about these two cartriges, I think that I will stick to my own handloads. I bought the dies from Lee and the first load that I tried was in the middle of the min/max range of the info supplied with them and also matched what I found at www.northwest-denture.com/mauser1896/index.htm.


It cycles fine and has very little recoil transmitted to my hand. It is 6gr Unique with an 85gr Hornady 80005 soft round nose bullet. It may be a little on the weak side but in an old gun I am not trying for a hot load, only one that cycles and is fun to shoot.

[Johnny Peppers]

Hope this doesn't stray too much from the original posting, but back when there were several ammo companies loading the 7.63mm Mauser round, the bullet diameters varied from company to company. In the 86 grain FMJ bullet Western used a .3088, Winchester a .3105, Remington a .309, and USCCo. a .3105.

[unspellable]

Kyrie ,


You are correct in stating that I was not quoting but rather paraphrasing from memory. I stand corrected. However, the Soviet committee report did make a point of the fact that they were changing the caliber to match the rifle so as to use one set of gauges for both. This discussion ran to a couple of paragraphs. Now I wish I had acquired the document.


The 7.62 Nagent revolver round is decidedly a different caliber. I havenâ??t actually taken measurements, but my information is that itâ??s closer to a 295.


Pulling bullets doesnâ??t prove much. Iâ??ve been sitting here measuring bullets from late manufactures commercial 7.65 mm Parabellum cartridges and they are all undersized. There are plenty of references that say itâ??s a 0.308 bullet, but show me a Luger barrel that size other than one somebody made from a cut down Springfield barrel. I have a bunch of barrel measurements and Iâ??m asking for more, enough to get some really valid statistics. The smallest to date is 0.3085 on an Interarms Mauser. Two other Interarms Mausers run noticeably bigger as do all the other barrels I have numbers for. The 0.3085 barrel is an outlier. Itâ??s getting pretty clear that the proper size is at least 0.3090 and probably bigger. There isnâ??t the big variation in size all the references warn you about either.


Head space may be the wrong term, but the cartridge does have a measurement that corresponds to headspace and this measurement must be in spec for things to work right. For example, on my 400-360 rifle (rimmed case) the nominal headspace is 0.050 inch. The nominal rim thickness is 0.048 inch. Like wise, on a rimless cartridge the shoulder has to be in the right place. Most rimless bottlenecked cartridges headspace on the shoulder. An exception is the 357 SIG which headspaces on the case mouth like a straight rimless case.


The dimensional differences Iâ??ve noted seem to be consistent across several makes of ammo. They also seem to be consistent enough that I run across mention of it in other places. The trick of mixing Mauser and Luger dies to load it was something I picked up elsewhere. There are tolerances and just plain goof ups. I have a Winchester 32 Special cartridge that will not come even close to chambering in my 1984. Itâ??s the only one Iâ??ve ever found that did not chamber easily. I had the same experience with a 10 mm Glock, forget what brand the ammo was.


Your velocity of 1378 fps for the Tokarev sounds about right, but Iâ??d like somebody to explain why test barrels always produce so much more velocity than the actual gun. It should cost about 30 fps to operate the action, whereâ??d the rest of it go? And the Soviets werenâ??t inflating the numbers for the sales brochure either.


Now there may be something else going here as well, because I have more than one figure for the diameter of the 7.62 X 54R bullet.


As far as shooting either goes, I donâ??t think the bullet diameter is any real problem. Head space may be worth looking at. I have nice modern fresh commercial loads in both and so I have been running Toks in the CZ52 and Mauser in the broomhandle an having no problems. Of course Iâ??ll have trouble when I get to those Hanson loads that are labeled both ways. Iâ??m storing 25 on their bases so theyâ??ll sag from gravity and be short enough for the Mauser while Iâ??m hanging the other 25 from their rims so theyâ??ll stretch and fit the CZ52.


The bottom line is you canâ??t always go by the â??authoritiesâ?� or the references. It some times proves to be a case of every body quoting somebody else until it becomes a case of everybody knows something that just isnâ??t so. I started noticing discrepancies with the 30 Luger and got onto this project of digging to the bottom until I find the real story.


One of the things I have learned. Winchester loads the 30 Luger to SAAMI specs so they say go to SAAMI for the official numbers. Winchester is the only US company loading it so the SAAMI specs are what Winchester says they are. They get nice numbers from a test barrel. But as far as I can tell neither of them have ever actually seen a Luger, fired a Luger, or bothered to find out what works in a Luger. The SAAMI specs for pressure are just plain silly. And Winchester downloads from there. Fiocchi at least has an excuse, they rechamber Glisentis in 30 Luger in Italy and the Glisenti is not noted for being a strong gun.


Some of the misinformation out there is really odd. Why is my Dan Wesson 357 Super Mag marked 357 Maximum? These are two different cartridges. A properly loaded 357 Super Mag cartridge is longer than the cylinder window on a 357 Maximum Ruger. In fact the 357 Maximum cartridge was created because Ruger did not want to build a revolver frame long enough for the 357 Super Mag. This led to said results, but thatâ??s a story that belongs on another website.


So any way, the debate has been fun, but I had better be getting back to my 7.65 mm Parabellum project. Iâ??ll be working out proper recoil spring strength as well as loads. Iâ??m not just taking somebodyâ??s word for it, I am going to MEASURE the damn springs. Iâ??m also doing the math to calculate what the springs should be. There is also some math to convert the instrumental velocities of circa 1900 â?? 1930 to todayâ??s instrumental velocities. Of course that involves a study of how they measured the velocity back then. The scope of this project expands exponentially. Wolff Gunsprings has asked for a copy of the book when it comes out. Ha!


unspellable

is pretty cool. Thought out, trying hard not to make the other person seem like an idiot, yet voicing your reasons for their beliefs.


Very impressed and gleaned lots of good info here guys!


Thanks Kyrie and Unspellable, Rick, Johnny, Steve and others for making this forum so good.


Ed

[Steve]

I just had a chance to measure a handfull of my bullets and most measured .309 with a couple at the listed .308.

[Steve]

My mistake. They are Sierra not Hornady.