What led to the Soviets replacing the TT-33 with the Makarov?
I know that the TT-33 was an aging gun at the time the Makarov was adopted, but what made the Soviets decide on a fixed barrel relatively small blowback pistol firing a relatively small cartridge compared to the short recoil locked breech full size pistol firing a fast cartridge that they already had in the TT33?
It almost seems like replacing a seemingly more modern Browning action with a fixed barrel Walther PP-ish design was almost a step backwards, or at least a sidestep instead of being a step forward in small arms development. Why didn't the Soviets go on to develop something a little more modern than a fixed barrel gun?
I get that Makarovs are very simple, very reliable, very accurate and are great shooters ( love mine), but comparing the Makarov to the sidearm of many of the Western militaries (Browning Hi Power) of the time it kind of seems inferior in every way minus size and cost/ease of manufacture (which is very important).
Tokarev is too much of a cartridge for use outside war.
>>29473986
>>29473970
the makarov is made of 8 parts and can be detail stripped by a troglodyte with no tools in 15 minutes
>>29473970
>It almost seems like replacing a seemingly more modern Browning action with a fixed barrel Walther PP-ish design was almost a step backwards, or at least a sidestep instead of being a step forward in small arms development. Why didn't the Soviets go on to develop something a little more modern than a fixed barrel gun?
The fact that it's a straight blowback design is irrelevant. There's nothing wrong with straight blowback for that cartridge. Locked breech designs aren't inherently better, and straight blowback has worked since the early days of semi-autos. It's not a "step back" to use a type of action that's appropriate to the power of the cartridge.
Some aspects of the Makarov that the Soviets probably thought were improvements were:
>double action first pull and the ability to carry in condition 1, without having to manually cock the hammer as on the Tokarev
>shorter length made it easier to carry - sitting down and such
>second strike capability
>heel magazine release prevented accidental depression of the mag release during carry
>newfangled cartridge that was not compatible with NATO weaponry worked to discourage raids of small munitions storage depots
>>29474050
Tokarevs are pretty easy to detail strip as well, but this is a minor aspect of the design. Most servicemen, back then, as today, rarely disassemble their weapons to the last pin.
>>29473970
the issue is really doctrinal. in western militaries the pistol was a weapon of last resort to be used against an enemy. in the soviet red army the pistol was intended for use against poles, kulaks, counter-revolutionaries and running pig dog lackies of the imperialist capitalist degenerates, and whoever lost the latest power struggle. and only ever at short range (to the back of the head).
subsequently, a larger cartridge and pistol is a waste of the people's resources and probably even aspirational. off to the gulag with you.
i have no idea, i just thought i'd shitpost this.
>>29473970
Because it was really only used by police and officers, so why make something big and powerful?
>>29474112
even in the West, pistols are mainly status symbols and discipline tools
>>29473970
Because you don't need a cartridge that shoots flat at 50yrds to blast a defeatist in the back of the head at 5 feet.
Americans make a big deal about the 1911 being such a king of service pistols, and woe is the army right now for using the Beretta M9, but the truth is that pistols don't really matter. It's a last resort for when your main weapon breaks or runs out of ammo and somebody is trying to kill you. If you want proof as to how little pistols matter, there were high ranking officers in the US military who carried little Colt 1908 .25 caliber pistols officially.
>>29474224
There are officers, I meet while in the Army, who did anything possible to not have to bother carrying.
Too many officers forget that they are soldiers. They think of them selves too much as some office worker or boss. that the soldiering stuff is beneath them. They don't have time to clip a holster with a pistol and magazine to their uniform belt. They have power point slides to make and a promotion packet to stuff with bullshit.
Pretty much all the Toks were shot out, and Soviet brass didn't like them. Heavy, were too unreliable and had too much recoil for mass executions like Katyn.
So they copied a German design and round and called it the Makarov.
>>29474224
>2016
>being this much of a shitposting retarded slav
SMGs also fell out of favor, as a front line weapon.
So no need for a round worth shooting out of SMG.
>>29474333
Do you actually have a point, or did you just feel like barfing into the post form?
>>29474392
that they issued officers 1911s and 1903s slavnigger
a 1908 colt pocket pistol with no provenance from a private auction that went for 4 grand when the normal ones go for 6-800 does not mean that the US army was giving officers .25acp pocket pistols for ceremonial carry. Unlike the soviets, who downgraded from a duty gun to a execution pistol for their officer corp. stay mad about 1991 m8, putin won't save you from social and economic subjugation to the west.
>>29474439
You're beyond retarded. Do you think the gun I posted is a fake? Go read your military arms history, manchild. Why you think you have any kind of point by saying that 1903's were issued too is beyond all logic. More than one model pistol was issued to officers, spurdo. Does that blow your (small) mind.
>>29474095
what rounds did they have pre makarov that worked with NATO guns? besides whatever they had from lend lease and capture guns?
>>29474484
Pay attention to the language.
>newfangled
>>29474476
>RARE 1908 GOVERNMENT MARKED
>this means they were issued en masse, unlike the highly documented use of the 1911a1 and 1903 colt pocket hammerless
stay mad that your former government decided that it's officers sidearm needed to be less of a combat weapon and more of an expedient way eliminate political enemies and "morale problems".
>hows that homosex gang rape problem on military bases treating you Ivan
>>29474503
Who's mad here?
Go sit in timeout until you calm down, kiddo.
>>29474527
don't you have some broken glass to avoid by squatting as you publicly drink Ivan?
>>29474539
What the fuck is wrong with you?
>>29474501
ok, So just new, but also not compatible with NATO guns like everything they had before.
I understand now.
>>29474544
>has to download epic memes from the filthy western internet to bantz
Ivan plz
>tfw asking a question about something I find interesting
>tfw thread devolves into two spergs going at it
>>29474176
>discipline tools
wut
>>29473970
7,62 tokarev is an excellent smg round, but a horrible handgun round. Look, even the mauser c96 was designed as a pistol-carbine hybrid, 7,63x25 mauser being the round tokarev ammo was based on. At the ranges handguns are used, it leaves a shoddy wound profile with only a small amount of the bullet's energy dumped, and the recoil makes it hard to get another couple of shots. That is the reason many officers actually stuck to the nagant revolver. Makarov, on the other hand, is designed with the shortcomings of the tokarev pistol in mind, it's a modified clone of Walther PP super, a simple blowback pistol designed for the 9x18 ultra, a cartridge designed with the prevention of overpenetration in mind- it was designed for use in submarines (for whatever reason you'd ever fire a gun in there). Therefore makarov performs better at the ranges handguns are actually used, and is inherently very accurate due to the simple blowback mechanism, as well as easy and cheap to manufacture, and has acceptable recoil that makes follow up shots easy. Simple blowback designs actually do have a couple of advantages over recoil operated handguns- simplicity, accuracy and reliability. That's why simple blowback P90 outperforms MP7 alongside other reasons.
>>29476536
>it was designed for use in submarines
dickgrips.jpeg
>>29473970
>>29476619
Stroke gently, Ivan senpai
>>29474484
Not much, save that any 7.62x25 gun should work with common 7.62x23 ammo encountered on the west. So you have germans using the latter ammo without trouble on captured PPShs
>>29475574
Western officers routinely shot their soldiers without trial, for major offenses, in ww1.
Don't want to charge across no mans' land? Bullet to the head.
Kind of off topic, but if you could only own one which would you prefer?
I've had both in the past and I currently only have a Mak. It's a great little gun.
>>29476536
>it's a modified clone of Walther PP super
>which didn't exist until 20years later.
Well you we're doing good until then
>>29478353
The cartridge was developed in 1936, it's easier than saying it was a modified clone developed after modified walther PP prototypes for the 9x18mm ultra cartridge. Kinda sounds stupid doesnt it.
>>29473970
Shit safety. Overpowered cartridge.
>>29477307
>WWI
>>29474050
27 parts and field strip by a Warsaw pact conscript in about 15-30 seconds, but yeah, your point is right.
>>29477307
Pretty sure this practice extended past WWI for the Ruskies
weight, cost, reliability
I'm just going to filter any comment with the word "Ivan" in it.
benis grips
