EAA Zastava M88 - 9mm Para

[TMan]

While in India, suffering from Jet-Lag, I got an e-mail from somebody saying that they had the EAA Zastava M88 for $219. Seemed too good to pass up, after all EAA brought me the Witness Match, which I currently think is the best 9mm on the market for the money. So with EAA's name on it, and the fact it was made in Serbia, how could I go wrong? Out came the credit card and in went the order.

For some reason I was under the impression that this was a surplus gun vs. being a new one. I was a bit surprised to pick it up on Tuesday and find that it was brand-new.

After insuring the gun was empty I pulled and pulled and pulled the trigger, and it finally went click. I also noticed that it had a heavy take-up because of the trigger return spring.

My wife came home from India yesterday and is home until Sunday, then 2 days in NYC, 3 days in Shanghai, then back to her apartment in Bangalore to be there while the movers pack and ship her stuff. She is sleeping so I had to be quiet. What to do? What to do? I know - take the M88 apart!!!!!

This gun is weird, unlike anything else I've owned. After doing a search on the internet and not finding anything except someone referring to it as the Tokarev T-33 design, I found on SurplusRifles.com a detailed strip of the gun.

The thing that impressed me the most was the hammer sub-assembly that just pulls out, or rather, rotates out. Holding the gun with the muzzle end to the left, you pull up and rotate to the right, the hammer assembly, which also contains the hammer spring.

Both the sear spring and the trigger return spring are leaf springs. The trigger return spring was from a 49 Ford. I guess they really want to make sure the trigger resets. The gun has a disconnector and a barrel bushing very much like the 1911. However, the barrel doesn't have much in the way of locking lugs, but again it was designed for 9mm vs. for the heavier recoil of the 45ACP.

When I glanced through the owners manual, I noticed that the gun has a magazine disconnect. As I've mentioned in other posts, I don't have a problem with that as long as it doesn't have an effect on the trigger pull, like it does on the Browning HP, which is the only gun I have where I ever removed it.

What they have is a leaf spring with a bend in the bottom of it, which fits into a notch on the trigger bar. So when the magazine is out, you can't pull the trigger because the spring is there. When you put the magazine in, it pushes the spring out of the way so there is no contact with the trigger bar; another implementation done right.

The plan is to lower the hammer hooks, polish the engagement surfaces, and reduce some of the tension on the trigger return spring. The sear also has an attached leaf spring and I think I'll leave it along for now because with the lowered hook on the hammer, I want to ensure the sear makes good contact. I also plan to reduce the hammer spring a little by spinning it on the belt sander.



As you can see from the picture, it has a more modern look than the Tokarev T-33, but retains their design. If you care to read more about it, EAA has the owner's manual online at: www.eaacorp.com/Manuals/M88-Manual.pdf

The disassembly instructions I referred to above are at: www.surplusrifle.com/pistoltt33/disassemble/index.asp

I bet this baby will shoot as good as my STI Targetmaster!!! Hey it is past 5:00pm in India.

[TMan]

And just in case you want to make a silk-purse out of a sow's ear:



No, No, No, I don't own it.

["DoubleAction"]

TMan; That's a dirt cheap price for a pistol these days. I've seen some very nice looking Maks that people only paid something like $125. dollars for.

[TMan]

DA, I've never shot, held, or even seen a Makarov. I think they use a special ammo: 9x18 or is it 9x17?

I think the Tokarev used the same ammo as the CZ-452, which is why I was never interested in getting one. I really notice the recoil and trigger slap in the CZ-452.

This afternoon, after I couldn't take the hot sun in the front yard anymore, I came in and finished working on the M88. I got the trigger pull down to 6.5 lbs, which isn't great, but I'd have to change some engagement angles to get it lower. The hammer hook is just a tad over .02".

I took the leaf spring that is the trigger return spring and put it on its side on a piece of paper. I then drew around it with a pencil. Then using a couple of pairs of pliers I slightly reformed the spring to give me less tension. By putting it down on the sheet of paper and looking at the pencil trace, I could see how much I'd changed it.

I don't think this pistol is going to be much fun to shoot, but it sure was easy to work on. The hardest thing was getting the grips back on.

Hopefully, I'll get around to shooting it later in the week. (I have to finish the irrigation project first. There was a great big rock that was next to one of the pipes that after 18 years caused a crack in the pipe. I also have several heads that need to be replaced.)

["DoubleAction"]

TMan; From what I read, many Makarovs was converted to the 9 x18 for the commercial market. For the money they were going for, they seemed like some nice pistols, and they actually have quite a following here.

[TMan]

DA, you lost me there. They were converted from what to 9x18 from what?

[MLB]

I used to have this straight, correct me if I go astray:

The .380 Auto is 9x17mm (9mm Kurz)
9mm Mac is 9x18
9mm Para is 9x19

I heard that some Makarovs were converted to 9mm para, but most I've seen are still chambered in 9x18. TA is our resident Mak aficionado.

["DoubleAction"]

Jul 23, 2008 6:47:07 GMT -5 TMan said:

DA, you lost me there. They were converted from what to 9x18 from what?

TMan; I'm lost myself. I know very little about the Makarov but I do know several people who own them and I've held one once. What I know about their calibers is what I've read, and have forgotten by now.

I was going through a 1995 handgun catalog tonight and ran across the Mak, which had the caliber listed as 9mm Mak and 9mm Para, as MLB mentioned.

This may have been where I picked up the commercial version in my head.

Several versions of the PM were developed for export market and domestic security use, including IZh-70 and IZh-71 pistols in 9x17mm Browning Short (.380ACP), available in both standard and high capacity variations, as well as Baikal-442, a commercial PM in 9x18mm, also available in standard and high capacity versions, with fixed or adjustable sights.

world.guns.ru/handguns/hg21-e.htm

[5ontarget]

Jul 23, 2008 22:04:38 GMT -5 MLB said:

I used to have this straight, correct me if I go astray:

The .380 Auto is 9x17mm (9mm Kurz)
9mm Mac is 9x18
9mm Para is 9x19

I heard that some Makarovs were converted to 9mm para, but most I've seen are still chambered in 9x18. TA is our resident Mak aficionado.

You got it!

Diameter of the 9x18 is .364, and the 9mm is .355.
a few others... just to add a little confusion.
9mm Kurtz (aka .380 Auto)
9mm police
9mm ultra
9x23
9x21
9mm Largo
9mm Parabelum
9mm Makarov
9mm Bergmann-Baynard
9mm Japanese Revolver
9mm Steyer
9mm Winchester Magnum

[TMan]

I continue to be impressed with this pistol. My shooting buddy shot it yesterday, and was very impressed with the accuracy. I shot 30 rounds through the center, and then he shot 10 rounds at his target. I then switched to the Kel-tec PF-9 and shot 5 rounds and totally ruined my target. I also got a FTF. He then shot it, but his target didn't look as bad a mine because HE MISSED IT ENTIRELY WITH A COUPLE OF ROUNDS. He also got a FTF. Same ammo as in the M88, but the recoil of the PF-9 - ouch.

Oh he also liked the feel of the M88 in his hand. I can see why EAA decided to import it, but the locking open with rounds still in the magazine can be a problem unless you fix it as I mentioned previously.

[Callahan]

TMan, you're comparing a pistol that weighs 28 ounces to one that weighs 12.7 ounces. Of course there's going to be more recoil. The fact that you are mentioning you both had aversion to the recoil goes a long way in explaining the missed targets and FTF.

I'm sure both of you were "limp wristing." By that, I don't mean spending time in guys-only bars, but not firmly holding the weapon and presenting a solid platform. This is especially important on the small pistols.

The only time I've had a failure to fire is when somethng just flat broke on the pistol. I notice the recoil on the 9mm PF-9 as being stronger than on the .380 3AT, but I can't really say it bothers me.

I must say I will keep the shiny Zastava in mind as a candidate whenever I finally buy my "pimp" gun!

[TMan]

I'm sure both of you were "limp wristing." By that, I don't mean spending time in guys-only bars, but not firmly holding the weapon and presenting a solid platform. This is especially important on the small pistols.

Callahan, are you trying to tell me that with all the guns I have, and experience, that I don't know how to shoot a semi-auto? I think I'll just lock everything up and move to China. ;D

Modified to add: I think it was the long trigger pull that was getting us more than anything else. I noticed that my buddy was flinching when he expected it to go bang and it didn't. I might have limp-wristed on the first round, but after that I was holding on for dear life. The recoil is nothing compared to the S&W Scandium in 357 Magnum, but compared to the M88 it is a lot. I never thought to compare the weights, but it looks like what you stated means the recoil on the PF-9 would be slightly more than twice that of the M88.

[Callahan]

TMan, in retrospect, your biggest problem may have been not fully releasing the trigger after that long pull. The PF-9 trigger will not properly reset unless fully released. You can't shoot 'em like a Glock.