Indians For Guns

Russia Picks New Service Pistol, Fires Armor-Piercing Round

It rhymes with Glock, but it seems that’s where the similarity ends. Russia’s Yarygin (PYa) pistol, otherwise known as the Grach, entered full service with the Russian armed forces earlier this year. It was actually adopted for the Russian army back in 2003, but it has only been in the last six months or so that a good number of Russian military units now possess it.

The Grach, replacing the half-century old Makarov, has won praise from many of the Russian officers who carry it, but there are a few Grinches who say the Grach is no Glock.

Most of the features on the Grach are pretty much standard: short recoil-locked breech, double-action trigger, ambidextrous safety, wrap-around polymer grip panels and changeable right-hand/left-hand button magazine release.

Image and quote from here: http://www.thegunmag.com/russia-picks-n ... ing-round/

Very interesting! Seems as if the whole world is going 9mm P. I hardly think that the 7.62 x 25 would have had a real chance, since its length requires a longer action. Don't get me wrong -- it's a fine round, and would be ideal from an armor piercing perspective, but it's length requires the pistol to be larger than the 9mm P of similar power.

I would have liked to have seen an analysis of how the Soviet experience in the Afghan War played a part in this choice. Perhaps that news will eventually leak out.

Looking at the picture I cannot fail to notice some similarities with 1911 design; the slide design, safety catch, magazine release, trigger position.

Is it really so or is it just my love of the timeless John Browning design!?

The link does not suggest a very quality weapon and steel in place of polymer seems to be a bit regressive.

It's another matter that the sidearm quality makes hardly any difference in operational capabilities of a modern army. A sidearm is now more associated with rank of bearer and tradition rather than combat worthiness.

Thanks for the thread,XL.

Incidentally, I came across the civilian version very recently here in Tbilisi and surprisingly it costs a fraction of what the European and American pistols cost.Say, about INR:27,000. The CZs go for $1100+ and the Berettas $2000+ for some reason.

The Civilian version is called Viking MP-446.I read that it was deliberately designed so that cannot handle the more potent +P or +P+ ammunition that the military version can handle.

http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/rus/mp ... ing-e.html





Best-
Vikram

Looking at the picture I cannot fail to notice some similarities with 1911 design...

Is it really so or is it just my love of the timeless John Browning design!?

Could be, but I expect it has more to do with the fact that Browning invented a simple, robust, and easily manufactured short recoil system that's stood the test of time. That's plenty of reason to love it!

The link does not suggest a very quality weapon

The original toggle link in the Browning design may be one of the weaker points. This "loop" design is more positive looking than many modern short recoil pistols. Many just have a ramp that slides to lower the barrel. It may not look like much, but it does make the design simpler and, to my way of thinking, more robust (if it works)!

steel in place of polymer seems to be a bit regressive.

Perhaps. This is one of the reasons I was wondering about the Soviet lessons from the Afghan War and what conclusions shaped the design of this pistol. This thought feeds into your other comment:

It's another matter that the sidearm quality makes hardly any difference in operational capabilities of a modern army. A sidearm is now more associated with rank of bearer and tradition rather than combat worthiness.

Well, yes and no. In the past "traditional" European battlefield type wars (especially WW2), very few casualties resulted from handguns and they were, as you suggest, more of a badge of rank than a practical weapon in most cases.

However, WW2, while a huge conflict, has become quite obsolete in weaponry and tactics, itself. Consider that the original 1911 was much prized by GIs in WW1 trench warfare and was rightfully feared by Germans for its firepower in the close quarter trench battles. These kinds of scenarios have come back, after largely fading from the scene in WW2.

Now we have "asymmetrical warfare" combating guerrilla type forces and irregulars, such as what the Soviets faced in Afghanistan, and what the US is facing also. This sort of fighting may include a lot of urban settings, with irregulars (I am beginning to hate the word "terrorist," so I'm going to avoid using it here) with a lot more firepower than even organized goons and dacoits packed in the past. These are forces with IEDs, rockets, assault rifles, and body armor. Something more is needed in these close situations.

In the past (the WW2 scenario), the handgun was more of an officer's weapon. But now, US ranks are also packing the Beretta, not just officers, and these handguns are not being issued as a badge of rank. The winds of change are blowing in warfare and I'd really like to see what premises the Russians have been working from to design this pistol.

Interesting, Vikram! I wonder if we'll get a civilian version in the USA. Right now, guns from Russia are stopped, as I understand it. That's from the first Bush or Clinton years. However, I'd note that the old Makarov was always considered a very well made pistol, and the examples I've handled bear that perception out. If these pistols are of the same quality, they may be worth a look. But then again, our market is filled with good 9mm choices and the competition might be steep.

I should add:

XL, you bring up the most interesting topics! Thank you!

Thanks, Tim.
You might have a very valid point when you say that the experiences of Afghanistan might have shaped the Russian Army's request for a new handgun and dictated its specifications. Russia completed its withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989. With the resultant political uncertainties of the Gorbachov years, it wasn't till 1993 that Boris Yeltsin was able to consolidate his position with the backing of the Army. After that I'm sure that the Army got what it wanted, when it asked.

From the article that I linked:

The beginning of the Grach story actually started in 1993 when the Russian government came up with the requirements it wanted in a new military service pistol.

Bowman,
You might be correct in seeing some of John Browning's genius reflected in the Grach. I see the grip and trigger guard being similar to the CZ75 (which many people say owes some of its design features to the Browining Hi Power), I see elements of the Browning Hi-Power's aesthetics in the slide and the controls. The barrel locking system, recoil spring and guide rod following his basic design has been used by almost every handgun manufacture for a while. However, this is a striker fired system (popularized by Glock?) as there is no evidence of a hammer. Till we see a more detailed breakdown, we wont be able to tell more. Many, many of today's pistols use features first introduced by John Browning.

It is interesting that it is almost 20 years since that original design requirement was called for, Are some of the features obsolete? Maybe. Remember when the Glock first came out, there were many people who thought that the polymer frames would be a very short lived. They have been proven wrong, of course but very few Military or Law Enforcement bodies embraced the Glock right away. It wasn't till it became clear that the Glock had a unique record for reliability and robustness, that officialdom began to advocate its use.

We must also remember that the Russians are quite well know for the durability and reliabilty of their military firearms. Look at the SKS, the AK 47 family, The Mosin, the Makarov and Tokarev families are also know for their ability to keep running when conditions are not ideal. Only time will tell how well the Grach performs.

Vikram,
Interesting. I wonder how they can keep the civilian version from chambering the AP rounds?
Have you seen one up close? How big is it. It is hard to tell from the photos. Just wondering how it would fit smaller hands. There are women in the Russian Armed Services now and I wonder if they will be comfortable with the Grach given it's apparent weight and size.

Guns from Russia are still coming into the US. But what I hear from importers is, that deliveries are unreliable. Both Remington and Winchester no longer list "their" Russian guns; though the previous importer is again importing part of the previous line. So, maybe the Grach will show up in the US some day.

timmy wrote:

This sort of fighting may include a lot of urban settings, with irregulars (I am beginning to hate the word "terrorist," so I'm going to avoid using it here) with a lot more firepower than even organized goons and dacoits packed in the past.

Indeed the ability to handle Armour piercing rounds should give us a strong hint that pistol is designed for use primarily in counter insurgency operations.

xl_target wrote: You might be correct in seeing some of John Browning's genius reflected in the Grach. I see the grip and trigger guard being similar to the CZ75 (which many people say owes some of its design features to the Browining Hi Power), I see elements of the Browning Hi-Power's aesthetics in the slide and the controls. The barrel locking system, recoil spring and guide rod following his basic design has been used by almost every handgun manufacture for a while.

However, this is a striker fired system (popularized by Glock?) as there is no evidence of a hammer. Till we see a more detailed breakdown, we wont be able to tell more.

From the World Guns link: http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/rus/ya ... ach-e.html

The PYa is a short recoil operated, locked breech pistol. It uses a modified Browning "High Power"-style locking, with the cammed slot under the barrel, that is used to lock and unlock the single lug on the barrel with the ejection window in the slide. The slide and frame are made from carbon steel, the barrel is made from stainless steel. The conventional DA trigger features an ambidextrous manual safety on the frame, that could lock the hammer either in lowered or in cocked position, allowing for "cocked and locked" mode carry. There's no decocker, and additional automated safety is built into the system, that locks the firing pin when trigger is not pressed. The external hammer on production pistols is partially enclosed from the sides by the slide extensions, to facilitate snag-proof handling.

http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/rus/mp ... ing-e.html

External hammer is enclosed from the sides by the rear extensions of the slide, which makes decocking procedure somewhat complicated, as pistol has no decoking mechanism. When engaged, safety locks the sear, trigger and slide, and allows for 'cocked and locked' carry, with the hammer cocked and safety engaged.

Vikram,
Interesting. I wonder how they can keep the civilian version from chambering the AP rounds?
Have you seen one up close? How big is it. It is hard to tell from the photos. Just wondering how it would fit smaller hands. There are women in the Russian Armed Services now and I wonder if they will be comfortable with the Grach given it's apparent weight and size.

XL,

I have been thinking about visiting a local gunshop to check this one out.When I do, I will make sure to take a few photos and also assess the points you raised.

Best-
Vikram

xl_target wrote: You might be correct in seeing some of John Browning's genius reflected in the Grach.

I agree XL. This is how the Russian weapon design philosophy is; take a proven design and make it a step simpler anr a step more rugged. The AK and Sturmgewehr, SVT 44 and Geweher 43, Makarov and Walther...pretty much simplified adaptations that work beautifully in their own conditions.

I hear that our own Special Protection Group has also replaced the Glock 17 in favor of a new arm - FN Five-seven.

This is how the Russian weapon design philosophy is; take a proven design and make it a step simpler anr a step more rugged. The AK and Sturmgewehr, SVT 44 and Geweher 43, Makarov and Walther...pretty much simplified adaptations that work beautifully in their own conditions.

Agreed. It is to be remembered that the Russians, and then the Soviets, did quite a bit of this. For example, during the Tsarist days, the Russians ordered the battleship Retvisan from the USA (Britain was still an enemy at that point in "The Great Game") and Tsesarevitch from the French. Later, in the Soviet days, they ordered plans for a large New Jersey-like battleship from the Italians and Gibbs & Cox in the USA.

The engines used in the Korean War MiGs were based on Rolls-Royce designs so thoughtfully provided to them by the UK government of Clement Attlee. Also, the Soviets reverse engineered the B-29 bombers they had obtained from emergency landings during WW2. (Here, it must be noted that they were mostly unsuccessful, as this aircraft never worked as well as the original Boeings, and by the time they were made, the USA had completed the B-36 and was working on B-47 and B-52 jets.)

In this gun list, it is noted that the TT-33 was a much-simplified Browning short recoil pistol, as well.

I must note, however, that while the magazine of the Mosin Nagant 3 Line Rifle was designed by Emile Nagant of Belgium, the action was the original design of Col. Mosin. Somehow, the Mosin Nagant got left out of the list of extremely durable and reliable Russian/Soviet designs. It should be remembered that, along with being tough as nails and simple as a rock, the Mosin Nagant was also an extremely capable sniper's weapon and has remained a fine target rifle into the 80s, at least, in Finland.

None of this should make one turn up a nose at Russian/Soviet engineering, as seems fashionable in some circles. Like India, Russia has a very long tradition in metallurgy (though not nearly as long as India's, of course!), and they've put that to good use, excelling in using steel for cartridge cases and bullet jackets, to name but a few examples.

One also ought to note that the Russians/Soviets not only specialized in sniper warfare, they were long known for their excellence in handling artillery since the Crimean War days. The Imperatritza Maria was able to hit Goeben/Yavuz from long distance in a Black Sea WW1 battle, for instance, sending the German battlecruiser scurrying for the cover of Istanbul. The Russian 12"/52 rifle was of noted accuracy.

Just because the reverse engineering of the B-29 didn't work out should not color ones opinions unduly. Every engineering establishment lays eggs, as well as creating successes.

This is true in just about every nation's engineering history, but I note that the Russians/Soviets had quite a capable set of engineering talents. Ask WW2 Germans about the T-34!

I see no reason why this pistol should be lacking in quality or refinement, if the will was there to make it well in the first place.

Two Rivers:

Guns from Russia are still coming into the US.

Am I then thinking of a ban on importing surplus firearms? I know that no Russian or Chinese AKs, SKSs, or Mosins come from either country since those days of 1st Bush/Clinton. The Mosins we've been getting are from Ukraine, as I understand it. However, You are right about US arms companies importing Russian guns under their own brands.

BowMan wrote:

xl_target wrote: You might be correct in seeing some of John Browning's genius reflected in the Grach.

I agree XL. This is how the Russian weapon design philosophy is; take a proven design and make it a step simpler anr a step more rugged. The AK and Sturmgewehr, SVT 44 and Geweher 43, Makarov and Walther...pretty much simplified adaptations that work beautifully in their own conditions.

I hear that our own Special Protection Group has also replaced the Glock 17 in favor of a new arm - FN Five-seven.

Really? the 5-7 is a great weapon.Anybody on the forum shot it yet?

timmy wrote:

Two Rivers:

Guns from Russia are still coming into the US.

Am I then thinking of a ban on importing surplus firearms? I know that no Russian or Chinese AKs, SKSs, or Mosins come from either country since those days of 1st Bush/Clinton. The Mosins we've been getting are from Ukraine, as I understand it. However, You are right about US arms companies importing Russian guns under their own brands.

As far as I understand there was an "agreement" with China under Clinton, to eliminate Chinese gun exports to the US, no outright ban. Don't know if there is a similar agreement with Russia concerning surplus weapons. Though the Russians tend to hang on to obsolete equipment for a long time.