Tokarev TAR 12 M81
Recently I had the opportunity to look over the inner-workings of Tokarev USA’s TAR 12-gauge shotgun. To those who’re unaware Fedor Tokarev, founder of Tokarev Arms, was the soviet Russian equivalent to John M. Browning here in the U.S. In the 1930’s the USSR adopted Tokarev’s TT-30 semi-auto pistol design that ultimately replaced the antiquated Nagant M1895 revolver which was over forty years old at that point. Even with just a quick look at the TT-30, it’s very easy to see the design stylings of Browning. It’s kind of hard not to wonder how Mr. Browning would feel about his designs being implemented by virtually every country in the world; by both allied and advisory countries alike. Either way, the company clearly continued on beyond Tokarev’s death in in 1968. Now-a-days though, it would appear that the bulk of what is available on the U.S. market would be three models of shotguns.
Their TX3 is a traditional-style pump shotgun that’ll accept either 3” 12-gauge or 20-gauge shells that comes in either blued or nickel-plated finishes. Their TBP is a bullpup shotgun that only accepts 3” 12-gauge shells, but comes in a variety of receiver finishes from plain jane tactical black to hydro-dipped M81 Woodland camo design. The final option is the TAR lineup, which is an AR-style variant of the TBP shotguns. Comes with the same options of ammo (which is just the 1 option) and the same styling.
Initial Impressions
Right from the box, it’s a pretty simple setup, and depending on your dealer you’ll probably receive the same thing. Initially visible is the shotgun itself with a plastic chamber flag in place, one 5-round magazine, and a parts box which contain the Magpul-like BUIS (Back-Up Iron Sights), a charging handle, a rudimentary sling, and a couple of spare parts. Some of the additional spare parts includes receiver pins and different Benelli-style choke tubes to utilize for different styles of shooting purposes. Of course, the last remaining bit is the owner’s manual, though I have to agree with Elon Musk when he said “any product that needs a manual to work is broken”.
That being said, I’m conflicted with this firearm. There’s a clear attempt to mimic what Glock did with using polymer to lighten the weight of this shotgun. If conventional materials were used, I have no doubt it would cross over 10+ pounds instead of the 7 pounds it currently is at. However, the polymer feels cheap, and by extension making the rest of the firearm feeling cheap. The receiver pieces at least feel like their re-enforced with some form of aluminum; probably T6 as that seems to be the most commonly used for aluminum in the industry these days. The hand-guard although is only polymer and due to its thickness can flex with just hand pressure.
For a first look though, I’d have to say for its price-point, it’s still a decent firearm. The butt-pad is highly effective due to its rubberized construction with deep v shaped grooves which I’m sure would come in handy should you find yourself in a wet environment. You’ve also got decent amount of picatinny rail “real estate”, which is unique to most tactical shotguns as it’s more common to find picatinny rails on the top of the receiver only. Another good feature is the fact it’s magazine feed, allowing for faster reloads. With the option of a 5-round or 10-round magazine, your capabilities with this shotgun are quite versatile.
Thoughts on Design
After a thorough takedown of the shotgun, it doesn’t take long to see the similarities to the other top mag-fed or tube-fed style shotguns. The bolt bares a strong resemblance to a Mossberg 500’s, minus the secondary extractor/ejector on the left-hand side. Instead, the TAR 12 uses an ejector pin that is interference-fitted into the barrel extension. The biggest issue with the bolt design is the locking block in the bolt does not, and I’ll say it again for emphasis, DOES NOT act as a firing pin block. This missing feature makes it possible for the shotgun to fire before lock-up can be achieved.
Another issue found during initial inspection was the use of obviously weak plastics for pieces where aluminum would’ve sufficed and not add extra weight. A perfect example is the feed ramp inside the receiver which is made a very flimsy plastic. This piece brings about several problems that range from feeding issues with three-inch shells to complicating the disassembly process due to the weakness of the plastic. I did find that feeding issues weren’t as prevalent with 2.75-inch shells.
Last complaint is the heavy and creepy trigger pull that comes out of the box. About 10 pounds was the consistent number on the trigger pull gauge. Now a creepy, heavy trigger shouldn’t be a negating factor, as with a little proper gunsmithing you can lighten up the weight and smooth out the creep to a nice light and smooth trigger pull.
