Ruger or CZ- opinions


SoDFW Jason
April 10, 2003, 01:42 PM
I'm looking to get a new house/range 9mm and I've narrowed it down to one of the two. I'm not gonna be carrying it so size/weight is not an issue. They both seem to be reasonably priced so now I have to choose.

Help me make up my mind please.

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger or CZ- opinions" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
April 10, 2003, 01:55 PM
I would suggest the CZ. Better balance and an all around more graceful gun. Plus 15 round mags are cheap and plentiful for the CZ

April 10, 2003, 01:55 PM
I don't own, and have never operated a CZ, so I cannot comment on that. None of the shops closest to me stock CZ's either. From what I have seen here, the CZ's are quite popular.

However, if you want an American made gun that will eat any ammo that you feed it, and go BANG! every time, pick the Ruger.
I have a KP-90 (.45ACP) that has over 2500 rounds of just about every brand/style of ammo imaginable, with only 1 hiccup...on Remingtons cheapy UMC ammo.

April 10, 2003, 01:56 PM
CZ 75 BD in a heartbeat!

April 10, 2003, 01:57 PM
Since weight doesn't matter, you've picked two good ones!;)

Over the long haul, you will enjoy shooting the CZ more. It's construction will not wear out easily, the trigger is more pleasant than the Ruger and the CZ is thought by many to be among the most accurate basic combat guns.

The Ruger is all quality, but a bit more "workmanlike" than the CZ.

In both cases, I would recommend the simplicity of the decocker version (or decock only for Ruger). This greatly simplifies the pistol's use under stress.

Since it is to be used in a dark house at night, you may want to budget for nightsights.

April 10, 2003, 01:58 PM
This battle's been fought here numerous times and on TFL, just do a search and you'll get gobs of info on the two. Personally, I have the Ruger KP95 and love it. Eats anything, is accurate, reliable, affordable, US-made and durable. You can still get 15 or even 17rd mags for it. Unlike some others here, I think it's much better looking also.

April 10, 2003, 02:33 PM
Have had both and there really is no comparison. Ruger makes a good cheap gun. CZ makes a great gun cheap.

This question does get asked alot and mostly it's guys who have never had a cz that will tell you to buy a ruger. It's pretty obvious to most that if you have the two guns side by side and work the actions, feel the grips, and aquire a sight picture, that cz is the way to fly. If that doesn't convince you, then you gotta shoot em.

If you can't find a cz and impulse buy a ruger it's not like you are screwing up or something but it's like buying a new ford escort for $275 and walking around the corner and seeing someone selling new Trans Ams for $300.

You will still be getting the kids to soccer practice but...


April 10, 2003, 02:48 PM
I have a P89DC, which I have owned for a little over a year. I am very happy with it, although I paid slightly too much for it.

It is boringly reliable (almost 2000 rounds, no jams or problems that weren't user-caused)

It is acceptably accurate (more accurate than me, anyway)

All that said, if I could do it over I'd get a CZ-75. It's not a criticism of the ruger at all; but for the price, I do think the CZ is a nicer and more polished firearm.

Jesse H
April 10, 2003, 03:04 PM
I have a Ruger P97, and I just acquired a beautiful CZ75 single action. Haven't had a chance to shoot the CZ yet, but man, I can not put the thing down.

I've been handling it and getting acquainted with it this entire week, just haven't had a chance to hit the range yet. The balance is superb, ergonomics are great. The quality appears better than the Ruger.

Funny thing is, the Ruger in my hands is a bit awkward. Very top heavy, and high bore axis. I don't know if all Rugers are this way, but mine has a sweet single action trigger break. The take up is long, and the overtravel is long, but the break is light and crisp. Perhaps that's of my centerfire guns, this one is most accurate in my hands.

I'm glad I have both (even w/out shooting the CZ yet), but if I had to choose only one, I'd definately go for the CZ.

April 10, 2003, 05:00 PM

I don't think that a Ruger would be a bad gun or anything, but I know from experience that CZ's rock. My 75BD fits my hand like it was made for it, and it looks a hell of alot nicer than a Ruger.

Sean Smith
April 10, 2003, 05:13 PM
Have had both and there really is no comparison. Ruger makes a good cheap gun. CZ makes a great gun cheap.

That pretty much says it all. I've tried both, CZ wins easily IMHO. :D

April 10, 2003, 05:17 PM
I have owned both and I vote for the Ruger all the way!

Never seen a problem with a Ruger, can't say the same for CZ. Sorry guys.:(

Gerald McDonald
April 10, 2003, 05:44 PM
I have had both and for a house gun you wont go wrong no matter which you choose. The CZ should be a little more accurate but everything is held in place with roll pins. No problem but its about as hard to get smithed as a Ruger. Cylinder & Slide wouldnt do any work on mine and Ten Ring in San Antonio told me the problem was after you stoned it for a trigger job your trigger job it might wear out fast or may last forever. The front sight on a CZ is a little low for me and I dont like the painted on finish.

The Ruger is (to me) not that pretty and while accuracy will equal a Glock 17 it probably wont be on par with the CZ. You can now find a few smiths who will work on the Ruger and there are a few sight manufactors who produce sights for it. The Ruger P95 appears to be a little more ruggedly built but that may be just in appearance. In a question to Ruger I asked about life expectancy and was told it should run at least 250000 rounds without significant wear. I wasnt that fond of my CZ but it was in 40 and I am not real fond of 40's. I would probably come closer to picking one of the CZ PCR's in 9 over the Ruger but if it were a full size CZ 75 it would probably go to the Ruger.

April 10, 2003, 06:41 PM
I just hate to jump on the bandwagon, but my CZs have been a LOT of fun to shoot.
15 rounders, too.
The pointability is what sold me.
That, and the price tag.

Marko Kloos
April 10, 2003, 07:14 PM
Both are fine guns, but I would (and do) prefer the CZ. The CZ-75 fits my hands much better than any Ruger model, and the CZ-75 models are more accurate than the Rugers. Both designs are sturdy, well-made, and very reliable.

April 10, 2003, 10:41 PM
Having owned Both. I'd give the edge to the CZ. Better ergonomics, lower bore axis, smoother action. The Ruger has always felt
'clunky' if i may use that word.

The Ruger and the CZ are very reliable designs.

Tales of problems with the Ruger's decocker always scared me.
With the 75BD the hammer never touches the firing pin until
the triger is pulled thru.

I wish the BD was around when i was required to carry a
pitstol with a decocker, or hammer drop safety.

The PCR is going to cost more, but you get a more compact
and lighter service pistol that many choose for CCW.

Accuracy: With the same loads the CZ will have a slight edge.
Some people can shoot 2 inch 25 yard groups with the CZ.

In retrospect. The Ruger is an entry level pistol intended
for civilian sales with some LE interest in it. Few depts
have adopted Rugers, as opposed to the CZ75B that
is marketed as as military/police service arm and
used worldwide. Just because they are not so popular
here. doesn't mean that the over 60 countries that
have adopted them don't entrust them on a daily basis.

You really can't go wrong with either brand. Hope you
enjoy your new purchase.

Gerald McDonald
April 10, 2003, 10:48 PM
CZF, does the Rugers hammer touch the pin on some models when decocking? On the P95 I had the decocker swung a cam around to block the hammer from the pin. Just curious as my experience with Ruger is limited to the P 95 and P94 and I wasnt sure how the other models decocked.

April 10, 2003, 10:54 PM
I own both the CZ 75B and the Ruger P95. I like 'em both. I sold one P95 to purchase the CZ 75B, and I've since replaced it with another P95. The Ruger will feed anything I can load in the mag. The CZ doesn't like reloads that approach the max. OAL in 147 gr HPs. Both are accurate with a slight edge to the CZ. Both are solidly made. CZ has the better trigger.

Tough call in my book. Guess I'd have to say CZ, but you would not go wrong with either.

Not sure if I've ever heard of any issues with the Ruger decocker ... even on the Ruger Forum. Unless, of course, you're talking about the broken firing pin issue with the original P85s. There was a recall on that way back when.


P.S. You can't stop at just one CZ. Next you'll want the CZ 75B in .40 caliber. Oh, yea. Then you need the CZ 75B P-01. Finally, you'll be waiting with the rest of us for the compact .40 melt that's should be out this year. :)

April 10, 2003, 11:33 PM
Go with the CZ, you won't regret it. Just order some of Hakan's grips to go with it and make it even more beautiful. (

April 11, 2003, 12:21 AM
I have shot both and I bought the CZ75BD...felt better in my hand.

April 11, 2003, 01:08 AM
Ive owned, shot, borrowed, rented etc both Ruger and CZ's.
The Ruger is a tool....simple, tough, dependable as a rock. Period....The CZ is the same thing with character and a soul.
You get a gun that will shoot anything everytime with either....My hands and heart are swayed by the CZ ....

As far as the trigger parts getting done and being inconsistent on CZ's...:rolleyes: Ive had 8 of them and had work done on most...I beg to differ with your smiths, I know CZ's have a much higher consistency rate metalurgically speaking, over most other BHPs and Colts. But then again I could just be biased.....:D


April 11, 2003, 02:17 AM
Maybe I'm the only one in the world, but I shot a Ruger P89 that continually jammed on me. It worked fine for the owner, so there may have been an issue with my grip or something.

Personal taste, I'd take the CZ over the Ruger any time. Better ergonomics, more elegant design, fairly inexpensive standard-capacity magazines, cross-platform compatibility (the mags from the fullsize can be used in the compact) and no philosophically inconsistant statements have been made by the CZ head honchos.

For a pistol that's in a medium-range price, I think the CZ is the best of all of 'em.

April 11, 2003, 04:26 AM


Which one fits your hand?

April 11, 2003, 08:34 AM
I guess you should buy the one that you really like the best.

I have shot a CZ, side-by-side with my P95.
I prefer the Ruger.
It felt big at first, but now it feels just right.
I even bought a P97 to keep it company. :D
The CZ feels more "Browning Hi Power" to me.
(Not that there is anything wrong with a BHP, mind you.)
It just doesn't ring my bell.
If either gun leaves you feeling cold like that, don't buy it.

On the other hand, if steel-and-wood gives you a wam fuzzy feeling, you won't ever warm up to the P95.
Me, I love a good steel gun, but I've come to really appreciate polymer guns too. (Darn Glocks!)

Go with the one that is calling your name, and you won't look back.

I liked the Ruger because:
1. Hi caps (actually "standard capacity mags" is the correct term) are easily available, and not that expensive.
2. It feeds anything.
3. Is a very accurate gun.
4. Made in the U.S.A.
5. Priced right.
6. Excellent customer service. (I called and asked about cutting down the mag release buttons. The gunsmith told me step-by-step how to do it, and sent me free new buttons, in case I messed the originals up. :p )
7. It's built like a tank.


April 11, 2003, 09:45 AM
In all honesty, I haven't owned a ruger 9/40, but have fired a few rounds though them....I will eventually aquire the P89.

I HAVE owned 3 CZ 75B's in 9mm: the Pro's & Con's........

PRO: IMHO, ergonomics are first rate, it's "sexy" looking", I prefer all-steel handguns, they're dead-accurate -- makes me a much better shooter -- , easy to strip-clean/lube, with time, the trigger gets a LOT better.

CON: Of the three I've owned, 2 were replacements from CZ: issues included fail-to-feed/eject(CZ #1), several broken slidestop shafts(on CZ #2), stovepiping/double feeding(CZ's #1 and 2). The black polycoat finish is much improved on my new '03 version: the '96 and '98 versions had chunks of the finish come off and "bubbles" under the grips: not a PROBLEM, but the new CZ is better finished.

CONCLUSION: I will buy more CZ's, but would not stake my life on one. For a Range Gun, I wouldn't hesitate.

I realize you did not mention S&W, but I got a new 9mm S&W 910 stainless for about the price of the Ruger or CZ: it only has about 1,000 rounds through it, but it is 100% reliable and I WOULD stake my life on it.

P.S. CZ guys & gals, I am happy for those who have 100% reliable CZ's -- and, note that I said MY experience has not been 100%; if you've never experienced any problems with yours, G_D bless you! CZ #3 is still in the break-in far, the only malf was an aluminum-cased Blazer, all the Blazers go into the S&W magazines! The CZ's tend to eat Sellier&Bellot like candy!

April 11, 2003, 09:52 AM
I owned a ruger in .45, and have put many rounds downrange with Ruger's in 9mm (p89 and p95). I currently own a CZ75.

In all honesty, for just a range/house gun, you can't go wrong with either. Although I would choose the P89 over the P95, simply because the polymer grip on the P95 feels to slippery to me.

April 11, 2003, 09:54 AM
I have a Ruger P97, have extensively shot a Ruger P95 and currently own a relatively new CZ P01.

The Rugers work period. They are tough as nails and my .45 is exceptionally accurate. My buddies P95 is not as accurate as my P01.

In my opinion I think the CZ offers more finesse if you will. It isn't necessarilly a better gun for what guns are but it is a nicer gun. If that makes any sense what so ever.

CZs are more friendly to the hand than the Rugers.

Personally I don't think you can go wrong with either one. The think that I like about CZ is they really go the extra mile when you buy a gun from them. You not only get a very nice gun but two magazines, cleaning brush, cleaning rod, 5 snap caps, allen wrench, multi tool/screwdriver punch thing box, test target and manual. I mean it isn't anything to drive the price up or make it a better gun it is just a nice extra or attention to some small details that I liked especially when you consider the baragain price.

Like everybody said whatever fits you the best. CZ full capacity magazines seem to be easier and a bit cheaper to get.

Would I give up my Ruger P97 though....heck no.

The CZs do cost a bit more but in my opinion you get more than a bit more in value.

Ruger's are American made and have great customer service.

I don't know about CZs customer service.

Really I think these two guns are so close that the CZ only edges it out in small details like fit and finish and extras that you get.

Gun to Gun either is just as capable as the other.

Sorry for the very disjointed post but it's early, I am having a bad day and I haven't had my coffee.


April 11, 2003, 10:33 AM
While I have many more expensive guns to use, I always tend to shoot or carry my CZ's more. For hi-cap, around the house and range I like my CZ-75B. Hicap mags are still cheap and the gun is very accurate and reliable. For CCW, I carry a CZ-75 PCR with a 14 round mag. The hicaps for these are more rare, but still can be had for around $45. Hey the standard 8 round mags for my HK P7M8 are $50 minimum!

April 11, 2003, 10:46 AM
The hicaps for these are more rare, but still can be had for around $45. Hey the standard 8 round mags for my HK P7M8 are $50 minimum!

Amen!!! Preach on Brother Pilot!!!

At least the P7 mags are made like tanks. That is $6.25 a bullet for crying out loud.

April 11, 2003, 01:57 PM
Maybe we should compare the P97 to the 97B?

April 11, 2003, 02:20 PM
Maybe we should compare the P97 to the 97B

I love my P97 and I have heard that it is probably more reliable with various types of ammo. I have heard that the CZ97 can be finicky with HP ammo.

All that being said the CZ97 is an absolutely gorgeous pistol. Leaps and bounds prettier than my P97. I would love to have CZ 97.


Tom B
April 11, 2003, 03:09 PM
I have owned several Ruger P-95s and a P-97. The P-95s were super reliable. The P-97 was not. None of the Rugers could match any of the CZ75Bs that I have owned as far as accuracy goes. Many people say that sighting a Glock is like looking down the deck of an Aircraft Carrier. Well sighting a Ruger is not that bad...its more like looking down the deck of a Battleship! :scrutiny:

April 11, 2003, 03:09 PM
I own both the Ruger KP-95 and the CZ 75B. Ergonomically the CZ is better but for me the decocker system of the Ruger is superior and probably safer than the CZ's unique DA/SA system. Of course one can get a newer version of the CZ with a decocker action. The DA trigger of the CZ is long but very smooth while the SA trigger has always annoyed me because of the stacking just before release. The Ruger's trigger in both DA and SA have been improving, the SA has some creep but I like it better than the CZ. The DA is not as smooth as the CZ but it is getting there. Accuracy-wise it's so close that I don't think there is a practical difference.

More important to me than the above is the complete 100 % reliability of the Ruger. The Cz has hung-up on more than one occasion. I have replaced the Cz's recoil spring and mag. springs and the last time at the range it was 100%.

It's a tough choice, but since I believe the Ruger is more reliable that's the one I would recommend. Neither is a SIG 228 nor a FN Hi-power.

SoDFW Jason
April 11, 2003, 05:10 PM
Thanks to all who replied. I am thining it's gonna be a CZ now. I have HUMONGOUS hands though, does that make a difference?

April 11, 2003, 06:34 PM

Don't buy one until you've held one in your big hands. My money says you will love it but just the same you should handle one first.


April 11, 2003, 07:17 PM
CZ all the way. It's an outstanding deal. Every part of the Ruger is cast, including the barrel and aluminum frame. With the CZ, you get a cast STEEL frame, milled slide and a hammer-forged barrel. It's simply made out of better material, and it's almost certainly more accurate. Don't expect to see any difference in reliability.

April 12, 2003, 01:41 AM
I'd go w/ the CZ.

April 12, 2003, 10:16 AM
SoDFWJason:"I have HUMONGOUS hands. Does that make a difference?


Jason, my hands are "medium"....I can hit the mag release, slide release and decocker/safety on the Ruger without changing my grip.

On the other hand(no pun intended), I have to slightly shift my grip to reach the slide release and mag release button on my CZ;
BIG hands are a bonus with the CZ.:uhoh:

April 13, 2003, 05:32 AM
I've owned a Ruger P89, I own a CZ 75 and CZ 40.

They are both reliable (with a slight edge to the Ruger), durable and great values.

The Ruger is much bigger and blockier and it feels heavier (though I'm pretty sure it is about the same actual weight). The Ruger's grips are a bit large for many (maybe fine for you, but if you want to take someone shooting it may be an issue). The CZ fits almost everyone nearly perfectly (it may be a near perfect ergonomic design).

The CZ is much more accurate, has much better fit and finish and for me provides much more pride of ownership (a lot for the CZ v. virtually none for the Ruger). Around me the price is very close but even if the CZ was $100 more than the Ruger I'd go with the CZ.

April 13, 2003, 01:18 PM
I own a CZ-75, and have shot my brother's P89 extensively, I can endorse Chaim's observations 100%.

April 13, 2003, 07:45 PM
I had a P95. Traded it for a CZ75. Pretty much sums it up.

April 13, 2003, 08:09 PM
CZ by a long shot.

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger or CZ- opinions" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!