Would you trade a Sig 220ST for a CZ-97B


September 26, 2006, 09:41 PM
Ok, here's the deal. I have a Sig 220ST that has been a safe queen. I have 5 mags for it. I could keep the Sig 220ST or I could trade it even for a CZ-97B with 5 mags as well. Taking the price aspect of the two handguns out of it, would you do it and why. If you wouldn't do it, I'd like to know why as well.

If you enjoyed reading about "Would you trade a Sig 220ST for a CZ-97B" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Deer Hunter
September 26, 2006, 09:48 PM
I'd do it. But then again, that's just me.

September 26, 2006, 09:52 PM
Seeing as how the CZ is selling for ~$450 to $550 here:


And the Sig is selling for $650 (reconditioned) to $925 here:


Are you sure you really want an answer?

Plus, you're going to throw in 5 mags?

You're just antsy, that's all. In the mood for a change.

Take two xanax and call me in the morning.

September 26, 2006, 09:52 PM
$ 663.00 MSRP in CZ-97B :barf:
$ 935.00 MSRP on SIG P-220 ST :cool:

With that out of the equation, no. Absolutely not. Matter of opinion, I hate the looks of the CZ. The SIG fits better in MY hands. I would therefore not even consider it. Nothing against the Czechs, just prefer Swiss design with German production machinery:)

Hope this helps:D

September 26, 2006, 09:56 PM
I'm taking the price part of the equation out of the picture as here in Mass we cannot buy a CZ as they are not on the AG list. That is unless someone moves into the state with one or it's pre-ban. Because of this ban, the CZs actually cost more in most instances then a used Sig 220ST.

I've never shot a CZ before, but the opportunity to get this CZ came up and yes, I was thinking of a change. But I don't want to get rid of a quality handgun like the 220 for something that is sub par.


September 26, 2006, 10:03 PM
No, I have the sig and its the one beside the bed. That's a strong endorsement.

September 26, 2006, 11:08 PM
man i have a cz75 nice gun i like it, that being said i have shot a few sigs, and these is coming from a cz owner mind you. The sig is superior to my cz any day of the week, dont do it.

September 26, 2006, 11:40 PM
Because of this ban, the CZs actually cost more in most instances then a used Sig 220ST.

Because of your ban, maybe.

But keep in mind that the prices I quoted you are in the real world and reflect the relative quality of the two guns. You absolutely get what you pay for and you will be trading for a drastically inferior handgun.

The 220ST is one of the best constructed, durable, accurate handguns available. Don't give it up.

September 26, 2006, 11:50 PM
I don't have a Sig but I do have a CZ97. If you want to use the CZ for self defense, keep in mind that they don't like hollow points. The CZ is very accurate though and recoil is mild for a .45. They aren't as hard to get a grip on as some people make them out to be. I have average sized hands and don't have a problem with the grip size.

Try shooting the CZ first if you can then decide if you want it more than the Sig. Or just buy it and keep both. Personally, I like the CZ97 very much but I don't think I would give up the Sig to get it.

Sigs have a good reputation for quality but price doesn't always reflect the level of quality. CZ,s are well made guns and sometimes price reflects the level of cost in manufactering in different parts of the world. Sometimes you get more than what you pay for and sometimes you pay more than its worth.

September 27, 2006, 12:59 AM
I love the CZ. Don't have one, but want one.

But if I had a SIG already, i probably wouldn't trade. Sigs are....sigs. A CZ is not.

September 27, 2006, 01:10 AM
Why is the SIG a safe queen? Is there something wrong w/ it? If not, how does it shoot? Do you even remotely like it?
If the 220st is a gun you like, don't get rid of it...save you $$
If you don't like that 220st, then by all means, get rid of it and get something you'll shoot!

September 27, 2006, 01:34 AM
Mercedes for a Yugo?

I say "no-go".

September 27, 2006, 07:34 AM
stay AWAY from the CZ-97. It's an outstanding pistol, but it's HUGE.

September 27, 2006, 08:14 AM
From a $$$ aspect, it is a bad deal.

From a quality aspect, I suspect hte SIG edges the CZ97 out.

From a manual of arms perspective (SIG DA vs CZ C&L capable), I would go with the CZ.

If you had the SIG P220SAO with C&L cpability, it would be no question (if the SIG fit your hands): keep the SIG.

mons meg
September 27, 2006, 08:21 AM
I've never shot a CZ before, but the opportunity to get this CZ came up and yes, I was thinking of a change. But I don't want to get rid of a quality handgun like the 220 for something that is sub par.

Try one out, I don't think you'll find it sup-par.

Mercedes for a Yugo?

I say "no-go".

At the risk of sounding un-HighRoadish...do you have any idea what you're talking about? ;)

Sigs are fine weapons. I happen to be of the opinion that they are a tad overpriced. CZs are fine weapons, which I find to be undervalued/underappreciated by those who don't have experience with them....it's not some fly by night organization, y'know...

Nothing against SIG whatsoever, my hand just doesn't fit them like it does my CZ75. A friend also lets me shoot his 97, and I was worried about the large grip, but it turned out to be unfounded. Makes the .45acp very easy to shoot.

Also, the 97 isn't really any bigger than a full size 1911. :P

September 27, 2006, 08:49 AM
If you're not crazy about the Sig and really want the CZ, then yes, but make it a three-way trade. Trade the Sig for the cash it is worth and then trade SOME of the cash for a CZ. Then spend the rest on ammo.

The Sig is absolutely a top-notch weapon, no doubt about it. Better than the CZ by most accounts (although there's nothing wrong with them, either). Just because it is "Top-Notch" doesn't make it the gun for you. Few would argue that a "snake-eyes" 2.5-inch Colt Python "out-classes" my relatively plain 3" S+W model 65. That doesn't make me a better shot with the Colt or make it feel better in my hand...

chocolate and vanilla......

High Planes Drifter
September 27, 2006, 09:34 AM
I'd research that 97 before considering it. I've read alot on the CZ board that they have feeding problems with hollowpoint ammo. Here's a link:


Go back thru it a few pages. There's plenty of topics on how to modify the gun to make it work with HP, like doing ramp jobs and such. Theres also plenty of topics on problems (various problems).

Cousin Mike
September 27, 2006, 10:45 AM
...for a CZ? :scrutiny: :cuss: :confused: :what: :fire: :banghead:

Man, HELL NO!!!

Are you crazy?


September 27, 2006, 04:59 PM
I love CZs, and I love SIGs, and these are both great guns. However, I never advocate trading off firearms. You will always regret it.

September 27, 2006, 05:33 PM
Respectfully, ain't no way in hell I would make that trade. :)

September 27, 2006, 05:51 PM
Thanks everyone for the replys. I think after reading these posts, I'm going to pass on the trade. Hummmmm, maybe I'll hold out trading the Sig for a HK USP 45 some day down the road. ;)

September 27, 2006, 05:52 PM
BUY the CZ 97 if it's that hard to come by. DO NOT trade the 220 ST for it, as the 220 ST is, in my opinion, a very high quality weapon.

220 ST's got a slimmer grip, better trigger, better sights, better ergos (for most). It's just a more refined weapon. Mine's SUPER accurate. You need to shoot yours more. :)

97's got higher capacity. Haven't shot one yet, but from all accounts, a very rugged, reliable, and accurate weapon also.

I traded away a 226 ST + $$$ for a Les Baer Supertac w/ 1.5" guarantee. That's trading UP, not DOWN. Trading the 220 ST for a 97 would be trading down.

Just buy the darn thing.

Edited to add: Ah, I see the 97 is no longer on your wish list, but the 220 ST is still in your dog house. Why? If you're looking at an HK USP .45 and a CZ 97b, you must have pretty large hands. Keep the Sig, it's one of those guns you'll regret getting rid of later on....

September 27, 2006, 06:03 PM
Edited to add: Ah, I see the 97 is no longer on your wish list, but the 220 ST is still in your dog house. Why?

To be honest I have no idea. I do like it a lot, but it's the only handgun in my collection that seem to not make it out of my safe very often. I'd love to just buy the CZ but $650 is steep. Not that steep of a price for it here in Mass, but it's still steep. Oh, I can see the replys when people see the price these are going for a used one in this state.

As to trading it for a HK, the HK is damn near impossible to get here for less then $800. Most used USPs go for closer to $1K.

You know, I think I'm going to take the 220 to the range this weekend and run it through it's paces.

September 27, 2006, 06:10 PM
Would you trade a Sig 220ST for a CZ-97B

Not just no...hell, no...

September 27, 2006, 06:15 PM
Dude I wouldn't trade YOUR SIG P220 for a CZ97 much less my own P220.

So count me among the Hell no camp.

CZ makes a fine, fine gun but the 97 is just too big and seems to have had quite a few early teething problems with ammo sensativity.

Now I am a SIG guy at heart so take it for what it is worth.

September 27, 2006, 06:15 PM
Without price in the equation, I'd take the CZ over the Sig. Sig's just don't live up to the hype for me, while CZ's have.

September 27, 2006, 08:36 PM
For a CZ Lover as myself, the 97B is big, heavy(which helps with recoil) and superbly accurate.

That some only feed FMJ isn't a big obstacle with loads like PowRball
on the market.

As for the SIG, I carried one on duty for 3 years. Unlike my P226, never any problem with it, just always prefered my CZ75s, especially overseas, where 9mm was the norm for ammo. I also like the traditional Browning type controls of the CZ over those of the SIGs.

My old 97B was glossy blue (no longer offered) had MMC nites and Hakans, just too big and heavy for me to CCW every day of the week. Mine fed HPs just fine.

Considered to be the Flagship of the CZ pistol line.They are somewhat
better machined/finished than other CZs and very smooth operating, at least in my opinion and that of other 97B owners.

Whether or not some folks think you would be trading down..
Given the fact that they are hard to come by and have peaked your interest...I think you will pleased with a 97B.

More pics and info:

September 27, 2006, 08:46 PM
The CZ just fits me better and I prefer its control layout much better than the Sig. I cannot abide a decocker-with-no-safety pistol. <shudder>

Most folks don't like its size. But if it fits you, oh my! It's breathtaking how good it can make you shoot.

September 27, 2006, 09:02 PM

Do you have the opportunity to shoot the CZ-97 before buying to check function, see how it fits you, and how you shoot it? Can you meet the seller at a range nd shoot both side by side? Do you want the HK more than the CZ? Are you planning to move out of Mass in the forseable future?

If you're planning to move to less firearms restrictive state soon then keep the SIG and wait on the CZ.

If you plan to stay in Ma. then prices elsewhere don't matter. Remember, the true value of anything is what someone is willing to pay for it. In Ma. the value of the CZ is inflated by scarcity, but if that's where you plan to stay then that's the pricing to go by. Shoot both side by side and see what you like better. Price out of the equation, the gun you shoot better and that fits/feels best is the better value to you - who cares what anyone else thinks, they won't be shooting it. You're also more likely to take a gun that fits/feels better, and that you shoot better, to the range more often. IMO, the gun you will shoot more is more valuable because you're using as the tool it is.

Also, if you really want the HK, more so than the CZ, then wait on the HK. When you find a good price on the HK the SIG will likely have better trade toward/ sell for cash toward value than the CZ. As I said above different guns work better for different shooters.

Finally, It sounds like you have several other guns that you enjoy so you can hang on to the SIG until the time is right. Just be patient and get what you really want. What you really want to do may be saving for another gun and keeping the SIG. It may be trading/selling the SIG toward something you've tested and know will better for you. Take your time and think on it.

Alan Fud
September 28, 2006, 08:55 PM
A Sig 220ST for a CZ-97B? An ST??

The only thing that I might trade a stainless Sig for would be an Inox Beretta -- and that's still a "maybe" ... depending on the two guns involved.

September 28, 2006, 11:31 PM
I have the Sig ST Stock, fiber optic sights and oversized controls. Also have the CZ 75BD, Kadet Kit, P-01 and IPSC Standard. I would not trade my 220 for the 97B. I might buy the 97, but would not trade.

If you are not shooting the 220, why would you think you would shoot the 97?

Mr Kablammo
September 29, 2006, 12:47 AM
The posts that base the worth of the trade on the monetary value alone are bogus. As stated by the wise above, prices in your state are the prices in your state. Beyond that, the idea that the quality of each arm is reflected in the price is also bogus. I have both, and used Sigs in new condition routinely rotate locally for just less than the price of a new CZ 97B. Is that because the CZ is low quality? No. The CZ 97B, in my opinion, is under-priced. I have a gloss 97B and am astonished that it is not an $700+ piece. The accuracy is astounding, the trigger is smooth as butter, and the gloss finish is deep and handsome, the takedown is as easy as the Sig. At the range, people say the Sig is a 'good gun'. But the compliments are come in for the CZ.

Yes, one can CCW the Sig more easily, but will you?

Shoot both guns and if you are impressed by the 97B, and it suits your purposes, trade. If there is ever a collector's market, the CZ will appreciate more than the Sig. Please, stop insulting the CZs. The quality is THERE.

September 29, 2006, 10:36 AM

September 29, 2006, 11:09 AM
He doesn't mention...
That the CZ comes with a 150 dollar holster and mag carrier from C Rusty Sherrick, 6 magazines, Jack Ash custom stainles steel guide rod, extra recoil spring, factory drop free magazine brake. I resent the notion that I am charging more because this is being sold in MA. That is absolutely untrue. The premium is at most 50-75 dollars if any and that is if you excessively devalue the accessories. I am only charging what I paid for it, and I paid that price for the accessories. I also added the guide rod and spring into the package since I bought it.

The Sig 220ST is a better gun hands down. Nicer fit and finish and it will feed hollowpoints no questions asked. The CZ-97 however has a totally different recoil feel that is the reason I bought it, is C&L capable, and has the two extra rounds of capacity. I would just carry it with ball and be done with it, in .45 I think it isn't such a big deal. You are welcome to shoot the gun before buying.

Don't yah just love cross posting forums?

Snake Eyes
September 29, 2006, 11:22 AM
I traded my wife for a Sig once. I don't even miss her.

September 29, 2006, 01:14 PM
More expensive gun doesn't mean better gun.

September 29, 2006, 03:52 PM
adweisbe wrote: I resent the notion that I am charging more because this is being sold in MA.

I don't think my posts indicated that at all. Unless your talking about posts from other people. I've been buying handguns in MA long enought to know how the ban plays into the cost. My comments about the price being steep was in reference to the funds I do not have available to buy it. If I had $650 I would definitely buy it from you.

I've only shot a CZ-75 once a few years ago and it shot well. This post was to get comments on what the overall opinion on this particular model. If any insult was taken by my comments, they were not stated to infer that.

Oh and I didn't post this question on the original forum as I didn't want anyone else to realize you were selling and grab it before I got a chance. :rolleyes: Yeah, really crappy of me. I REALLY need to get an incognito id for these types of questions. :o

As I emailed you, good luck in selling your CZ. I'm sure someone will quickly swoop it up.

September 29, 2006, 04:07 PM
RockRivr1, I have no complaint with you whatsoever. Not with anyone else I guess, they just didn't have the whole picture with which to pass judgement. I should have kept out and not been rude but I couldn't help myself. ;) I always get a kick out of seeing people cross post.

A new CZ 97B is 525 from onpoint firearms, devalue the holster to 75 + mag carrier, that is 600, add in 4 mags, that is more then 50 dollars, plus the guide rod. The honest MA markup is not to charge more for a gun that isn't available, but instead to charge new or close to new price if the gun is in %95 or better condition. Considering that a used 220ST goes for 550-699 (Carls has a 599 in stock), brand new 220STs were selling for 650 only two years ago, it seems like a pretty straight deal. The catch is, you have to want a CZ-97, without that it's worthless.

September 29, 2006, 08:50 PM
I have a sig p226-9mm and a cz pcr. If I had to choose between the two I would take the cz all the time. But I love my sig as well. Both are great guns.

September 29, 2006, 10:20 PM
The catch is, you have to want a CZ-97, without that it's worthless.

And be willing to give up and live without the 220ST. I want a CZ-97 but, I want about 25 other guns first and wouldn't be willing to live without any I already own to get one. :)

September 29, 2006, 10:36 PM
I'm not a sig fan, but if you tell me to pick a 220ST or CZ97B, I'd take the Sig.

September 29, 2006, 11:01 PM
No way I'd do that.......I much prefer SIGs.

If you enjoyed reading about "Would you trade a Sig 220ST for a CZ-97B" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!