CZ-75 owners - do you know what you're talking about?


PDA






SDDL-UP
October 26, 2007, 09:50 AM
Okay CZ owners!

How many of you own at least five different brands of semi-auto handguns and think the CZ is as good or better than anything else?

I own...

1911 (Kimber)
BHP (made in Belgium)
HK USP
Glock
CZ

...and to me the CZ's are the best of the bunch! I've shot Sig's and Ruger's a fair amount too, but they've just never "done it" for me. Fine guns, but just not something for me.

Now I think a lot of CZ owners are like me and have significant experience with other handguns, and have learned to appreciate the greatness of the CZ-75 design.

What do you think?

CZ "homers" can check-in too! I'm obviously not going to tell you that you're wrong for being a homer, but maybe tell us how you came to be a CZ homer?

If you enjoyed reading about "CZ-75 owners - do you know what you're talking about?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
budder
October 26, 2007, 10:16 AM
Well, I don't own 5 different brands of semi-auto handguns, but I've shot many more than 5 different brands. My 75 SA is one of the best.

armoredman
October 26, 2007, 10:27 AM
I worked an indoor rental range for a year and a half, where one job was to test fire incoming trade in sidearms, and maintain the rental handguns. I fired everything on the market up to 2002, including almost every model of Glock, SiG,(with the exception of the 210, of course - NOBODY traded THAT in!), Taurus, Ruger, HK, (yes, we had a P7 on the rental range with the USPs), Springfield, Beretta, Llama, (couldn't sell it, why not rent it.), Colt, (including the All-American 2000, yikes), and I know I am forgetting a few brand names.
After all of it, CZ still works better and fits better than anything else on the market. The only sidearms I liked almost as much as CZ was the SiG P220 .45, and Beretta 92FS, while too big and bulky for me to be comfortable carrying it, was indeed a fun range gun, up 'till it broke.
I saw every brand break, too, including ALL above mentioned manufacturers, with the following exceptions - CZ autos, Ruger autos, and Smith revolvers.

S&W620
October 26, 2007, 10:27 AM
Well, I've owned a CZ-85, Springfield Loaded 1911, a G19 and G17 an M&P as well as an HK USP to go along with a Smith revo.

Was the CZ better than the rest? No.

Were they as good as the rest? Yes, except for the HK. It truly is in a league of its own IMO.

However, CZ's are about as fine of firearm as one can hope to buy. I'm very pissed I sold mine.

Hauptmann
October 26, 2007, 10:33 AM
Each pistol design has its own advantages and weaknesses. The CZ 75 is a very good overall pistol and has many more advantages than weaknesses. When you compare the CZ 75 or other designs you can see those advantages as well as those weaknesses. When it comes to weaknesses versus a Sig, the CZ has a longer double action and single action trigger. Trigger reach overall is also more of a stretch. There is less gripping area on the slide for cycling the action verus a Sig. This is evident during high stress or combat shooting where gross muscle movement is all that you have available because your heart rate is around 200bpm. The CZ will not go into a full decock, this means that instead of keeping it more simple with two trigger conditions, you now have three which increases training time. Those are the operational issues on the CZ that I think other designs are better with. Other issues to look at are the thin/weak extractor, weaker barrel to slide lockup, and weaker trigger return spring.

The Sig has its own weaknesses, as well as a Beretta, or 1911. Some days I think the Sig is the ultimate pistol, the next day I think my CZ is the ultimate pistol......in truth there is no ultimate pistol design. Just equally impressive alternatives.

Omega
October 26, 2007, 10:38 AM
I am down from 13 CZs to 4:
- PCR, SP-01, CZ97, CZ82
and I still have a few other semi, among them - SIG, H&K, Glocks, Les Baers, Makarov, Walther p99, Witness Tanfoglio, Benelli, etc.
I wouldn't say that CZs are THE BEST guns there, but they are better than many. Probably they are the best in only one aspect - cost (that is going up little by little) I think in $380-$450 they are the best guns.
Just my 2 cents

,

Marshall
October 26, 2007, 11:01 AM
For the price, they're good enough.

SDDL-UP
October 26, 2007, 11:11 AM
S&W620,

That's funny to me because I actually BROKE my HK USP-40! The trigger bar broke with about 2000 rounds through it and it was NEVER abused in any way. This and the fact that the barrel is so high in relation to the grip makes me like the USP less than I thought I would (had it now for 13+ years). I still think it's a fine gun though.

Hauptmann,

I agree the CZ-75 isn't "perfect"... we'll leave that little fantasy to Glock homers (I also own a Glock and love it so don't flame me!). I appreciate your input as a CZ and Sig owner. Thanks.

Marshall,

I'm just curious about those kinds of comments... spend twice what you would on a CZ-75 (you pick the variation) and tell me how the given firearm of YOUR CHOICE would be significantly better than the CZ?

Ghost Tracker
October 26, 2007, 11:17 AM
Jeff Cooper (R.I.P.) said the CZ 75B was his personal pick of the "Wonder Nines" available at the time. His opinion packs a lot more experience than mine. I'm a SA autoloader fan & the CZ easily behaves like one. Good Choice!

obxned
October 26, 2007, 11:25 AM
Come on now, there are hundreds of different gun models that are all reliable and accurate enough. The things which make one gun better than another are the 'feel' and the features. Both of these are subjective.

As far as price, CZs and a few other makes that aren't the current favorites do give you a lot for your money. Sadly, CZs seem to be gaining in popularity and the prices may continue to rise.

deanodog
October 26, 2007, 11:30 AM
Other guns have better sights and a shorter DA trigger reach. CZ's are very good for the money but it surely could use better sights. Even the lowly sigma has better sights than CZ's. I prefer the feel of the M&P9 better.

Coronach
October 26, 2007, 11:40 AM
I prefer the BHP to the CZ75, but that's like saying I prefer an Aston-Martin to a Rolls-Royce. Adequate, sir. They're both adequate. ;)

Mike

BayAreaTactical
October 26, 2007, 11:46 AM
CZ is a very under rated firearm. They make a quality firearm, and for the money they deserve more attention than what they currently get. They shoot very well and are not particular with the ammo is used in them. But at the end of the day, when you are talking about quality firearms, it is how that firearm fits and feels in your hand that matters the most.

Marshall
October 26, 2007, 12:30 PM
For the price, they're good enough.

Marshall,

I'm just curious about those kinds of comments... spend twice what you would on a CZ-75 (you pick the variation) and tell me how the given firearm of YOUR CHOICE would be significantly better than the CZ?


First of all, that's just one comment. Second of all, it wasn't a bad one. Thirdly, many guns fit that same comment, the CZ-75 is not alone. Fourth, what they said. Sights, trigger reach and feel are poor and, to me, the trigger gaurd is ugly and too big, the rails on the .40cal are ugly and show wear, the trigger and hammer should be black, they look cheap but, it's a nice functioning gun and good enough for the price. If the price keeps going up I'll be harder pressed to say that. Fifth, significantly better to whom? Significantly better to me is all that matters? ;)

ClickClickD'oh
October 26, 2007, 12:41 PM
Let's see, I own pistols made by:

Beretta
Colt
CZ
Glock
Mauser
PA-63 :barf: (whoever makes that thing)
Ruger
Smith & Wesson

The CZ-75B .40 S&W is my carry choice.

PS, the CZ-100B is a piece of garbage.

SDDL-UP
October 26, 2007, 12:48 PM
Marshall,

EXACTLY! I'm curious as to what handgun would be significantly better for you.

CZ offers three dot sights, three dot luminous sights, three dot tritium sights, competition fiber optic sights, and fully adjustable sights. That's totally okay if you don't care for any of them, I'm not saying you should.

When you say "for the money" and "good enough" I am just curious that's all. For the money compared to what, a Hi-Point or a Wilson Combat? Good enough compared to what?

saltydog452
October 26, 2007, 01:19 PM
I'll play.

My 75 Compact is the DA/SA model.

In DA, the trigger reach is too long for non/NBA hands.

In SA, the thumb safety ledge is too skinny for positive engagement under stress at speed.

Geo Smith at EGW is working on building up that ledge.

In DA/SA, I prefer the 228.

In SA only, I had much rather have the BHP.

The 92FS isn't even close to either.

Maybe I'd have a different opinion if I had bought the SA only version.


salty.

-terry
October 26, 2007, 01:27 PM
I own
Walther P99c
Sig P220
Buckmark
CZ75B

I like the CZ best for it's fit, reliability, and appearance. I paid 700 or so for mine after the competition rework. I'm always pleased when I pick it up and just hold it.

Trebor
October 26, 2007, 01:41 PM
I sold all my HK P7's because I shot my CZ-75 better. That tell you anything?

ZeSpectre
October 26, 2007, 01:49 PM
I own (or have owned) around 15 different pistols from a variety of different manufacturers and of a variety of different "luxury" levels. There are three of mine that really shine where out of the box accuracy, reliability, and consistency are concerned.

c.1979 Ruger Security Six (.357 Magnum Revolver)
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b66/zespectre/0705-2.jpg


c.1999 SIG 229 (.40 S&W)
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b66/zespectre/0709.20_45feet.jpg


c.2006 CZ-75B (.40 S&W)
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b66/zespectre/CZ-75_Bullseye.jpg

Marshall
October 26, 2007, 02:01 PM
I'm curious as to what handgun would be significantly better for you.
Why do you care so much what I like? There's a whole lot of hanguns I would rather buy than a CZ-75. Throw in revolvers are there's even more. A P-01 would even be one of them. All but one or two are more expensive, to speak of anyway. Which brings me back to my original statement. For the price, they're good enough.

bigmike45
October 26, 2007, 02:36 PM
3-Wilson Combat 1911's
1-Browning Hi Power
1- Springfield XD45 Service
2-Taurus PT-145's
1-KelTec P-11
3-Ruger Redhawks
1-Ruger GP-100
1-Ruger SP-101
and of course
1-Stainless CZ75B

The CZ is a great gun, fun to shoot, accurate and dependable.

SDDL-UP
October 26, 2007, 02:38 PM
Marshall,

I care what you like because you cared to post in this thread SPECIFICALLY titled "CZ-75 owners - do you know what you are talking about."

From what you have posted I don't know if you even own a handgun! The thread was meant for a comparison of the CZ-75 and other auto-loaders. If you don't want to provide us with useful information - don't post!

Marshall
October 26, 2007, 03:26 PM
Opinions are useful information, that's half, if not more, of what this forum is used for. It's just not the information you want to hear. For someone that doesn't know if I own a handgun or not, or have ever owned a handgun or not, or what brand and model they were or presently are, you sure assume a lot. I missed the part they required a history of handguns and the part that said don't offer an opinion if you don't provide one. You did ask for CZ owners right? I figured you were including ex-owners too.

You asked what handgun would be better to me. I told you there are quite a few, not just one. I told you what I didn't for care for about them too, specifically. It's just not the particular information you want to hear.

Why? Because you want to argue that the CZ is the best gun on the market, I don't. If it is the best to you, great. You want to go tit-n-tat on specific guns, I have no desire to do so, we could go all night. It's not that important to me. If that get's your panties in a wad, sorry.

If this was just suppose to be a chearleading raw-raw CZ thread, I apologize.

BrokenArrow
October 26, 2007, 03:50 PM
When the PCR tested the CZ75, there were 7 malfunctions in 15,000 rounds. The 2 CZ75s, and 5 CZ75Bs I have owned were about that good. Could probably do better in mil-spec type testing, but I haven't heard about it if they have.

The first 20K guns delivered of the 40K gun PCR contract were rejected for problems BTW. Anybody can mess up anything. Ask Beretta.

Thats about what the M9 did in 1985's testing. Newer production contract guns are doing much better, 1 in 17,500, and slide life is from 55K - 95K.

The M11 (SIG P228) had 1 in 15,000 (3 guns x 5K rounds).

The FBI's 1911s had 7 in 80,000 (4 guns x 20K; two guns had 0 in 20K).

The FBI's Glock 40s had 0 in 120,000 (6 x 20K).

3 gun
October 26, 2007, 03:50 PM
The CZ75 has it pretty well covered as far as 9mm pistols go. You can find pistols that will hold more ammo but not with as slim a grip. You'll find ones that fire smaller groups at the cost of being ammo sensitive or less reliable. You will find better fit and finish at a much higher cost. As a package the 75 covers the middle ground very well.

If you want a display piece you might want to look at something else. If you want a bullseye pistol keep looking. If you want a CCW piece to show off how much money you can spend you'll want to pass on the CZ.

If you want a well made, rugged, reliable, easy to maintain, high cap, USPSA/IDPA/self defense ready pistol that won't break the bank the CZ75 should be very high on your list.

goon
October 26, 2007, 04:19 PM
I've had a couple Glocks, a couple 1911's (springfield and kimber), a couple SIG's, a couple CZ's, and a Browing HP. I currently have a Ruger P-95.
If I had to rate those, it would be as follows

SIG
CZ or Browing HP
Glock
Ruger
1911's

These are rated just on my own experience so don't take any of this personally. Overall, CZ's are great pistols and even better when you consider the price tag.

col_tapiocca
October 26, 2007, 04:23 PM
I own / used to have follow semi-autos:
-Glock 17
-Walther P22
-Sig P225 & P226
-1911 (Colt Serie 70')
-Sphinx AT-2000S = Swiss clone of CZ75

Basically the Sphinx AT-2000S is a almost exactly copy of CZ75 with few minor modifications.
Is it available in the USA? If yes, I'll recommend you to take a closer look at it!
It's a 9mm with extem good finish and workmanship. But quite pricy.

SDDL-UP
October 26, 2007, 04:25 PM
Marshall,

This is not meant to be a ra-ra thread, and that goes for everyone telling us "they are fine guns" too. I want context!

Everyone has a valid opinion.

Some people here understand and are posting that their opinion is not based on ownership of one or two guns, but with many, that's what I'm most interested in.

The best posts in this thread are from those that have let us know they have a lot of experience with many handguns, like armoredman, ClickClickD'oh, bigmike45, and others. I'm giving more weight to the opinions with context. Providing a picture that show accuracy provides context, telling us the safety is too small (and why) provides context, you telling us it doesn't fit you doesn't mean as much unless you tell us what fits you better. Same with the sights - I'm simply asking for context.

Stephen A. Camp
October 26, 2007, 05:18 PM
Hello. Let's make sure that as the discussion and information with "context" continues that we stay on THR and not get sidetracked into name-calling or other silly actions.

Thanks in advance.

Best.

GaryArkansas
October 26, 2007, 05:54 PM
Two CZs, Bersa, Smith & Wesson, Taurus, Hi-Point, Ruger

I'm familiar with and have fired numerous Colt 45 ACPs, Beretta, Kimber, STI, and Springfield XD.

On an overall basis, when it comes to reliability, functionality and accuracy, yeah, so far, CZ is the best. Some match grade custom jobs may be more accurate, but they might have reliability issues, or may be finicky with ammo, etc.

Kimber and others may have CZ beat on the quality of finish or polishing of unseen machined parts, they do not exceed the CZ when it comes to the defining characteristics of a defensive firearm.

CZ's will consistently digest the cheapest Russian ammo, lead bullets - just about anything. It will do so accurately, round after round.

Juna
October 26, 2007, 11:01 PM
Well, let's see... A few of the handgun brands I've fired (but not necessarily owned) off the top of my head...

Glock
SigSauer
Beretta
Ruger
Kel-Tec
Smith & Wesson
Kimber
Para-Ordnance
Springfield
Desert Eagle

There are others I'm forgetting at the moment...

I can honestly say that I prefer the CZ 75 series (including full size, compact, and RAMI) to any brand of gun mentioned above for several reasons--accuracy, ergonomics, reliability, looks, options, etc. The next closest for me would be the XD or a good 1911.

I've actually gone to the range and done side-by-side, head-to-head comparisons with different versions of CZ 75s and the other guns mentioned above, and the CZ wins every time for me.

Granted, I've never fired any CZ pistols other than the 75 series (CZ 75B/75BD/SP-01, CZ 75 Compact/PCR/P-01, and CZ 2075 RAMI/RAMI-P). I have no experience with the CZ 97B or any other CZ handguns (e.g. CZ 100). Also, I think I've only fired the 9mm versions of the 75 series.

Nothing has the ergonomics or accuracy of the CZ, IMO. I truthully don't find their triggers to be bad at all, especially in SA. I just can't get enough of CZs! I have a serious addiction! :D In fact, all this talk of CZs--and especially the pictures--makes me want to buy another one!!! :evil:

Trebor
October 27, 2007, 12:09 AM
The guns I've owned or currently own include:

CZ 75
FN High Power
Sig 239
HK P7M8 and PSP
Glock 19
STI Spartan 1911
Makarov
various S&W revolvers.

The CZ-75 is still my "go to" gun as it's the gun I shoot the best and gives the most consistent performance. The Sig has been just as reliable, but I don't shoot it as well, and the Glock *might* be a contender when I get more used to it.

The FN HP and the Sig are pretty much tied as my second choice for best performing semi-auto for me.

My carry gun is the S&W Model 65 due to the combo of bulk, weight, ease of use, and effectiveness. It's really in a different category then the CZ though.

Lobotomy Boy
October 27, 2007, 01:07 AM
It depends on what you mean by "better." The CZ is an excellent gun built to a very high standard, but so are a lot of other brands. What might be better for you might not be better for someone else.

robctwo
October 27, 2007, 11:41 AM
I own a number of different hand guns, and have sold a few. One of my first was the CZ75BD, and I put the Kadet Kit with it right away. I have the CZP01 as my go everywhere sidearm. I have a 97B and a Standard IPSC.

Are the CZs "better" than my Sigs and high end 1911s? No.

They are great guns and have been exceptional values. Especially the 75BD for around $390!

I try to not be too critical of anyone on this board, whether they have a few or many posts. That is the high road.

Golddog
October 27, 2007, 11:56 AM
I've owned various 1911's, a very fine BHP, some underrated Stars, a half-dozen S&W autos, a Ruger P89, and an HK P7 PSP, and I've shot many Berettas, Walthers, Glocks, Tauruses, a couple of Sigs, and a bunch of Euro cheapos (Maks, Toks, etc.).

I now own none of the above, and I just bought my seventh CZ. The CZ's have all stayed around, because of their ergonomics, SA triggers, good looks, reliability, and fun factor. No other semi combines all their assets, at least for me.

By the way, the Ruger and the Smiths had practically no virtues, other than the fact that they actually went bang - ill-handling, with awful triggers. Smith revolvers are exquisite, and I've owned or shot hundreds, but among their centerfire autos only their various SA models were pleasant and useful as shooters.

Bilt4Comfort
October 27, 2007, 11:59 AM
I have had nothing but feeding problems with 2 of my CZs.
The 75B eats whatever I put in it without a hiccup so far.
The Rami 9mm and the 97B are feeding nightmares. The 97 was only having problems with different jhp at first, but at the range yesterday, was jamming up with WWB fmj. I clean my guns after every range trip. I'm not sure what the deal is, maybe I just need to polish the ramp up a bit...but don't trust myself with a dremel. Really frustrating.

The underlaying machine work is sloppy and rough compared to any other semi's that I have owned. If this ever improves...the prices will increase I'm sure.

They point and shoot accurately better than any semi I have owned and the 75 really feels good in my hand.

If I can get the other 2 to feed properly, I'll be pretty happy, despite the machine work.

woodstock72000@yahoo.com
October 27, 2007, 12:07 PM
I`ve just gotten my CZ 75 B this week and it is magical. Yep, that`s the word, magical. It`s an extension of my hand, low recoil, deadly accurate. I literally blew the bullseye out of the target at 20 yards with it yesterday.

I haven`t had it long enough to make any more comments about it like durability etc.etc. but from the research I`ve done I`d say all of these things will be covered.

I currently have only 3 different handguns and they`re all .40 S@W. Here`s my sweethearts.

Sylvilagus Aquaticus
October 27, 2007, 09:23 PM
I've owned a PCR for about 3 years now. I don't shoot it as much as I like, but that's my problem. I bought it because I *like* CZ's. SAC will disagree with me, but I consider the CZ action to be an evolved design of the BHP in large measure. Do I think it's as good as my BHP? No, but with qualifications- I think the Browning can have a better trigger than the CZ, whereas I think my PCR has a trigger very similar to my P229; granted, I like my SIG and I carry it daily and have no problem with any aspect of it. Did my CZ cost what the SIG (or BHP) did? No. Do I like my Taurus better than my CZ? Absolutely not, but I'm not throwing the Taurii out, either.

One of the most spectacular CZ's I've ever beheld was a 'pre-B' made when they were a rare commodity in the States in the early 1980's. I should have bought it, as the finish was as magnificent as any blued BHP I'd ever seen. I've never seen its equal from CZ since in terms of of finish quality. My PCR has no rough toolmarks in it, yet has the polycoat finish that doesn't inspire sonnets. It also is every bit as accurate as my P225, which does have tool marks in the slide and has a Nitron finish which is equally as tough yet uninspiring.

Between SIG, Browning, and CZ I think there's not a gnat spit worth of difference when comparing the premium lines on 9mm pistols. I'm going to be subjective and say that I love each and every BHP I've ever had, I really like my SIGs a lot, and I'm really pleased I bought the PCR that I did and when I did.

I think it's a better pistol than my 1960's vintage Mauser HsC and that '42 vintage P38, but then they're solidly built pistols, too. They just have negatives that outweigh the positives of the CZ, like the rough machining and finish on the P38 and the damnable DA trigger pull on the Mauser.

One can make a case for anything. It's like asking if you like your hot blonde model ex-wife better than your current brunette wife. You're going to have to justify your answer to somebody at some point, but nobody is going to be entirely happy with it.

I think if you want a CZ, then get the damned thing. That's what I did and not one of my other handguns is jealous of it.

Regards,
Rabbit.

woodstock72000@yahoo.com
October 27, 2007, 10:35 PM
Benched and viced today at 21 feet. Ruger P94//3 shots,1.7 inches----Glock 22//3 shots 3/4", CZ 75 B 3 shots// 9/16", all in .40 S@W.

Sig .357// 3 shots,1 1/2", Beretta 9mm 3 shots// 7/8"

Sonny74
October 28, 2007, 12:14 AM
Here are the guns that I've own. List in order of favorite.

S&W M&P 40 - most favorite
1911 (S&W)
Beretta 92FS Vertec
Sig 226
Springfield XD
Sig Pro 2009
CZ 75b
CZ P01
Ruger P95 - least favorite.

AndyC
October 28, 2007, 12:54 PM
Having grown up in South Africa, the CZ75 was immediately popular there ever since they were first imported around 1976 - my dad bought one of the first. I still remember reading the imported US gun-magazines where the writers were moaning that they couldn't import one for themselves for whatever legal reason.

As for his son - moi, naturellement - I have owned 3 (or maybe 4, I misremember) 75's (bought my first around 1981 or so), one of which was a Tanfoglio clone in the late 80's. That one stood out for me because I remember my gunsmith swearing at the hardness of the steel when drilling the front sight for a tritium capsule :D

I started competing in IPSC matches with CZs, first informally then in more formal matches - cocked and locked, of course, never used the DA pull. I've mentioned this before, but I easily put over 120,000 rounds through one, calculated from my weekly use (never less than 500 rounds per week) - I replaced the barrel when it miked-out at .360"; never replaced a recoil-spring, either.

Although I prefer the 1911 platform, I've carried CZs on security details guarding foreign royalty (because that's what the rest of the team carried) and I had absolutely no hesitation in doing so - I trusted in my CZ that much.

Only problem I ever had was a front-sight flying off - the earlier models had the sight staked-in, which was corrected a long time ago.

tekarra
October 28, 2007, 05:42 PM
Have owned and shot Llama Omnis, cZ75s, BHPs, S&W 4506, S&W 39??, 1911s, Ruger P93, 94 and a couple of cZ 75 clones. The cZ 75s just feel right and shoot well for me, and I have never had a problem with them. The Omni 45 was also a favorite until the frame cracked. That is the only major problem I have ever had with a semiauto.

browningguy
October 28, 2007, 08:14 PM
I don't think so.

They are decent guns for people that like the DA pull and don't want to carry cocked and locked, but they surely aren't better than the BHP's, 1911's, Sigs, HK's, Tanfoglio's etc. I currently only have one CZ, a 75B Anniversary model that I carry for my barbeque gun (that's when we get all gussied up in Texas).

jmr40
October 28, 2007, 08:56 PM
I went through the CZ-75 stage a few years ago and have owned 3 at various times. They were good guns, but no better than anything else I owned. I decided I had too many types of magazines to keep up with so the CZ's were sold. I must be an odd ball because they did not fit my hand nearly as well as other guns.

lastresort777
October 28, 2007, 09:02 PM
surely aren't better than the BHP's, 1911's, Sigs, HK's, Tanfoglio's etc
In my opinion the CZ`s are as good if not better than your list. 1911???? I`ve seen so many posts and comments stating "1911" ??? Which model? The original Colt or the hundreds of clone 1911`s out there????

Glockorama
October 28, 2007, 09:05 PM
I've owned (and own) a lot of guns, but the CZ-75 is my all-time favorite. 100% reliable, laser accurate, and an ergonomic dream. It is my ultimate SHTF sidearm. :cool:

http://a755.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/90/l_b0aabc6fc9895abd0e23dfd8fc32110a.jpg

Blue .45
October 28, 2007, 09:45 PM
After a three day waiting period, I brought my new CZ75B home today. It's my first and I hope that when I get to the range this week, my experience will be as positive as most other CZ owners.

BTW, for those in the Chicago area who might be interested in one of these guns, Midwest Sporting Goods in Lyons, IL. has them for $389 while supplies last.

philbo
October 28, 2007, 10:20 PM
Part of what I currently own includes:

1911 (Para & Sig)
BHP
XD's (9/40/45)
S&W (1006/5946)
Steyr GB
Kahr K9

I own others and have owned many more over the years including a CZ75 in 9mm. I picked it up for a good price, and it was ok for plinking. I recently traded the CZ because it wasn't as accurate for me as those above. DA trigger was long & heavy, SA had a lot of travel to reset. Fit & Finish was ok, but not spectacular. In the end when it came time to shoot in competition or choose a carry weapon for the day, everything above just beat it out. If the CZ works for you then it's a great choice. If it were my only pistol I wouldn't complain. Unfortunately, it just wasn't meant to stay in my collection. Purely personal.

Mat, not doormat
October 28, 2007, 10:48 PM
As far as autoloaders, I'm primarily a 1911 guy. As such the CZ is a very nice gun, as it can be made behave in a similar manner, i.e. c&l carry. It's not quite a 1911, though, as the safety is a skinny little thing to hit well, and the trigger has a LOT more takeup, and a LOT more reset length. It does fit my hands very nicely, is easy and intuitive to point, and is reliable. My list is as follows:


1911. I have 4, have had 6. RIA, Sistema, 2 Tauri. Had Colt and SA.
CZ-75, B or SA, either one works. I've got the B.
Kel Tec P32. I list it because I own it, and like it, and it's an autoloader that I like but like less than the CZ
Springfield XD .45 Tactical. Ick, gone
H&K USP .40 Fullsize. Again, ick. Again, gone.
Beretta 92FS. Like gripping a 4x4, didn't group, it patterned. Again, ick, and again, gone.


~~~Mat

SDDL-UP
October 29, 2007, 01:18 AM
Excellent comments here so far guys!

browningguy,

I am just curious but why do you state that a CZ-75 would "surely" not be better than a Tanfoglio? I know some Tanfoglio owners prefer them to CZ's even though they are an evolution of the basic CZ-75 design. What about the Tanfoglio do you prefer?

Also have you ever tried a CZ-75 SA (single action)? I never have but then again I don't have a problem carrying the CZ cocked and locked either.

lastresort777
October 29, 2007, 01:52 AM
I`ve seen a lot of "my 1911" comments but I`m curious as to which 1911. The original or one of the hundreds of clones?

briang2ad
October 29, 2007, 07:35 PM
That may depend a bit. If you have smaller hands, and if you install a different safety, maybe it is better for you.

But the CZ is a bit more versatile. It comes with a very well positioned and useable safety, provides C/L carry as easily as any 1911/HP, and CAN be carried DA/SA. It is easily as accurate, and is VERY consistent to POI with various rounds. The grip actually feels a little rounder and more ergonomic than the BHP - but the browning is a bit slimmer.

armoredman
October 29, 2007, 08:35 PM
I carried a Tanfolgio for 13+ years, the first 40 EAA Witness marked Tan to hit the US. I wish I hadn't sold it, but I can state it was a well made solid sidearm. My wife carried three Tans over the years, as well. I would not feel underarmed with a Tan. I just prefer the feel and action of the original, CZ.

Baba Louie
October 29, 2007, 10:52 PM
Do I know what I'm talking about? Probably not. :D

I do like my CZ75, just as I do like it's little brother the 83. The ability to do both DA and SA is I guess, nice, tho I only shoot it in SA, so I'll use that as the basis for comparison to...

Start with the BHP. Hmmm. Fit and finish go to the Browning, accuracy is equal. Trigger. It's not fair comparing a DA/SA to the HP's SA but then again I've left my HP trigger stock and you know what that means so we'll call that a push. If I had the mag disconnect safety undone and a trigger job on the HP it still wouldn't be a fair comparison so... push. Both fit me like they were designed around my hands or vice versa. Equal. Price point goes to the Czech. One was designed by JMB (sorta) one was designed using JMB's concept (sorta), we'll call that a push. So it's fit and finish compared to price point. Subjective point to the P35 since it came first.

Move to the Beretta 92FS. Similar trigger design one being internal one external. I'll lean to the CZ there. Barrel Lockup. CZ. Price point. CZ. Fit and finish goes to the Italian... but it is kinda blocky in my hands and I do prefer the 75. I don't care for slide mounted safety, hands down to CZ. My CZ is more accurate than my 92 (tho curiously, not to my Taurus 99). I'll lean towards the 75 and have often wondered how they might have fared (faired?) if they hadn't been a nasty Commie gun in the US trials of 84-85... but that's a moot point.

Next we'll compare it to the Glock 17. I like the 17. A lot. As a shooting device it's a simpleton's tool (hmmmm). It's accurate. Equal. It's ugly. 75 wins there. It's trigger is spongey but I know the reset and can shoot it fast if need be, faster than the CZ, so I'll give that to the 17 sponge or no. It does feel good in my hands and it points naturally for me. Push. When shooting it I look like I know what I'm doing. Push. Sure is lighter than the Czech, isn't it? I can carry it all day (in fact I have) 17 point. Glocks sure are easy to detail strip aren't they? I have yet to break down the 75 into many parts. I'll lean towards the ugly Austrian, knowing that others are in shock at my indiscretion and ignorance.

SIG 226. DAK. God I love that trigger. It's really a very good gun so I'll just say SIG and take the heat. It's probably what our soldiers should be using if they've got to shoot a NATO round.

Colt 1911 or 1991 or Combat Commander. Sorry. I'm predisposed to that design, the .45 and that trigger. For me it cannot be beat. I've never had a problem with Colt (well, I did lose a front sight once and had to get a new one staked on... and that was a wee bit annoying) Sorry CZ. :rolleyes: I really wonder if given a chance to redo the 85 trials and leave the .45 in there as the basis for sending chunks o' lead downrange if... nah. Won't cry over spilt milk.

S&W 3rd gen. I'll just skip it and say CZ.

Choose not to do Ruger semi's. Got no basis for comparison. Sorry. Have to let others do that.

If I had to pit the CZ up against my S&W wheelguns, it'd lose. It might hold more rounds. It might be newer. But in my mind it isn't in the same race and if it was it'd need one hell of a head start and even then it would still lose. Call it prejudice or ignorance or me not knowing what I'm talking about. Or maybe call it day vs night, dog vs cat.

Don't know how it all came out. I do know that I typically have either a Colt Commander or a S&W 60 out and ready to use if need be while the CZ sits in the safe ready to go... right behind its Austrian neighbor, it's usually found in the on deck circle. If I'm going to carry that much weight around it'll be a Commander pushing a .45 caliber round down the tube or a S&W pushing another type of .36 pill albeit fewer of them.

But that's just me and I readily admit I don't know what I'm talking about. Just what I've grown up with and what I like. YMMV

Hawk
October 29, 2007, 11:00 PM
Handgun fit is a terribly subjective thing. In the dim and distant past I rented everything I could get my mitts on trying to decide on a carry piece. I could never warm up to the CZ-75 though I'm sure it's a fine handgun.

I did rather like the P-01 although why I would prefer it that much over the CZ alternatives is something of a mystery. Anyhow, in the spirit of the OP, what wound up in my "carry group" (those I liked well enough to buy a Sparks to carry it in) include:


A couple P7-PSPs, one of which got Roguarded / NP3'd.
An STI VIP in .40 S&W
A SIG P239 in 357SIG


Both the 357SIG and .40 are chamberings I swore I'd never own but caved when the gun I wanted that day 'came that way'.

The STI is a delight. The SIG is another "personal preference" mystery - I generally hate small-ish semis in snappy chamberings and (compared to the STI) crappy triggers but the P239 just flat feels and works right. I have no rational explanation. The fact that it's in the general CZ price ball park doesn't hurt. The same cannot be said for the STI.

The HK I like in spite of myself. I called HK to see if I could retrofit the P7M8 trigger heat guard to the PSP but they (with apologies to a certain mod here) told me that I sucked and they hated me.

Someday I'll own the P-01 or the RAMI or whatever that CZ thing is. The -75 has fallen smooth off my radar through no fault of its own. As much as I tried to like the CZ-97B, that will never happen either - seemed to make my G21 seem svelte by comparison but that's probably my genetically impaired mitts.

Danus ex
October 29, 2007, 11:09 PM
I had a strange experience with the CZ. For the record, my autoloaders are a BHP and a 1911.

The first time I had the opportunity to shoot a CZ-75, I had very high hopes. I knew it was supposed to be similar to the BHP so I figured I'd love it. However, when I grasped the gun, my immediate reaction was "Aaaack! Get it out of my hand!" I set the gun down and pretended to fiddle with it a bit before I picked it back up and shot it. I shot it no better or worse than other DA/SAs like the 92FS, but I despised the CZ's trigger.

I've never reacted that way to any handgun. It was like plunging into cold water. I'll wear a wetsuit next time.

Zak Smith
October 30, 2007, 12:13 AM
I've owned a variety of autoloading pistols, from $180 Makarovs up to $2500+ custom 1911s, BHPs, and raceguns. I've purchased 4 CZ pistols, compacts and full-size 75/85 models. I don't own any CZ pistols anymore.

The pistols I kept and shoot/train/compete with include: Glock 9mms; HK P7PSP; SV/STI "2011" double-stack raceguns.

Of the 4 CZs I bought, three did not operate properly from the box. A "1911-crisp" trigger will necessitate too little hammer/sear engagement. Placement of thumb safety is inferior to the 1911. The arugment for the CZ was that it was a "Great pistol for the money." While this is true at $300 or even $350 (if you don't put any more money into it), at $450-550, why not just buy a Glock?

When the cost of ammo, training, and travel is factored in, a purchase price difference of even $150 means little. That's 3 tanks of gas or less than a case of 9mm!

If you enjoyed reading about "CZ-75 owners - do you know what you're talking about?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!