New CZ75B SA - What a Difference a CZ Makes


May 24, 2004, 01:24 PM
My wife has had a CZ-75B in 9mm for quite a while. Since I taught her to shoot it I became familiar with it and basically fell in love with it.

Based on my experience with my wife's CZ I decided to get a CZ-75B SA in .40 S&W. As it turns out I've never made a better decision regarding a pistol.

For the longest time my only .40 S&W gun has been a Glock 22. To make a long story short I've never been very good with it. I can make 2" to 3" ragged holes all the way out to 15 yards with my wife's CZ and my Sig P220. At 25 yards from an isocoles position I can keep the bullets in an 8" circle with both of those guns (my accuracy just seems to go to hell in a hand basket at 25 yds). With the Glock though I've never been able to get better than minute of man at 25 yds (B-27 target) or groups better than 4" to 6" at closer ranges. I had to be at three yds with the Glock to make the same type of ragged hole I do with the CZ and Sig out to 15 yards. I always figured the problem was a combination of the rather snappy .40 S&W and just piss poor skill on my part.

Well I'm here to tell ya it ain't piss poor skill on my part. With the CZ I'm now shooting the .40 S&W with the same accuracy levels I get with my wife's CZ and my Sig. In fact at 25 yards I am keeping the .40 rounds in a 6" circle which is pretty darn good for me and better than the other pistols I shoot.

After switching back to the Glock and getting the same poor results I used to get I'm betting the problem is the trigger. I never realized just how much the Glock trigger sucked until I had another pistol in .40 S&W to compare it to. Oh I knew the trigger couldn't compare to that of my wife's CZ or my Sig but had no idea that it could be the cause of such poor shooting on my part with the .40 S&W. The CZ SA trigger is very crisp and requires 3.5 lb pull to break (I think I got lucky here). The difference in perceived recoil between the Glock and the CZ is negligible (prior to shooting the CZ I believed that the perceived recoil difference would be considerable as the CZ is a much heavier weapon - turns out I was wrong). The negligible difference in recoil is one more reason I believe the problem with the Glock is the trigger.

The Glock always went bang when I pulled the trigger, was easy to maintain and was relatively inexpensive but it's going to get traded at the first opportunity. In fact one gunshop has already told me they'll give me $300 for it. Wonder what I should buy next?

If you enjoyed reading about "New CZ75B SA - What a Difference a CZ Makes" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
May 24, 2004, 01:35 PM
The 75SA is an economy priced tackdriver! The 9mm version actually shot tighter groups than the much more expensive SIG P210-2 in HANDGUNS testing.

My .40 was superbly accurate. Snake-eyes @ 25 yards the first couple of shots, and that was with Wolf .40 that I wanted to test .

Mine had a CZ-USA trigger job and MMC nites, along with CZF Hakan Grips.

May 24, 2004, 03:02 PM
The 9mm version actually shot tighter groups than the much more expensive SIG P210-2 in HANDGUNS testing.

I would love to get a copy of that article! You wouldn't happen to have a link to that?

May 24, 2004, 03:52 PM
Yeah, the SA is a lotta bargain for the money... Of course, most CZs are.

When you sell the Glock, I'd recommend a trigger job for the SA from either CZUSA or from Evolution Gun Works. It'll be the best circa $100 you spend on a gun mod. I've handled many SAs and, while the triggers consistantly embarass Glocks, they can be made to be heavenly... If you love the current trigger pull, you're gonna need to have a cigarette after seeing and feeling what EGW can do for you.


May 24, 2004, 04:15 PM
CZs are not mentioned in the gunsmithing section of their website, but their CZ work is first rate; on my CZ 75B .40, they did a general "check out" including a throat & polish on the barrel, and they replaced the extractor spring. Prior to having it worked on, the gun would jam intermittently, but it has not skipped a beat since I got it back from them in January.

Right now, they are working on my S&W #27-2 revolver, so after that comes back I might get them to do the trigger & sights on the CZ. You have to be patient with EGW, since their turnaround times tend to be long, but the results are worth it.

Gary G23
May 24, 2004, 07:32 PM
Does the SA have a longer beavertail than the standard model? It looks like it does in the pictures I've seen.

May 24, 2004, 08:09 PM
Yes, a longer beavertail ala the 97B. Also has ambi safety and an extended
mag release.

As for the 75SA outshooting the SIG. I was quite surprised to see the
articles. The 9mm SA was only slightly more accurate than the .40
version. I really did expect the P210 to be the best shooting.

One gunwriter has remarked that better groups with CZs could
be had with better sights. They have not tested the CZ85 Combat
(that I know of) or the Race Guns like the Standard.

The Gun Press is slowling turning towards CZs. Those stalwarts
of Glock and 1911s are finding out that you don't have to pay
a high price for a high quality pistol, same with CZ rifles.

May 24, 2004, 08:09 PM
Does the SA have a longer beavertail than the standard model?

Good question...
So I broke my B model and SA model out and set them side by side.

Yes - it appears that there is a difference. The actuall sweep/radius of the underside of the beavertail appears to be identical on both weapons. So grip wise they are identical. I held each and they feel the same.

However, the top profile of the beavertail is different on the two. The top of the SA is longer and comes to a sharper point than the B which is shorter and more blunt.

This actually surprises me because the description of the SA model on the CZ site says that the B and SA are identical in every respect except that the SA has a drop free mag and a single action only trigger.

There is one other difference - the SA has a full length guide rod with out a captive spring whereas the B has a captive spring and a short guide rod. This may however be due to my SA being .40 and the B being a 9mm.

May 25, 2004, 09:41 AM
I picked up a CZ75SA in .40 a couple of years ago. It is easily the most accurate pistol I own. Or rather, it is easily the most accurate shooting pistol that I can shoot. I picked it up for $450.00 or so out the door and it runs rings around any of the other guns I own....that's saying something (Sig 226,225, HK P7 PSP, USP 45F, Beretta 92FS, SA Loaded 1911). The only criticism I had was that it would have FTE's with Win White Box .40 ammo. I've read about this with other CZ .40's as well. For some reason the 75's don't like that brand of .40. Oh well. A CZ75SA in 9mm may very well be my next pistol. Outstanding gun, especially for the money.

Edited to add: I find the .40 very snappy in some guns: ie, Glock's model 22 and smaller. The only guns that I've shot that felt comfortable to shoot in .40 are the Sig 229/226 and the CZ75.

May 25, 2004, 02:57 PM
I cant attest to the Sig 210/SA comparison but my SA's have shot neck and neck with my Kimbers and STI's. :D Walt bought my last custom attempt at an SA and it will make one ragged hole all day long as long as you can help it out..............

Shoot well.

Michael Zeleny
May 25, 2004, 05:14 PM
I really did expect the P210 to be the best shooting.It will if you shoot at 50 meters, the range at which it is designed to put bullets inside a 5 centimeter (<2") target. No proper measure of accuracy delivered by a precision firearm can be taken at half its intended optimal range.

If you enjoyed reading about "New CZ75B SA - What a Difference a CZ Makes" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!