CZ 75 and Cougar 8000F

[Arthur2001]

Hi to All,

I have two questions;

1- If you compare the trigger of CZ 75 and Cougar 8000F, who is the winner ?

2- If you carry with a round in the chamber which one is the safe one ? Please bear in mind that in CZ 75 you can not put on the saffety lever with a round in the chamber unless you cocked the pistol.
However you can put on in safe position the Cougar 8000F. By this way you decocke and put the safety on.
My aim is to carry the pistol with a round in the chamber, without cocked in DA mode.

 

[essayons21]

I have shot a CZ-75 only once, and only put a mag through it so I am no expert. I own a Stoeger Cougar, and have since given in to the GF to keep as a bedside gun.

I prefer the Cougar trigger. Neither is great, but the Cougar's is about on par with most DA/SA guns.

She keeps the Cougar the same way you describe, round in the chamber, hammer down, safety off. The DA trigger pull is long enough where it is safe. Just make sure nothing gets caught in the trigger guard while holstering or unholstering.

No idea on the operation of the CZ, so I don't really understand what you mean about the safety operation with a round chambered.

I would get the Cougar for a number of reasons. It is very high quality, and the fit and finish is pretty good for the price, comparable to Berettas. Stoeger essentially bought the entire factory from Beretta and moved everything but the building to Turkey. Since everything is build by CNC machinery, the quality stayed the same.

Also the rotating barrel design makes for an extremely accurate pistol. Also magazines are easy to find and extremely cheap. Simply buy surplus M9/M92 and a small file. The notch on the M9 magazines is cut about 1/4" lower than the M8000 magazines. 5 minutes with a file will fix this and functions flawlessly. All other dimensions on the magazine are the same.

 

[JHansenAK47]

1.
I would go cougar if you are talking stock triggers.
My Beretta Cougars trigger breaks crisply while the my SP-01 has a bit of mushiness to it in SA. In DA they are similar. The CZ is a decent trigger I just think my cougars is a little better.
2.They both have firing pin blocks. I believe they both have inertial firing pin safety features. (The inertia of the hammer striking the pin moves it forward to strike the primer past the point where the hammer contacts it. Meaning hammer down all the way the firing pin may be in contact with the hammer but doesn't reach the primer. This safety feature is independant of the firing pin block which prevents an AD from a hard blow to the hammer even if the hammer is in contact with the firing pin to transfer energy.)
Both can also be had with decockers. Also both hammers can be cocked back to a quarter cock.
I guess you could claim the cougar is marginally safer with the safety on as the firing pin transfer pin(or whatever it is called) rotates out of alignment to the firing pin.
CZs however can be carried cocked and locked with the traditional safety.
However if I was going to carry either of them I would quarter cock them with the safety off.
When you quarter cock a beretta to turn the safety back on you because it wants to decock the rest of the way. Which gives a little resistance to the safety getting flicked accidentally.
To sum it up both are safe though on a manual safety CZ you have to pay attention when you decock it.

 

[Arthur2001]

Thanx for your replys and special thanx to JHansenAK47..

My main issue is with CZ during the decocking stage. I never fire a pistol during the decock but any how it seems to me a bit easier to decock the hammer with the safety lever of Stoeger. So safety lever features of Stoeger is plus for me.

On the other hand the trigger of CZ is the second best pistol trigger for me after Sig Sauer 226.

So I am in a dilemma between Stoeger an CZ.. For safety lever features I am thinking to go for Stoeger, but due to quite accurate trigger I can not stop thinking about CZ...

 

[railroader]

Just get a cz with a decocker. They decock to half cock which helps with the trigger. Mark