CZ75B vs. Taurus 92

[Ultrastar]

Which one is more reliable? It will be a range/ccw piece.

 

[ggamyang]

You will get only one answer....& I will be the first one
CZ

 

[CZF]

I've owned both. They were both 100% reliable..with the
75B having an edge feeding some hollow-points.

CZ-USA customer service is top-notch, and parts are easier to get
than Taurus parts.

Never had a broken Cee-Zed or Taurus. The CZ fits me better, so i'm
more accurate with one. There are plenty worse guns than these two
brands...i.e. Ruger P89.

 

[Ivy Mike]

Charlie-Zulu...over and out.

 

[Ultrastar]

My service pistol is a Beretta 92 but I really like the safety on the Taurus more. I've shot the CZ and it is a fine shooter. I may just go with the Taurus and maybe later get the CZ.

 

[cratz2]

Well, I've owned 4 various CZs (that I've actually shot), a couple EAAs and a Taurus PT99. For reliability, I'd say all the guns have been in the excellent to outstanding category. I doubt if I've had 20 failures between all the CZs out of thousands of rounds... Granted, I'm not the kind to take 10 different kinds of HPs to the range and see what feeds and what doesn't.

Overall, I'd give a slight edge to the Taurus for pure reliability but would give the edge to CZ or EAA for ergonomics by a wide margin.

For my money, I'd get a CZ.

 

[rbernie]

CZ.

 

[9mmepiphany]

both guns have

1. frame mounted safeties
2. designed for and reliable with 9mm loads
3. clean DA/SA triggers
4. more than adequate accurracy

the differences have to do with personal preferences

the taurus is based of the beretta 92 design and shares it's smoothness, ( non-tilting barrel) lighter weight (alloy frame), huge ejection port, wide slide and larger grip (fits bigger hands better)

the CZ has more weight, a smaller grip, thinner slide and lower boreline (less muzzle flip,faster recovery)

 

[faustulus]

Can't go wrong with either. I prefer the CZ, my friend the Taurus. One thing though, the new Tauri have the decock lever, which if you tend to ride your thumb on the safety like I do, can sometimes lead to the gun becoming decocked during firing.

 

[Roger Williams]

CZ!!!!

Between the two, the CZ wins for ergonomics, reliability, and accuracy... at least for me. And yes, I have owned and shot both.

Get the CZ and shoot it a lot to slick up the trigger and you'll have one hell of a fine pistol.

 

[Big Bad Wolf]

CZ =

Taurus =

Can I simplify it anymore?

 

[wildehond]

The CZ fits the bill and it is tough as nails. The 92's are fat and bulky. That is something to consider if you want to use it for CCW.

 

[rbernie]

9mmepiphany did a good job of trying to list out the objective pros/cons of each. But I'll add one more thing to the list - trigger pull/feel. One of the biggest selling factors for me when I went thru this same decision was the fact that the CZ trigger pull was far more solid and positive in both SA and DA than was either the Berettas or the Tauruses (Taurii?) that I handled.

Sinply put - the CZ lockwork felt like fine machinery. The Beretta and Taurus lockwork felt like there was a bunch of marshmallows with some really stiff rubber bands wrapped around 'em in there somewhere.

 

[tiberius]

the taurus is based of the beretta 92 design and shares it's smoothness, ( non-tilting barrel) lighter weight (alloy frame), huge ejection port, wide slide and larger grip (fits bigger hands better)

the CZ has more weight, a smaller grip, thinner slide and lower boreline (less muzzle flip,faster recovery)

Taurus 92: 34 oz.
CZ-75B: 35 oz.
I wouldn't sweat the weight difference.

Personal preference should be the deciding factor, but I reccomend the CZ based on MY personal preference....You will get much the same responce from most on the board.

 

[TooTaxed]

I have both...the Taurus in 9-mm and the CZ in .40, and I range shoot a lot. The CZ feels much better in my hand and I shoot it perhaps 5 -1 more than the Taurus. But, the Taurus has a smoother trigger and is more accurate...

I also have .22 conversions for both. Interestingly, the CZ .22 conversion is more accurate than the original .40, which likes 155-gr SWCL best.

 

[Berg01]

Both are fine guns, pick the one you like best; I have a CZ 75B in .40 S&W so that would be my choice, but strictly "MHO"

 

[Snowdog]

I've put more rounds through my PT-99 than any of my other 9mm handguns, and I bought it used. It has never jammed in the 2,000 or so rounds I've put through it over the years (no, I don't shoot much). Granted, the vast majority were hardball, but a good number were +P JHPs.

I question those who seriously believe the PT92/99 =
Maybe they've had a bad experience, heard of a bad experience or dreamt up a bad experience due to their personal inexperience…however, I have yet to see a PT92/99 chronically choke on anything, whether it be my Taurus or those owned by friends.

Bottom line, I just don't think you're going to find a difference in reliability between the PT92 and a CZ. In general, they’re about the same.

 

[cratz2]

I've put more rounds through my PT-99 than any of my other 9mm handguns, and I bought it used. It has never jammed in the...

I can go a bit further and say my PT99 that I bought used (but unfired) has never failed in over 18,000 rounds. I've replaced some parts, but none ever broke or failed.

But I carry a CZ while the PT99 stays at home.

 

[dairycreek]

Speaking strictly from personal experience.................

.....I would have to say that CZ has been the more reliable gun. Have owned six Taurus guns and four CZ's. Had serious trouble with three of the Taurus - enough to have to send them back to the factory for work. Have never had a problem with any CZ. So, based on that sample (admittedlly small) I have had much better reliability from CZ than Taurus. Good shooting

 

[Roger Williams]

I have yet to see a PT92/99 chronically choke on anything, whether it be my Taurus or those owned by friends.

My Taurus only jammed on me a few times, and that was over the course of a LOT of shooting (not exactly chronic)... but a good buddy of mine had two of them and one was a total jam-o-matic. The good one would shoot anything all day long, the bad one would shoot 2 or 3 rounds and FTF or FTE, usually a stovepiped empty case.

So... just from my own experience, that's why I said I'd go with the CZ. I've never personally seen a CZ that was a real dog, and I've seen plenty of Taurus guns that were. (not all of them were the PT92's though)

 

[Stephen A. Camp]

Hello. Though not a CZ75B, I do own an earlier version or two and have been quite pleased with them. I've also had exceptionally good results with a PT92.
If interested, some observations on both are below via the links. Perhaps these can help you decide the one you prefer:

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/CZ75.htm


http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/TaurusPT92.htm


I personally prefer the CZ, but that does not mean that the same choice is the best one for others.

Best.

 

[CZ-100]

Definitely the


CZ

 

[wally]

I've both, both are great. The CZ 75B is a better buy right now.

The only advantage of the Taurus is the "three-way" safety -- Cocked'n'Locked, Off and Hammer drop. The CZ75B is Cocked'n'Locked only, you have to drop the hammer manually on a loaded chamber if you like DA/SA carry mode. If this is a factor get the Taurus or CZ75D but you lose CnL mode with the CZ75D.

I prefer the looks of the PT92/99/Beretta but the CZ is growing on me.

--wally.

 

[Son of John]

CZ vs Taurus 92

Should be more like Tangfolio / EAA Witness versus Taurus 92. CZ would be versus Beretta 92.

Seriously, all 4 of these guns are fine. I would try to shoot the Taurus and CZ and compare how they feel.

 

[goon]

CZ.
Right now I am working on selling my CZ-75BD but it is still a great gun. I want to get a standard CZ-75 to replace it someday.
Or maybe a RAMI...

BTW- The BD has a SIG style decocker. No safety, just a decocker that slowly lowers the hammer.