I've owned CZ's for years, and am a huge fan. I recently bought a 92FS, and 92FS Compact L. Great guns, even with the slide mounted safety which I do not engage except as a decocker. I shoot the CZ's and Berettas equally well. You can buy and shoot both you know.
CZ 75 satin stainless vs Beretta 92 FS INOX
- Thread starter nathan
- Start date
- Status
FIVETWOSEVEN
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2009
- Messages
- 5,146
Must be why more countries field the Beretta 92 and clones.......wait a minute......
My CZ75B has choked only once and that was literally on junk, heavily tarnished ammo with a hint of corrosion. My father's 92FS has had a couple of malfunctions with clean ammo. That and the fact of the slide mounted safety is a turn off for me to buy a Beretta. Also the CZ has a more durable design. Less moving parts and no worry about replacing the locking block if I'm not mistaken.
meanmrmustard
Member
I've never owned a CZ or its clones that malfunctioned.
SharpsDressedMan
member
I own a CZ75 and a Beretta 92FS. Both are about equal reliability-wise, but you might need a little more "break-in" with the CZ to make sure it is going to run properly. They are generally a little rougher internally, and that might cause a burp until smoothed out.
jhb
Member
I'm a cz fan myself.
I got turned off from berettas early on when a lgs guy tried to show me how easy the 92 breaks down for cleaning and how he was an army guy and could do it in his sleep and somehow broke the gun and couldn't get it back together...and the other store guys all sat and worked on it and couldn't do it...finally the gunsmith came over and mentioned something about a piece broke and for those counter guys not to take anymore guns apart...... and that was enough I lost interest.
True story....but like anything else I was a newbie back then and didn't realize the gun could have been dropped many times and beaten to death and it had nothing to do with taking it apart.
Later I regained interest in them but couldn't get over the large grip and looks of it, and lastly the people who always come into the lgs with their camo desert digital bdus on spouting about if there was a better pistol the army would change and they don't cause its the best and everything ele is no good, etc......those loud mouths kinda keep ruining it for me. Plus I live in the swamplands and I often wonder why would people wear digital desert camo in an all green year round environment...and no these ain't ex military guys......these fellows are buying 'em online.
So cz75/85 for me....its one best 9mm ever made, imho.
I got turned off from berettas early on when a lgs guy tried to show me how easy the 92 breaks down for cleaning and how he was an army guy and could do it in his sleep and somehow broke the gun and couldn't get it back together...and the other store guys all sat and worked on it and couldn't do it...finally the gunsmith came over and mentioned something about a piece broke and for those counter guys not to take anymore guns apart...... and that was enough I lost interest.
True story....but like anything else I was a newbie back then and didn't realize the gun could have been dropped many times and beaten to death and it had nothing to do with taking it apart.
Later I regained interest in them but couldn't get over the large grip and looks of it, and lastly the people who always come into the lgs with their camo desert digital bdus on spouting about if there was a better pistol the army would change and they don't cause its the best and everything ele is no good, etc......those loud mouths kinda keep ruining it for me. Plus I live in the swamplands and I often wonder why would people wear digital desert camo in an all green year round environment...and no these ain't ex military guys......these fellows are buying 'em online.
So cz75/85 for me....its one best 9mm ever made, imho.
leadcounsel
member
CZ75 much better gun.
Xfire68
Member
I don't think I have to type out which one I like?
LockedBreech
Member
You forgot "IMHO"
Neither gun is objectively better. They're both quality makes and reliable.
beatledog7
Member
When you post on a board, you don't have to add "IMHO." We know it's your opinion unless you cite something.
LockedBreech
Member
"Much better" implies there's some objective trait or characteristic making it better. Saying an HK is "much better" than a Taurus can be backed up by things like quality controlling and materials quality. The CZ-75 is not a "much better" gun than the 92, it's just favored by some. In fact, if anything the 92 has higher quality finishing/less tool marks.
Saying "I like the CZ-75 much better" is an unassailable opinion statement. Saying the CZ-75 is a "much better gun" is not supported by anything objective.
FIVETWOSEVEN
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2009
- Messages
- 5,146
When there is a much larger majority liking one over another and have tried both, starts to say something. I first liked the Beretta but once I got the CZ, the Beretta became unappealing in all regards. Do a pros and cons list between the two sometime.
beatledog7
Member
Exactly, which is why we take it as the poster's opinion, whether so stated or not.
Off to a great start on only your 4th post....Don't post garbage just to get your post count up when it is obvious you know nothing about the topic. Beretta has zero issues selling guns. Ever hear of Beretta shotguns? Didn't think so.....and no they were not bought by Taurus. If anything it would have been the other way around.
Both are excellent pistols. My choice would be Beretta.
You have enough posts to know better, but you don't.
wow6599
Member
Same thing for Wal-Mart before being bought out by Dollar General.........
LockedBreech
Member
I post on 6 major gun forums. This is the only one where the CZ-75 wins by any real majority. On one, the 92FS wins handily. On the other four, it's usually about 50/50.
THR, while an excellent forum, is not the entire shooting community.
Geneseo1911
Member
I think the Beretta is slightly prettier.
I think the CZ is a slightly better gun.
Is this a shooting gun or a collecting gun?
I think the Glock is better than both of them, and cheaper, but not NEARLY as cool as either.
My opinion is worth exactly what you paid for it.
How many people would own Beretta 92's if not for the US .mil adoption?
I think the CZ is a slightly better gun.
Is this a shooting gun or a collecting gun?
I think the Glock is better than both of them, and cheaper, but not NEARLY as cool as either.
My opinion is worth exactly what you paid for it.
How many people would own Beretta 92's if not for the US .mil adoption?
Walt Sherrill
Member
LockedBreech said:
I won't take sides in this argument, as I think the "better" in question is almost always subjective for most modern handguns. Case in point: claiming as you do, above, that " if anything the 92 has higher quality finishing/less tool marks" is an assessment based on subjective values -- because you're attaching an implied value to that set of characteristics -- higher quality finishing/less tool marks -- that isn't always shared by other gun owners. I'd argue, for example, that unless the "less tool marks" are in an area where tool marks affect function, the extra time and effort taken to remove them are possibly wasted and add cost without performance enhancements. If additional finishing enhances function, then it's important, otherwise it's interesting but meaningless, but you'll pay for them.
I've had both CZs and Beretta (multiples of each). I think that Berettas are more nicely finished than most models of CZs -- but if you're willing to pay for a high-gloss blued CZ-75B (which can be ordered through the CZ Custom Shop), even my "prettier" claim is open to debate. (Ditto with the matte stainless CZ vs. the Inox Beretta.) Prettier doesn't address performance, however.
One thing I found puzzling about the Beretta/CZ comparison is that TO ME the Beretta always SEEMED much bigger and more massive than the CZ, yet they both rode comfortably in the same holsters. And they didn't really feel all that different in the hand. Maybe it's like the belief that many express that the older P-series (both metal and polymer framed) RUGER semi-autos were big and clunky; actual measurements showed that they're really not all that different than the other pistols against which they competed.
Could it be that my eyes were deceiving me? I've come to suspect that with the Beretta and the Ruger it was more LOOKS than anything. If so, the new Ruger SR series shows that Ruger has learned some new tricks. They look almost TINY, but aren't.
.
Last edited:
returningfire
Member
I have both a Beretta and a CZ 75B.
The accuracy of the CZ out of the box makes the 92's accuracy look like a Red Rider's, no offense intended to the Red Rider.
The accuracy of the CZ out of the box makes the 92's accuracy look like a Red Rider's, no offense intended to the Red Rider.
Really? I find my CZ-75B, and Beretta 92FS pretty similar in accuracy. Sometimes I even shoot the Beretta better.
Me too.
biohazurd
Member
I love both designs and own a few variations of each. But if I absolutely had to choose it would for me be the Cz. My stainless cz75 is one of the beauties of my collection. But also I just shoot the 75s more comfortably and accurately then my Beretta's. Every one is different. We all walk in different shoes.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
