Anyone have a CZ 75B-SA? Or shot one?

[TriggerMan]

I'm thinking of getting one, it's a SA only version of the classic CZ 75, I have been wanting an all steel 9mm for a long time and it's down to either a new CZ or a used Browning Hi-Power, just looking for any good or bad comments, I already read about them at CZForum.com and they are highly spoken of, just looking for a more critical perspective, thanks

Here is the web page for it...
http://www.cz-usa.com/product_detail.php?id=33

 

[Marshall]

The SA CZ-75 is the only CZ-75 I would buy. Good choice.

Of course there are the 9mm single action FN Hi Powers with the SFS system at CDNN for $449.00 brand new. They can also be found on GA for $420.00 shipped. You can get the non-SFS Hi Powers in 40 S&W for $399.00.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

There's not THAT much difference between the standard 75B carried and fired in SA mode, and the 75B SA. (And yes, I've had and have both.)

With a first class action job on both, the only real difference is that the 75B SA can use a two-way (optional) adjustable trigger that lets you reduce takeup and over-travel to a minimum.

Other than that, the guns are mechanically so similar as to have no real difference in accuracy, reliability, etc. Most parts are the same and interchangeable.

(The slides are slightly different, and the 75B SA has ambi-safeties. The .40 version comes with a full-length guide rod, and on some of them, the beavertail is different.)

 

[GeneS]

I have a CZ75B-SA and a Mk II Browning Hi-Power.

They feel very similar in the hand. The grip is slightly larger on the CZ. It holds a couple more rounds and is faster to change mags. The CZ has a beavertail so you won't get the hammer bite the Hi-Power is famous for. Both have been very reliable and accurate for me. They both need better sights. The Hi-Power has a magazine disconnect, the CZ does not. Out of the box, my CZ had a better trigger pull. I've shot several Hi-Powers that had a better trigger pull than mine, however. The trigger reset on both is pretty long for a single action.

 

[Gun Cleric]

Either is fine choice.

I have owned both the CZ and HP. Both shot excellent, the only complaint I had with my HP was, the hammer bite. I hold high on the grip, so getting snapped by the hammer was annoying to say the least. I haven't tried shooting the HP's with the round commander style hammer.

 

[Pilot]

the only complaint I had with my HP was, the hammer bite. I hold high on the grip, so getting snapped by the hammer was annoying to say the least. I haven't tried shooting the HP's with the round commander style hammer.

Stephen Camp has some great pics of his 'bobbed" hammer Hi Powers. I think he just takes a little bit off the hammer, but I don't know how much. By the looks of it, nor very much. My MK III Hi Power does not give me hammer bite and my hands are pretty large, but not fleshy.

I have both the Hi Power and CZ-75B, but not the SA only CZ. The CZ is a larger pistol in all respects. THe Hi Power is more like the Compact CZ's in the grip and frame with a little longer slide/barrel. I've installed my 75B slide on my PCR (compact CZ) frame and it looks/feels more like the Hi Power. It works too, but the PCR is accurate with the shorter slide, so why bother.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

The "compact" CZs have the same grip and frame as the full-size CZs, except they just lopped off a bit from the bottom of the grip frame, and a bit from the front of the gun to make it "compact." Going to a "compact" CZ won't make it fit your hand better than a full-size CZ.

The BHP is a bit narrower. I have a BHP and several of the CZs of different sizes.

 

[Pilot]

Well it "feels" different to me. Whatever.

 

[Gary G23]

I have a SA. It was good out of the box but I had it worked over by Miossi Gun Works. Now it is REALLY nice.