Ar 24?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have one. The AR24 is one of the great sleepers in the handgun world. It is very well made with a forged frame, and excellent fit and finish. Armalite did a poor job marketing this handgun.
Magazines are difficult to obtain, but EAA mags will work just fine. There are those who will suggest it is a clone or a clone of a clone of a CZ 75, but it is not. At best it is an adaptation.
 
It was an attempt to take the CZ75, which is a respected handgun, and possibly improve it. The AR24 is a llittle more ergonomic than the CZ75B, there are a few other things that differenciate it for the better, but it never took off. I have one, and a CZ75B. I prefer the AR24, if nothing else, the craftsmanship is nicer, and it has a better feel in my hand over the CZ.

The problem is that the AR24 is a sleeper. Most people don't even know what it is, because it wasn't marketed to its potential. It cost more to make than the CZ75B. Since it looks like a CZ75B, most people couldn't see a reason to pay more for something that looked like a copy of a CZ.

It's such a sleeper that it's almost in hibernation. I rarely see them on the shelves at gun stores anymore. It's too bad.
 
Last edited:
Dobe said:
There are those who will suggest it is a clone or a clone of a clone of a CZ 75, but it is not.
This is correct it isn't a CZ 75 clone.

It is a variation of the Tanfoglio...design which was so popular when folks were unable to import the CZ...and is produced by Sarsilmaz Silah Sanayi in Istanbul Turkey.

I have a friendly gunsmith is running one in USPSA Production. He said the exterior was very nice, but the internal parts need some clean up to function smoothly...he said it was a little rougher that the old AT-84 and about on par with the old Springfield P9, which were all the rage in USPSA shooting before the advent of the STI and SVI platforms
 
Sarsilmaz of Turkey was a Tanfolgio distributor before they decided to make thier own clone, which was subsequently marketed into the US as the Ar-24. EAA mags will work because it is an EAA design, which was a clone of the CZ-75 with some small changes. It is a modified clone of a modified clone. Everything I have heard says it is a solid, well made sidearm, and Turkey has had a LONG tradition of firearms manufacture.
 
Are they still being imported? I looked at them when they first became available and at the time, they were $75 more the the CZ, so I got the CZ. Later, I ran across a LNIB compact at a local shop for $350. Nice gun. I like it alot. Well crafted but the Armalite marking are a bit over the top. The stampings are neat and clean, but they're on both sides of the gun and quite large. Other than that, what's not to like? I picked up 3 Witness mags for it that work just fine.
 
Very nice, thanks to you all, hopefully there's more! :)

It looked like a decent gun, and being it is the only handgun they make I was curious. Sounds like I'd just assume have both, if possible. :D
 
Sarsilmaz of Turkey was a Tanfolgio distributor before they decided to make thier own clone, which was subsequently marketed into the US as the Ar-24. EAA mags will work because it is an EAA design, which was a clone of the CZ-75 with some small changes. It is a modified clone of a modified clone. Everything I have heard says it is a solid, well made sidearm, and Turkey has had a LONG tradition of firearms manufacture
A clone denotes a close enough copy that parts (most but perhaps not all) are interchangeable. Examples of course is the venerable 1911 and the AR. The AR24 is not a clone, not that there is anything wrong with clones. The 1911 and AR are two of my favorite platforms.

Very nice, thanks to you all, hopefully there's more!

It looked like a decent gun, and being it is the only handgun they make I was curious. Sounds like I'd just assume have both, if possible.
As stated above, the AR24 is not made by Armalite, merely marketed by them. The manufacturer is Sarsilmaz. They make several models of handguns.

have a friendly gunsmith is running one in USPSA Production. He said the exterior was very nice, but the internal parts need some clean up to function smoothly...he said it was a little rougher that the old AT-84 and about on par with the old Springfield P9, which were all the rage in USPSA shooting before the advent of the STI and SVI platforms
__________________
I bought one of the first releases. At that time they were still made with black wooden grips. Mine, as well as others of that period, were well made exhibiting few if any tool marks. Perhaps QC dropped as there was little demand for the product.
 
Last edited:
I'd rather have the real CZ than some of these knock offs. I am willing to pay a little more for the orginal. I don't understand buying a BHP clone either. Save your money up and get the better gun.

It is a credit to CZ that these guns are so copied, but CZ's aren't that expensive anyway.
 
The problem with the success of the AR24 was just the opposite. People were not willing to pay more for what they considered a copied handgun. I have always felt the AR24 was the better of the two.

There is a little bit of past handgun technology in all modern handguns. The HKs resemble the Sigs. Glocks have the Sig lock-up, and certainly weren't the first to use a striker. They all owe something to Browning. Copies and even true clones are not lesser firearms. If the copy/adaptation has more of what I want, I buy it.
 
If you truly want a clone of a CZ that shines, look for the Sphinx, but be prepared to pay through the nose! I hear they are incredible sidearms.
The original Tanfoglio clone was indeed a clone of the CZ 75, pre B, back in the late 70s/early 80s, imported as TA90 and TZ 75 through FIE and Excam. Over the years the two designs have drifted apart with minor and major changes. Original Tans can use PreB magazines, from what I have been told, haven't had a chance to verify that for myself.
 
There are reasons why folks go with the Tanfoglio evolutions over the original.

First, the safety works with the hammer down or cocked. CZ only works when cocked. There is no option to place the pistol on safe, hammer down with a CZ.

Second, the firing pin block design is superior to the CZ. The Tanfoglio design, which predates the CZ design by nearly a decade, operates by lowering the block to allow the firing pin to fire. The block is pushed into place and lowers by the operation of the trigger, which means it actually improves the trigger pull. CZ's design is exactly opposite (and is similar to the FPB on the CZ-52). It operates by pushing the block out of the way when operating the trigger. It actively pushes the block away whereas the Tanfoglio passively allows the block to move down. The result is that the FPB in the CZ actually degrades the trigger pull. Add to this the less-refined machining on CZ's, and you get CZ's that have worse triggers, out of the box, compared to Tanfoglio pistols.

Third, Tanfoglio evolutions are simpler in design and execution. Some of this means that the machining is more squared and less pleasing than the elegant CZ to be sure. But other elements such as the discarded magazine brake (which many, if not most, CZ owners modify) make the Tanfoglio design less complicated in areas where the increased complication of the CZ provides neither advantage nor improvement.

As it goes, I own both pistol designs and objectively see both. I have Israeli and Turkish CZ's, I have a Swiss-made CZ as well as its half-brother, the AT-84. I have Springfield P9's, Tanfoglio Force, and an ASAI One Pro. I have original 75's and 75b's and even a Jericho with frame-mounted safety.

I like them all. But there are real advantages that the Tanfoglio-based designs bring to the platform.
 
Hmm, we had 6 Tanfolgio pistols, don't have any more, have/had 11 CZ pistols, still have several of them. The Tanfoglio is a well made gun, I will agree, but the ones I had were less accurate than my CZs, generally speaking, never noticed any real difference in trigger pull. Then again, I like the HK vp70z design, too, so I guess I am no judge of trigger pull. :)
I think 90% of Tanfoglio's problems, other than the recent 10mm slide breakage issues, is being stuck with EAA marketing/customer service. Someday perhaps Tanfoglio will simply bring their own guns in, instead of stamped by 15 different importers.
BTW, which Swiss made CZ? CZs have only ever been built in Czechosolvakia and the Czech Republic, though clones have been built everywhere. The Sphinx, made in Switzerland, is an incredible sidearm with an incredible price tag, but the ultimate CZ clone ever made, so I am told. As for the One Pro, be careful - when we sold those in the gun shop I worked at, they had a huge problem with breaking slide stops, had to send several back. Incredible trigger, but that one fragile part, grab some spares, just in case.
 
Great information. There are a lot of subtle, under the skin, differences and it is good to know information.

Is the AR-24 frame size the equivalent to the old small size Tanfolgio frame?

I know Tanfolgio went to a mid-size frame (bigger than CZ75 but smaller than the CZ97) to allow the larger calibers such as 38Super, 10MM, and 45ACP.

The AR-24 only offers 9MM (I believe) so there is no need for the larger frame.
 
First, the safety works with the hammer down or cocked. CZ only works when cocked. There is no option to place the pistol on safe, hammer down with a CZ.


And why would you need that option when you can carry a CZ safely, as it was designed, with hammer down or at the half cock notch which is just as safe as every common DA revolver, Glock, M&P, XD, etc.?
 
The AR-24 only offers 9MM (I believe) so there is no need for the larger frame.
At one time, The AR24 was to be offered in .45 ACP. The AR was never a sales success, thus the .45 ACP version never transpired.
 
At one time, The AR24 was to be offered in .45 ACP. The AR was never a sales success, thus the .45 ACP version never transpired.
Maybe if they offered the 45 AR might have had a success. I would like to have seen that gun.
 
I agree, Pilot, but it is an additional feature for some. I don't use a positive safety at all, prefering decockers and the wetware Mark 1 Mod 1 safety between my ears.
 
Ash,
Wish you would post photos and a range report of the One Pro. I have only read of them in gun rags and have never had the opportunity to handle one.
 
Armalite did a poor job marketing this handgun.

The CZ75 market is pretty crowded by, um, CZ75s. And Tanfoglio Witnesses. Both of which come in under budget compared to the AR24. It's no real wonder no market presented itself and they haven't done stellar.

There are those who will suggest it is a clone or a clone of a clone of a CZ 75, but it is not. At best it is an adaptation.

(Cough) Turkish copy of a (cough) Italian copy of a (cough cough) CZ75. So either people are paying more for quality Turkish engineering, or the illusion that substituting "Armalite" on the slide somehow makes it more American than a Cee-Zed or Witness.
 
Last edited:
So either people are paying more for quality Turkish engineering, or the illusion that substituting "Armalite" on the slide somehow makes it more American than a Cee-Zed or Witness.
I think their ad campaign lost me when they tried to compare it to the Sig 210
 
I was always under the impression that the AR24 was a CZ clone. Not picture perfect but still a clone like the Tanfo guns from Turkey. They did pay to licence the CZ gun design there.
 
The CZ75 market is pretty crowded, um, CZ75s. And Tanfoglio Witnesses. Both of which come in under budget compared to the AR24. It's no real wonder no market presented itself and they haven't done stellar.
The 1911 market seems a bit crowed too, but Ruger has proven that quality and price will bring 'em to the table.

I believe the AR24 had the quality, but not the price to bring in the market share.

I was always under the impression that the AR24 was a CZ clone.
No. There isn't a part in the AR24, which can be exchanged for a part in the 75B....well maybe the trigger spring.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top