Are Polymer CZ pistols any good

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm now picturing sitting at a stop light and a Rolls Royce rolls up, the window rolls down and some guy in an upper class British accent says "Pardon me, would you have any See-Zed?"

:neener:
 
Kent O'Reily of the Miami PD was shooting a polymer CZ(not sure which model) during a course of fire at the USCG range in Florida recently and his frame rails snapped on him. He also said that several other officers were having problems with their polymer versions as well. It seems the polymer frames are not quite as durable as the metal alloy models. The classic 75b with steel frame seems to still be the best overall CZ model.

As for CZs being super guns, be careful of internet hype:

1993 FBI pistol trials:
-14 models of pistols tested(5 of each)
-The FBI did not accept pistols for testing from the manufacturer. They purchased pistols from the market to ensure fair testing.
-All pistols were tested for reliability, durability, service life, and consistancy when exposed to expected service conditions.
-Pistols that passed were those made by Glock and Sig. Pistols that failed were those made by S&W, Ruger, Colt, CZ, FN, Browning, Beretta, Tangfoglio, H&K, Steyr, and a few others.

2002 Department of Homeland Security pistol trials:
-43 models of pistols were tested(5 of each model)
-The DHS did not accept pistols for testing from the manufacturer. They purchased pistols from the market to ensure fair testing.
-FBI testing protocols were used.
-Pistols made by Sig and H&K passed. Beretta pulled out early. CZs were also in the testing and failed.

2005 Department of Defense pistol Trials:
-28 models of pistols were tested(5 of each model)
-The DOD did not accept pistols for testing from the manufacturer. They purchased pistols from the market to ensure fair testing.
-FBI testing protocols were followed in addition to some extreme dust testing.
-Only pistols made by Sig passed. Beretta pulled out early again. CZs were once again tested and failed.


Recently, I talked to a Federal instructor at FLETC who had more information on the NATO testing in which the CZ P-01 passed. The testing only went to 15k rounds, the manufacturer was allowed to replace springs as often as every 1000rds, and broken parts did not result in a failing score if the pistol could be back in service without replacing the barrel, slide, or frame. Also, the pistols that were tested were submitted to NATO by the manufacturers.

CZs are pretty good guns. I still enjoy shooting my old 75b and will likely never sell it, but lets keep an element of reality here. That's the beauty of US police and military testing. It really weeds out fact from fiction, and gives the civilian consumer a way to determine which company is pulling their leg and which isn't.
 
Last edited:
I have a Rami poly. Have about 1000 rd down range w/o any problems. I love it. Replaced a pos Kahr PM9.
 
dobrzemetal,

I get mine from the law enforcement training materials which are made available from either FLETC(Federal Law Enforcement Training Center), or at the Fed academy in Quantico. Just about anyone in Federal service can get ahold of archived training briefs such as equipment procurement standards which also include information on the pistol trials results. I haven't been able to get ahold of the full FBI trials which is over 1500 pages long, just a 30 page summation. So, I don't have the details as to why the CZs failed. It might be something as minor as inconsistant accuracy during the dust test. The circular internal locking lugs of the 1911/CZ 75 "drain" sand poorly which results in either malfunction, poor groupings, or excessive lug wear. Probably why CZ is going with the newer Sig style square locking lug which works with the open breech in the P-07. I'm interested in trying out a P-07 myself.
 
In the 1993 FBI test the CZ used was the 75b 9mm. In the DHS testing it was once again the 75b 9mm. In the DOD testing it was the 75b and P-01 9mm.
 
On the guns being discussed here, the entire frame is polymer.

I've only handled - not fired - a couple of polymer models, a 2075 RAMI manual safety and a CZ100. I personally did not like the shape and location of the RAMI's safety levers, but that has nothing to do with its being poly. The 100 was a bit offbeat but quite intriguing.
 
Last edited:
CZ110 CZ's Poly frame

I have a CZ110 manufactured date is 01 so it is 8yrs old by now. When I purchased it in 2003 I just fired tru it around 1000 rds. no failures what so ever. When I was relocated in other in other area in our country, I left the gun to my bro who stored it with out properly oiling it for preservation. It is almost 3 years when I was able to put the gun back in my hands again, but it was rusted inside out. After cleaning the poly frame and its inside parts, which was really rusted, have barrel and the slide hard chromed to restore its beauty and functionality. Now it is my daily carry gun, for about a year with 2000 rds like before with any major malfunction. Have fired +P ammo, factory and mostly cheap reloaded ammo and was able to experienced a 9mm ammo went BANG inside the chamber, which rattled the gun in my hand that it really hurt me. The ammo had a blast hole at the side near its base. That is one thing that is dangerous firing with cheap reloaded ammo, this happened when I was testing the gun after I restored it back from its rustiness.

in the CZ forum in CZ100 series thread there where issues of a part (trigger mechanism housing) that broke after 20k rounds, it is a CZ100. But as for the poly frame it self, there was no issues about it.

Just my experience whit CZ polymer gun.:)
 
Probably why CZ is going with the newer Sig style square locking lug which works with the open breech in the P-07
Click to expand...
Actually the square barrel lockup thing isn't new to CZ.

I also suspect that the main motivation for that type of lockup is that it's easier to machine. Equate that with lower costs. It may have some other advantages, but anytime a manufacturer does anything your first assumption should be cost reduction.
 
From Marcus L...
I haven't been able to get ahold of the full FBI trials which is over 1500 pages long, just a 30 page summation. So, I don't have the details as to why the CZs failed. It might be something as minor as inconsistant accuracy during the dust test.
Click to expand...

The information provided is interesting but, as he says to his credit, without knowing what the criteria for the tests were, what guns were tested, how they were tested, etc. it's hard to draw any conclusions from the results other than that some guns were chosen by some agencies and passed over by others.

It's difficult to draw any general conclusions from the results alone.

The OP may want to drop by the CZ forum and take a peek there...

http://www.czforumsite.info/index.php


tipoc
 
The information provided is interesting but, as he says to his credit, without knowing what the criteria for the tests were, what guns were tested, how they were tested, etc. it's hard to draw any conclusions from the results other than that some guns were chosen by some agencies and passed over by others.

It's difficult to draw any general conclusions from the results alone.
Click to expand...

Come on, all things being equal.
The criteria was that the guns go boom when you pull the trigger after being exposed to a host of conditions found in the field.
The guns that were chosen were chosen for a reason and that reason is/was that they performed in excess of the "criteria" set forth in the testing.
The conclusions you can draw are that the guns that were chosen bettered the competition.

No?

I was under the impression that the Glock had failed the '93 test when it became seperated at the frame rails. I may be thinking of another test by another department.

Brand loyalty aside.
 
I was under the impression that the Glock had failed the '93 test when it became seperated at the frame rails. I may be thinking of another test by another department.
Click to expand...

That was the DHS testing of 2002 which is why the Glock did not pass. DHS awarded contracts to Sig and H&K who passed the testing. DHS were using 155gr duty loads during their testing which puts a heck of a lot more abuse on the .40 pistols than the FBI trials which used 180gr loads. 9mms that were tested used 124gr+P. There was no mention of Glock failing any aspect of the FBI trials, which is why they were awarded pistol contracts.

Tipoc,

Go to a Sig forum and all the members will tell you that the Sig P220 will give you at least 100k rounds of trouble free service. Even though the DOD and FBI found that most of them were out of action in as little as 10k rounds. Go to an FN forum and the members will make similar claims about the FNP series which did not pass the DHS or DOD trials. Glocks.....H&Ks....S&Ws.....all such fan forums will tell you the same. My past experience on CZ forums was a joke in that CZ fans overlooked the fact that they were replacing broken parts such as trigger return springs, trigger bars, and extractors at a rate of 5-10k rounds and claiming that their pistols were highly durable.....and these were the 9mm models, not the more troublesome .40S&W models or the .45acp 97b nightmare. You simply are not going to get any element of a unbias or realistic measure of a firearm's quality or durability by going to fan sites in which the members spend all their time defending their own confidence and financial investments.

Either a pistol passes or it does not. The FBI, DOI, ICE, DOD, USCG, USA, USMC,....etc has never adopted a firearm that did not pass open trials. If they have a choice, they will often choice the more economic of the finalists. Poe-dunk little LE agencies who don't do such testing will adopt equipment based on political or economic motives alone.......that's why most of us don't consider them the standard. We consider them an exception.
 
That's the beauty of US police and military testing
Click to expand...

Yes the beauty is that they have been notoriusly WRONG in the past, and not just a few times but alot, and always at the expense of the tax payer i might add(early m16 trials, FBI 9mm fiasco in the 80s and 90s?, 10mm OMG lets adopt a gun that half our people cant even handle profitiently!) BTW to my knowlage all metal framed cz-75 verients are NATO rated. In closing, buy what you want, shoot it and smile. we will wallways have haters and fanboys.:neener:
 
Marcus,

Interesting post. Details of tests and failures would be interesting reading. Do you have a source for the tests?
 
Interesting info, but I doubt if I'll ever run sand thru my pet RAMI or other CZs. Not even my Glocks or M&P.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Hello :) A question about 9mm CCW
Replies
17
Views
988
albanian
A
H
  • Locked
CZ P07 Night Sights and 3 Mag Combo?
Replies
2
Views
684
ny32182
N
I
  • Locked
List of affordable 9mm?
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
armedwalleye
armedwalleye
T
  • Locked
  • Poll
Cz poll
Replies
4
Views
517
Treo
T
D
  • Locked
  • Poll
Poll: Narrowed my ..22 choice down to 3. (and added a 4th for fun!)
Replies
8
Views
636
dxkj21
D
Back
Top