Battle of the .45's: Sig 220 vs. CZ-97 vs. Average 1911

[Trigger]

This is easy, 1911A1. I've always been able to shoot faster and more accurately with the 1911A1. Reliability has never been an issue for me with mine.

P220 is nice but a the trigger is not as nice as a 1911A1 and I couldn't wring out the accuracy from it. I think it's a trigger control issue for me.

 

[yucaipa]

I voted 220, that's the gun for me. For you,the one you can safely hit the target with...every time

New out of the box,

Sig,good to go
cz, I've heard good things
1911,proven,but as already posted the devil can be in the details.

 

[at-home-daddy]

I like my P220ST, but I love my SW1911. Have never shot a CZ97, but as I've read numerous times that the grip is somewhat larger (than the other two you mention).

Having said that, I don't know that I'd rely on any 1911 for home defense use (even my SW1911 which has had only 2 failures in 800 rounds); the Sig, on the other hand, has unmatched reliability. Plus,the most crucial difference for me is that I prefer that DA first-shot pull for any defensive pistol (home/self-defense...and carry).

 

[ruger357]

Plain Jane 1911.

 

[garrettwc]

There's no such thing as an "average" 1911. Some are just less extraordinary than others.

I picked the 1911 because it fits my hand and is reliable. The Sig would be a close second though.

 

[Dienekes]

1911. Shot my first one in 1959 as a kid. A proper one with decent sights and a decent trigger is about as honest as it gets and does its job in a workmanlike way. Although I became mostly a wheelgunner through circumstance, I have never let myself get too far out of practice with the .45 auto.

No experience with the CZ other than briefly handling one--it seemed pretty big to me.

Bought a SIG 220 a few years back to see what I could do with it. Bigger than the 1911 which I do not need, high bore axis, and and the DA does not compare to a revolver. Ran it in DAO configuration for a while but was never able to develop real proficiency with it. I do know that it can be shot fast and well because a good friend of mine proved it to Jeff Cooper at Gunsite. He also had better luck with the girls, all of which just proves that life isn't fair. Still hanging on to the SIG and may give it another wringing out but really can't develop much affection for it.

Personally I think the driving force behind DA semiautos was always a bureaucratic solution to the demand for a "safe", legally defensible semiauto to hand out to minimally trained people.

The single action 1911 requires a heads up operator, but once that hurdle is out of the way I think it is a superior weapon. At least it is around here.

 

[VG]

This is kind of silly in that "average" M1911's have been described as everything from USGI pistols to some of the highly tuned, very expensive offerings sold today.

There's an immense difference between a USGI pistol with a 6-8 lb trigger pull and slip fit bushing and the modern target-style pistols that are tight, and have much larger sights - and safety - than the USGI pistols.

I like the 1944 Remington Rand M1911A1 for what it is. I took a Sistema Colt and had the trigger stoned, put in a new, tight bushing and barrel link and cut the groups at 25 yards from about 8" to 4".

But the SIG shoots tight groups all day; requires no tuning; is easier to field strip; is more accurate than most sub- $1,000 M1911A1 clones; and coss less.

 

[armoredman]

HERESY!

Everyone who knows me is aware of my CZ "leanings', also know to some as addict status. OK, here goes nothing - of the three posted, and no others, I would pick the...





SiG P220.




HERESY!!!!


Nope - the CZ97 is a great gun - built for big hands. I have average sized paws, so I grip the P220 much better. I like DA, and the P220 seems to fit quite well, plus I enjoyed shooting the one we had on the rental range at Jensen's when I worked there. So, out of those three....the SiG P220 would ride with me.....

 

[sgtb]

CZ97B.....carries more rounds, is super accuarate, and is just a pleasure to shoot.

I would rate the Sig 220 second....

 

[bigmike45]

I own a SIG P220ST.......My most dependable and accurate firearm. I also own two 1911 style guns. A Para Ordance LDA Carry 12 and a Springfield Armory GI WWII Champion slightly modified.

My preferences are as follows:

SIG
PARA
Springer

I have shot 2 different CZ's and did not like either of them.

 

[W Turner]

If I could pick the "average" 1911m I would go with a NRM Colt....otherwise, it would be the CZ. I don't share the passion for Sigs that so many others do.


If I had to pick any out of the box .45 to take out of the box, load and put on my hip it would be the Glock 21 though.


W

 

[deputy tom]

Another vote for the 1911.tom.

 

[caz223]

Well, I choose the 1911 for several reasons.
1. They make a 10mm 1911
2. They make a 1911 commander/officers' model.
3. Single stacks rock!
4. Fastest time to target of any gun I've tried.
My favorite 1911 right now:
My DW PT-C bobtail in 10mm.
I like sigs, and they work, but they are just one step above glocks in appearance, that being said, I'm not gonna sell my 228 or my 2340 anytime soon.
I'm going to sell one of my CZ75s if I can, but I'm keeping the other, and I'm keeping my CZ97b, too.
I guess I like 'em all, I just like 1911s more......

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Quote:
-------------------------
(justify your answer of why one is better or preferred over the others, besides battle field history).
---------------------------

Sorry to break the rule, but having carried the M1911 on the battlefield, and knowing how it has been carried on many others -- from the arctic to the tropics, I gotta go with John M. Browning's masterpiece.

When the other choices have 90+ years of experience under the same conditions, I might consider one of them.

 

[caz223]

If I had to rank them, I'd say 1911, CZ97b, then the sig.
I prefer the sig 228 to the CZ75b, but I prefer the CZ97b over the 220 (Unless we're talking about the crazy expensive comped, counter-weighted, 'sport' model.).
The 220-s models aren't bad, either.

 

[photo_guy]

I voted for the Sig even though I really enjoy shooting 1911's more. I think the Sig is better suited to your use as defined. They are reliable, accurate, and have a nice trigger for a DA/SA gun. Put night sights on it and you should be good to go.

The 1911 would be a close second.


The only reason I did not consider the CZ is that I have no firsthand experience with them.

 

[Tactical]

I have to join the rest of the HK Clan and vote HK 45. however since it's not on the list I'll throw in a vote for my Kimber 1911.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Quote:
-------------------------------
I have to join the rest of the HK Clan and vote HK 45. however since it's not on the list I'll throw in a vote for my Kimber 1911.
--------------------------------

That's my carry gun, a Custom Classic. I use Chip McCormac Shooting Star 8-round magazines with it, and it's dead reliable.

 

[mmike87]

I'd take a 220ST over the 97B any day if price was not an object. Nothing wrong with the 97 but I think the SIG is a bit nicer.

The 97B is probably a better value for the money, however. You can find them for just under $500 on Gun Broker, and that's cheap for a reliable, accurate .45 - the SIG cost considerably more, especially an ST.

As far as average 1911's go - an true blue GI M1911 is a reliable and accurate weapon as well. If you want a pimped out gun, you have to spend a lot more.