CZ 75 questions

[1SOW]

Another unusual option is to learn to shoot it DA first shot.
With very minor low-cost trigger work, the DA can be brought down to a 7# pull--5# can be reached for more $. Practice will make the first shot DA just as fast and accurate as SA.

 

[meanmrmustard]

Funny story: My dad shot my CZ this weekend (he's a rifle guy) and he could only shoot it accurately in DA! I'm dumbfounded.

 

[Tex4426]

Best thing I did to mine was put hogue grips..very comfortable ..trigger will smooth out at about 4-500 rounds...love it but upgrading to sp-01

 

[meanmrmustard]

My GF got me VZ grips. Thinned the profile of the 75, made it even more comfortable. Think my dads just weird. Go figure.

 

[tekarra]

Shot it more accurately DA. I am not surprised, I prefer the DA trigger pull in my 75s over the SA.

 

[Black Butte]

... cheesy "Cold War Commemorative" models that were put out with the idiotic hammer and cycle and Cyrillic lettering ...

Wow, talk about a killjoy.

 

[larryh1108]

I put the thin Cocobolo grips on my PCR. It thinned it down a lot. Wonderful shooter. Some say it is too fat for CCW but I disagree...

 

[bikerdoc]

Public Kudos to Walt.

It was the recoil spring! I bought a dirty 75 BD for cheap. Evidently the chap had relpace the spring. Put in a 14 lb spring and presto. Tame and accurate.
Thanks Walt.

Now looking for a 97.

 

[meanmrmustard]

Wow, talk about a killjoy.

I wouldn't bother. I've been preaching the story behind the Cold War 75 for a month now, and simple folk don't care. For those who own it, it does make an obvious statement. Bugs me that our more intelligent members write things off so easily. If you don't like the looks, fine.

 

[beatledog7]

Two 75s in my safe, a black B SA and a matte stainless B, the latter seems never fired. Gonna remedy that this weekend.

SA is a sweet shooter. For me these are strictly range guns as I don't carry SA or SA/DA semis.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

I wouldn't bother. I've been preaching the story behind the Cold War 75 for a month now, and simple folk don't care.

And some other simple folk obvioulsy DO care.

Commemoratives are generally a sales/marketing gimmick. I remember back when one of the firms that makes commemoratives came out with a line of .45s "remembering" the U.S. roles in Vietnam. I think they even had a USAF version. (I was in the Air Force back then, and I can't recall ever seeing a 1911 used by an airman or aircrew member. But, it was just as authentic as the CZ in question.)

Re: commemoratives. If you can get one at a lower price than the standard gun, jump on it. The gun is still a good gun.

 

[larryh1108]

I know the commemoratives are often less valuable today because they aren't really anything special right now. However, what will they be worth (when compared to a non-commemorative) in 50 or 75 years? The fact that only 5,000 or whatever were made will surely make them more valuable when we are long gone? The same with limited edition Kimbers made for marketing companies, etc or the 100 year 1911 Colt. In 2100, won't they have more value than a traditional counter part?

 

[Walt Sherrill]

The fact that only 5,000 or whatever were made will surely make them more valuable when we are long gone? The same with limited edition Kimbers made for marketing companies, etc or the 100 year 1911 Colt. In 2100, won't they have more value than a traditional counter part?

Rarity alone does not make a gun a collectible or particularly valuable.

There are a lot of commemorative guns out there, some 40 - 50 years old, and some of them sell at a slight discount. I haven't seen many (if any) that sell at a substantial premium. A special roll mark or paint job doesn't necessarily make a gun more desirable to a collector. A special numbered series, more rare still, doesn't seem to add a lot of value.

Collectors typically look for pristine (as they were, when new) guns in their original boxes, that are representative of the gun model in question. Exceptions can be found, but even WWI Lugers or early Colt Single Action Army models, while valuable, have more value attached to condition than anything else. Some of those guns, in very good condition, haven't kept up with inflation. If long-term value growth of value is your focus, you'd be far better off buying shares in a mutual fund.

If you buy a gun, today, thinking it'll have future collector's value, don't lose any of the papers that came with it, don't lose the box, and don't shoot it -- if any of that happens, you've degraded it's collector value greatly. You may also want to play the lottery, as your hopes of picking a future collectible is a bit like picking a winning lottery number: it could happen, but the odds are against you.

 

[Pilot]

If you buy a gun, today, thinking it'll have future collector's value, don't lose any of the papers that came with it, don't lose the box, and don't shoot it -- if any of that happens, you've degraded it's collector value greatly.

Great advice. I also agree that guns are for shooting more than collecting, and if you look at the time value of money, and inflation, there are generally better investments out there. (although today a decent return is a challenge to find)

I bought two Colt WWI 01918 Repros as I thought it was the best representation of the basic 1911 made with modern materials out there. One is a shooter, and the other after I inspected it was put back in its box and is a safe queen. I don't anticipate selling either, but I just wanted another one to keep pristine. I doubt I will loose money on the safe queen if I sell it, but that's not its purpose.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Using one of many inflation calculators on the web (http://146.142.4.24/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl), you begin to appreciate just how much a "collectible" gun would have to appreciate (increase) in value to just stay even with inflation... (This calculator is based on actual dollar value changes over the period; it's one that includes 2011 in it's calculations.)

Note: I would expect inflation to become dramatically worse in the years to come, as all of those dollars our buying of trinkets has sent overseas eventually comes back and begins to compete with our dollars for goods here in the U.S. (That's one of the ugly parts of trade imbalances -- they eventually balance up...)​

A gun that cost you $600 in 1960 would have to sell for $4649, today, to buy something of similar value/construction, when paid for in TODAY'S dollars. Not many guns appreciate in value that much.

The folks who do well with collectibles are 1) professionals, 2) sometimes find guns that the sellers don't always know are valuable, and 3) may be lucky. I don't think many of them get rich from their occupation -- but it is often a labor of love.

 

[larryh1108]

$600 was a lot of money in 1960. Wasn't a nice S&W in the $80s back then? That would be about $600 today, right? (quick head calculation).

 

[Walt Sherrill]

$600 was a lot of money in 1960. Wasn't a nice S&W in the $80s back then? That would be about $600 today, right? (quick head calculation).

I cited $600 'cause that's a pretty common price, nowadays. I think S&W went for more than $80, new, back in the 60's -- but it's hard to find original prices to be sure. Used, maybe...

Let's look at some easier ones:

1) One I had, and now regret selling: a S&W 547 MP in 9mm. Original price was $317, they sell for $775 NIB, and were discontinued in 1985. Keeping even with inflation required a sale price of $675... which is what one in 98% would bring. Only a NIB model would be a true investment, and offer only a $160 gain for having been invested for 27 years -- that's an annualized return of 3.4%. A little better than a savings account, nowadays, but not back during some of that period.

2) A standard Model 25 made in 1991, sold for $429, but would have to sell for $926 to just stay even in buying power. The Blue Book says today's price, in NIB condition, is $550. I've seen them for a bit more, and a bit less -- but never in 100% condition.

Most of the very nice S&W revolvers i've seen seldom sell for more than $550, regardless when they were made -- and darned few of them are in the condition a collector would want for a gun considered as an investment.

3) There are exceptions, like a .45 LC version of the 25 (1955 Target Model). It sold for $347 new, was discontinued in 1985, and now sells for $4,200 in NIB condition. Inflation-adjusted value for that original investment would be $740, so that one would be a winner.

Guns, generally, aren't good investments. They are expenses. Like cars. That doesn't mean you shouldn't buy them or collect them, but it does mean you really have to buy and collect wisely if you really hope to make money on the effort.

(I'm a gun nut, like many here -- but I was also a Certified Financial Planner for a number of years, and look at some of these things differently.)

 

[Zundfolge]

Dumb question: what is the function, if any, of the grooves on the front of the trigger guard on CZs?

The grooves and flat front of the trigger guard were designed to be used to brace the pistol against the top of a riot shield or other barricade. Same thing goes for the Glock ... I guess it's a European thing.


Since we're sharing, my SA in .40 is probably the most accurate autoloader I've got ... and makes a nice companion when I want a larger gun than my EDC (Steyr S40).

 

[larryh1108]

First, I'd never buy a gun for an investment. As shown, it is not a good idea.

Here's an ad from S&W from 1963. The Model 20 in .38S&W for $80. Just for discussion purposes.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Interesting ad page!

Using the inflation calculator above, showing $80 for 1963, that gun (Model 10, blued, with 4' barrel) in 100% condition, would have to sell for $600 to just stay up with inflation. A 95% gun, what most of us see, is worth only $295. The Fjestad Blue Book says an ANIB model should sell for about $595. Again, not much of an investment. (People quibble with BB prices, but they are a reasonable yardstick, if not the ultimate authority.)

Guns, however, are a ready source of cash -- when you need it. (I used two nice collectible guns, a few years back, to pay for most of a nice used Pickup, when I needed another vehicle. It was nice not having to get a loan.)

 

[meanmrmustard]

Rarity alone does not make a gun a collectible or particularly valuable.

There are a lot of commemorative guns out there, some 40 - 50 years old, and some of them sell at a slight discount. I haven't seen many (if any) that sell at a substantial premium. A special roll mark or paint job doesn't necessarily make a gun more desirable to a collector. A special numbered series, more rare still, doesn't seem to add a lot of value.

Collectors typically look for pristine (as they were, when new) guns in their original boxes, that are representative of the gun model in question. Exceptions can be found, but even WWI Lugers or early Colt Single Action Army models, while valuable, have more value attached to condition than anything else. Some of those guns, in very good condition, haven't kept up with inflation. If long-term value growth of value is your focus, you'd be far better off buying shares in a mutual fund.

If you buy a gun, today, thinking it'll have future collector's value, don't lose any of the papers that came with it, don't lose the box, and don't shoot it -- if any of that happens, you've degraded it's collector value greatly. You may also want to play the lottery, as your hopes of picking a future collectible is a bit like picking a winning lottery number: it could happen, but the odds are against you.

And last I checked, CZ didn't need a marketing gimmick to sell firearms smart guy.

You don't have to be a financier or whatever you are or were to notice that.

Besides, I don't recall where I posted having bought a Cold War for value...somebody else did. Last I checked, you weren't there when I bought it...which I would do again, and as I HAVE stated, could care very much less about what others think. I know you know CZs Walt, but not my nature.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Hmmm. Tell us, meanmrmustard -- did you write the following?

The fact that only 5,000 or whatever were made will surely make them more valuable when we are long gone?

That was the comment to which the post above was a response. larryh1108 wrote it.

The answer is NO -- a limited number will not SURELY make them more valuable when we are all gone. (And, 5,000 isn't a particularly small number.) It MIGHT cause some value increase later, but there nothing sure about it. As I noted above, scarcity alone is no guarantee of increased/collector value. (Do you think the CZ-100 will have collector's value in 50 years? There can't have been too many of those made -- especially in .40 a.c.p.)

If those aren't your words, what's your problem? If something else I wrote bothered you, you should cite the stuff that bothered you, not the stuff cited, above. Please note: the cited material doesn't address YOUR reasons for buying a Commemorative CZ; it simply addresses the issues of 1) scarcity and 2) what is needed for a potentially "collectible" gun to be of interest to a collector.

As noted in other responses here, inflation is a killer, and most gun buyers don't think about that when making their gun buy/sell decisions; what $500 buys today is a lot less than what $500 bought 10-15 years ago. Even though someone bought a gun years ago, and sold it for more than they paid, chances are he or she is actually losing out on the exchange. The "time value of money" is an important consideration which allows you to evaluate the worth of an investment and to determine whether other alternatives might be more attractive.

You are free to get your underwear in a knot if you want, but you have nobody to blame but yourself if you find it uncomfortable.

 

[k-frame]

The grooves and flat front of the trigger guard were designed to be used to brace the pistol against the top of a riot shield or other barricade. Same thing goes for the Glock ... I guess it's a European thing.

Thanks, much obliged! I would have liked to listen to the design discussion when that particular feature was being kicked around.

 

[meanmrmustard]

Hmmm. Tell us, meanmrmustard -- did you write the following?



That was the comment to which the post above was a response. larryh1108 wrote it.

The answer is NO -- a limited number will not SURELY make them more valuable when we are all gone. (And, 5,000 isn't a particularly small number.) It MIGHT cause some value increase later, but there nothing sure about it. As I noted above, scarcity alone is no guarantee of increased/collector value. (Do you think the CZ-100 will have collector's value in 50 years? There can't have been too many of those made -- especially in .40 a.c.p.)

If those aren't your words, what's your problem? If something else I wrote bothered you, you should cite the stuff that bothered you, not the stuff cited, above. Please note: the cited material doesn't address YOUR reasons for buying a Commemorative CZ; it simply addresses the issues of 1) scarcity and 2) what is needed for a potentially "collectible" gun to be of interest to a collector.

As noted in other responses here, inflation is a killer, and most gun buyers
don't think about that when making their gun buy/sell decisions; what $500 buys today is a lot less than what $500 bought 10-15 years ago. Even though someone bought a gun years ago, and sold it for more than they paid, chances are he or she is actually losing out on the exchange. The "time value of money" is an important consideration which allows you to evaluate the worth of an investment and to determine whether other alternatives might be more attractive.


You are free to get your underwear in a knot if you want, but you have nobody to blame but yourself if you find it uncomfortable.

Obviously I somehow spawned it. To which I apologize to those who were on topic, but them alone.

Don't recall having problems, but thank you for the concern. My underwear is quite knot free, considering I'm not grasping for arguments here. I will, however, agree to disagree on scarcity. It isn't just how many are made, what caliber, or even color. It's consumer demand. Take that and put it into the equation, and scarcity begins to make sense regarding worth. Supply and demand. Albeit, people actually have to want whatever that thing is in order for that to matter. If no one cares to own one, then it is, as you said Walt, essentially no more valuable than it ever was initially.