CZ 75B vs. Browning Hi-Power

[Gunsmoker]

I like both looks the same and shoot them the same.

But the Hi-Power is ~$200 over the CZ. Is it more gun in terms of reliability, ruggedness, etc.

 

[donkee]

I have a couple FN Hi-Powers (same thing) that cost 35.00 more than my CZ75BD. I Shoot the Hi-Powers more, but like them equally. I thing the grip on the Hi-Powers fit me a little better though.....

 

[45shooter]

In my experience, CZ-75 is more reliable, more durable/rugged and for people with large hand they are more ergonomical.
Browning Hi-Power has the name, tradition and style.

I like both of them.

 

[robertbank]

I own two FN Hi-Powers, an INglis as well as a CZ85 and a Tanfoglio (CZ Clone).

The biggest advantage the CZ has over the HP is it is D/A, S/A which does give you a double strike capability. Both designs are great. the S/A trigger on both the CZ and Tanfoglio is significantly better than the HP IMHO.

Both designs certainly are prefected. My CZ are slightly heavier loaded than the HP, both designs are very comfortable in my hands and are very accurate. Frankly I can't see paying $200US more for the HP over the CZ. I guess it just comes down to personal preference. Access your needs and if all else is equal go with the the CZ, only you can make that decision.

Aside from JMB having a hand in early interations of what became the HP, there is nothing in that design that sets it apart from the CZ IMHO. It is lighter and if you don't mind carrying Cocked & Locked than the gun won't let you down.

Check out Stephen Camp's website, he does a comparison of the two guns you might find of interest.

Take Care

Bob

 

[CZguy]

It's a personal choice. But out of these two you can't go wrong. They are both excellent guns.

 

[Marshall]

Both great guns. Personally, I like the Hi Powers. I like the look (much prettier IMO), the feel and you can't beat the history & legacy. I also like SA pistols much more than DA. I like to carry cocked and locked and like a consistent trigger pull. It's very simple in design.

 

[HorseSoldier]

Tough choice -- the only real solution is to buy both.

The HP-35 is an absolute, 1911-level classic. And like the 1911 it's still a very viable pistol today.

The CZ is one of the finest combat pistols out there today. And, for me personally, the only pistol that feels better in the hand than a BHP.

 

[rbernie]

The CZ family of pistols generally fit my hand better, and I find the controls easier to use and shaped better. I've not owned a HP long enough to really compare durability, but I would expect them to be very equal in that regard.

 

[AndyC]

Used both extensively, the HP in war-time.

The HP is definitely a classic - however, it suffers out-of-the-box with a poor triggerpull, partly due to the magazine-safety. In the original model, there's a problem with tiny sights, a famously abominable safety-catch and the spur-hammer tends to bite those with fleshy hands.

I'd take a CZ, personally.

 

[Furncliff]

you asked: Is it more gun in terms of reliability, ruggedness, etc.

No.

Just different.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Both are ecellent guns, and the CZ was modeled in part from the Hi-Power. But similarities end at outward appearances. Very different guns internally. Aftermarket support for both is very solid. Both are capable of good accuracy, but the CZ will have a better SA trigger than a stock HP. Either gun can be carried C&L, but the DA CZ-75 can be carried hammer-down as well. CZ's hold 15+1, HP is 13+1. CZ takedown and reassembly is easier, IMO; I've gotten my finger bitten more than once by the sharp edge where the recoil spring seats against the barrel of the HP.

You can't go wrong with either, but the CZ is a more robust pistol. You simply can't beat all-steel construction for long-term durability.

Another deciding factor may be the mag disconnect. CZ's don't have it.

 

[10-Ring]

I bought my BHP a couple years ago and it quickly became a fave! Get the BHP