CZ-75B vs CZ-75 P01
- Thread starter gallo
- Start date
- Status
The P-01 has a bit smaller barrel and grip. For me the P-01 was just a bit more ergonomic.....I'm not sure why. As for accuracy, both are more accurate than I am. Both are also very very reliable. However, the P-01 did go through the Nato test and exceeded NATO standards..
armoredman
Member
P01, forged alloy frame, decocker, compact, 14 round standard capacity magazine. My personal choice.
CZ-75, steel frame, standard safety, (can carry cocked and locked), 16 round standard capacity, full size pistol. Carried a clone of one for 13+ years.
Both have outstanding ergonomics, both are very accurate and reliable. If you want to CCW, the PO1 would be a slightly better choice. The PO1 is also available from the factory with Crimson Trace Lasergrips, if you wish.
Either would serve you well in any role you want.
CZ-75, steel frame, standard safety, (can carry cocked and locked), 16 round standard capacity, full size pistol. Carried a clone of one for 13+ years.
Both have outstanding ergonomics, both are very accurate and reliable. If you want to CCW, the PO1 would be a slightly better choice. The PO1 is also available from the factory with Crimson Trace Lasergrips, if you wish.
Either would serve you well in any role you want.
armoredman
Member
Nope. I can control it quite easily. 
The trigger on the P01 has a slightly more pronounced curve to it, making it easier for me to reach than the one on the CZ75. That, plus the lighter weight and smaller size made the decision for me, since I'll be carrying it occasionally. It seems (subjective) to have more muzzle flip than the G19. None of this is negative for me, though. I like the P01 immensely.
jm
jm
Golddog
Member
One of the chief virtues of the CZ line is cocked and locked capability. Without that, the P-01 doesn't make the cut. Its only asset over the 75B Compact is lighter weight. The extended dust cover makes it incompatible with holsters for other CZs, and the faddish light rail is useless to me. What's the point of buying an alloy frame gun to lose weight and then adding ounces to it with a light?
A light may make sense in LEO applications, but I know my territory in the dark better than any bad guy, so I'm not going to show him around or show him exactly where I'm standing.
How about just giving the PCR cocked and locked capability and losing the decocker?
A light may make sense in LEO applications, but I know my territory in the dark better than any bad guy, so I'm not going to show him around or show him exactly where I'm standing.
How about just giving the PCR cocked and locked capability and losing the decocker?
I handled the CZ 75B at the gun shop. Esthetically, I like it more than the XD9, but ergonomically the XD9 fit my hand like a glove. The deal breaker for me was the magazine release lever. It's too far for me to reach it with my thumb without significantly twisting my wrist. The XD has all the levers on the right place for my hand size. To give you a point of reference, I can wear a medium size gardening glove tightly, and the large size fits just a little lose. My hand from the base of the wrist to the tip of my middle finger is 7.5 inches.
I am picking-up my two tone (stainless and black) XD9 today after work. Thank you for all the advice.
I am picking-up my two tone (stainless and black) XD9 today after work. Thank you for all the advice.
leadcounsel
member
I own 4 CZs and love them; 75B, 75 Compact, P01, 40B. They are habit forming and a great bargain at current prices.
The 75B and P01 feel almost the same in my hand, with the P01 slightly better balanced. With the 75 you get a safety and can in theory carry cocked and locked. I wouldn't though. Unlike the 1911, there is no grip safety nor is there a firm "click" into battery for the safety. In short, I would not trust the 75B safety in a carry situation. With the P01 you get a decocker. Not very useful in my opinion, and slightly more useful than the 75's safety. CZ also makes a 75 Compact. This is a 75 in the same size as the P01 but without the rail, so thinner and better for CCW. CZ also makes a pistol the size of the P01 in .40, which is my choice caliber for carry.
The 75B and P01 feel almost the same in my hand, with the P01 slightly better balanced. With the 75 you get a safety and can in theory carry cocked and locked. I wouldn't though. Unlike the 1911, there is no grip safety nor is there a firm "click" into battery for the safety. In short, I would not trust the 75B safety in a carry situation. With the P01 you get a decocker. Not very useful in my opinion, and slightly more useful than the 75's safety. CZ also makes a 75 Compact. This is a 75 in the same size as the P01 but without the rail, so thinner and better for CCW. CZ also makes a pistol the size of the P01 in .40, which is my choice caliber for carry.
DirksterG30
Member
Actually, CZ now makes 2 pistols in .40cal the size of the P-01:
The 75 Compact .40 - steel frame, light rail, manual safety, 10+1 capacity
The P-06 - aluminum alloy frame, light rail, P-01-style decocker, 10+1 capacity, night sights
rbernie
Contributing Member
The P01/PCR both have a slightly different shape to the trigger, making them slightly more friendly for shorter fingers/smaller hands than the older-style CZ75B. other than that, the ergonomics are very similar.
I find the recoil difference between the alloy framed P01/PCR and the steel-framed 75B to be quite noticable. Not uncomfortable, but noticable. For range use, I vastly prefer the full-size CZ-75B, especially if I'm practicing double-taps and such things that put a premium on a rapid follow-up.
Both are equally accurate at the standard 7yd-15yd distances you're likely to shoot at; I'm slightly more accurate with the full size pistol but that's just me. Both pistols will (given spring replacements every 5K rounds and a new slide stop every 10K or so) very likely outlast you.
Conventional wisdom will suggest that all new CZs need to have their extractor spring replaced with a stronger Wolff unit, and the recoil spring likely uprated slightly. I agree with the former, but do not agree with the latter.
For carry use, I would prefer that CZ made their alloy framed 9mm pistols (P01, PCR) with a safety instead of a decocker. Alas, they do not. I've carried both the steel and the alloy models, and while the weight difference was noticable I don't feel the weight difference to be a deal-maker. Instead, I would favor the one that fit me best and had the manual-of-arms that I prefer.
I have had (and still have) multiples of each. If I were forced to reduce the stable to just one, I would pick the full size CZ75B based predominantly on it's having a manual safety.
I find the recoil difference between the alloy framed P01/PCR and the steel-framed 75B to be quite noticable. Not uncomfortable, but noticable. For range use, I vastly prefer the full-size CZ-75B, especially if I'm practicing double-taps and such things that put a premium on a rapid follow-up.
Both are equally accurate at the standard 7yd-15yd distances you're likely to shoot at; I'm slightly more accurate with the full size pistol but that's just me. Both pistols will (given spring replacements every 5K rounds and a new slide stop every 10K or so) very likely outlast you.
Conventional wisdom will suggest that all new CZs need to have their extractor spring replaced with a stronger Wolff unit, and the recoil spring likely uprated slightly. I agree with the former, but do not agree with the latter.
For carry use, I would prefer that CZ made their alloy framed 9mm pistols (P01, PCR) with a safety instead of a decocker. Alas, they do not. I've carried both the steel and the alloy models, and while the weight difference was noticable I don't feel the weight difference to be a deal-maker. Instead, I would favor the one that fit me best and had the manual-of-arms that I prefer.
I have had (and still have) multiples of each. If I were forced to reduce the stable to just one, I would pick the full size CZ75B based predominantly on it's having a manual safety.
armoredman
Member
I've never had to replace a single CZ spring. The only time I replaced a spring was the recoil spring in my EAA Witness40 clone, after 10,000 rounds, just because. Maybe I am just really lucky with my CZs, but at 5 and counting, something seems to be working pretty well...
prefer 75b
Gallo, I own several CZs includinf a p-o1 and a 75b. I like the 75b better because I prefer the old style trigger, the grip is a tad too short with the metal botttomed mags, and I feel the trigger is better with the safety rather than the decocker. However the both shoot very well for me. pete
Gallo, I own several CZs includinf a p-o1 and a 75b. I like the 75b better because I prefer the old style trigger, the grip is a tad too short with the metal botttomed mags, and I feel the trigger is better with the safety rather than the decocker. However the both shoot very well for me. pete
rbernie
Contributing Member
You don't HAVE to replace the springs - you just should do it because it's better for the firearm. Springs do fatigue in use, and should be refreshed every so often based upon the number of compression/extension cycles they've been through.
Five thousand rounds seems to be a good number for a spring refresh, but I freely admit that I pulled that out of my a$$ rather than calculated it in any repeatable fashion.
briang2ad said:
There are plenty of people who disagree. In fact, I would argue that the manual safety is unnecessary and makes the gun harder to work. With the PCR or only decocker-only pistol, pull the trigger and the gun goes "BANG". Manual safeties introduce an extra step that the shooter may or may not remember to take in the heat of the moment. The decocker's function only comes into play before you fire or after the threat is eliminated. There's no "speed" involved in its use because there doesn't need to be.
Bottom line is that the decocker serves a purpose -- and there are plenty of advantages to the CZ line that extend far beyond just the ability to carry them C&L.
Jim
Halo is for Kids
Member
lol. That's some refreshing honesty.
- Status
