CZ 75b vs Sig 226

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have experience with both: I have the P226 and my father has a 75B stainless and a P-01. I have to say I prefere my SIG by a wide margin in every aspect.
Why? I find the exact opposite true. I prefer my 75B, and 75 D PCR over my Sigs by a wide margin. The CZ's feel better in my hand, are more accurate, and just as reliable. Mine are all stock, but there is a lot of aftermarket parts available for the CZ's now, so even if you don't like the trigger reach you can shorten it although I can't imagine why people don't start with the hammer at the half cocked notch like Walt says, or get slimmer grips.
 
The CZ grip fits me better, and I like CZ triggers. The Sig is a tad smaller, blockier and I don't care for Sig triggers. My vote goes to the CZ!
 
Why? I find the exact opposite true. I prefer my 75B, and 75 D PCR over my Sigs by a wide margin. The CZ's feel better in my hand, are more accurate
I've experienced exactly the opposite :). All our guns are stock (except for my father's CZs that have CZ wood fully checkered cocobolo grips which I think gives a better grip on the P-01 but not on the 75B Stainless). I also consider the SIG the softer and smoother shooter. The trigger is alot better on the SIG and I've experienced a superior accuracy with the same factory ammo. Not to mention the superior quality of the machining and finish both inside and outside (reflected by a higher price, however...). Forged vs cast slide and frame is another win for the SIG (the P-01 has also a forged frame but the slide is still cast). I prefere the sights of the SIG.
The SIG is also alot easier and smoother on racking the slide and breakdown procedure.
CZ are good but, sorry, I so much prefere the SIG.
 
Funny, I was at the same place recently, SIG226 or CZ75BD. I wanted to get the CZ SP01 Tactical with the decocker but it was not on California's list of approved guns so I ended up getting the SIG. I am happy with my P226 Dark Elite except for the way the "adjustable" rear sight adjusts. SRT trigger is nice in SA.
 
I'm both a SIG and CZ owner, having owned a variety of both models. I also have Glocks and S&W Pros in a variety of calibers. And I like them all.

I would observe, as a long-time participant on these forums, that folks who really like CZs seldom are turned on by SIGs, and folks who really like SIGs are seldom enthused about CZs. There are exceptions, but they are exceptions -- and rare.

Of those two, I like CZs a little better, but it's not a big difference, and I have found things I don't like about BOTH of them! In IDPA I've always done well with a CZ-85 Combat -- but have done my best with a Glock 34. (My first shots are always just a bit faster but no less accurate with a G-34.) I now have well-tuned S&W Pros in both 9mm and .40 and think, should I start competing again, they'd be my choice until I find they aren't as good in my hands as I think. (That said, I'm in the process of buying a loaner Sphinx SDP that I've been shooting a bit recently -- and I shoot it better than any of them...)

It all seems to boil down to this simple statement: there's no accounting for taste.

Personal preferences seem to underlie this type of discussion, based on factors that each of us know and others factors (less conscious ones?) that we don't understand. But, once we've made that choice we all seem to justify our reasons for choosing what we chose by using whatever excuse or rationalization that seems to sound best at the time. That's because mine is bigger and better than yours, etc. :neener:
 
Nice wrap up Walt, and I can see what you mean about either or.

My Sig 225 is in for repair as it finally broke one of the small springs, after almost 30 yrs of service.

I like the new CZ and it seems more accurate than the Sig by seat of pants method at 50 feet/25 yards. The CZ ate some screwed up LSWC's that were over-sized and I messed up making. In testament to one of Sigs virtues: forgiveness, I had the box labelled "bad- for Sig 225 only". The CZ did fine and another big surprise the shots grouped much better than with the Sig for this ammo.

We'll see which one stays in the safe more when I get the 225 back LOL
 
I was never as accurate with my Sigs as i am with my CZ 75b, especially in rapid fire drills. Needless to say, the Sigs are gone, the CZ is here to stay.
10802001_10201922050132297_6023223269547775697_n.jpg
 
I have a CZ75B SA. I love its ergonomics - the thing just fits right. Shooting it is intuitive, and almost always very accurate.

My cousin has a P226 .40. Also very accurate and nice. I'd not turn one down.
 
"CZ has a far better reputation for reliability IME."

Your opinion...but overall, IME, absolute nonsense.

Our most elite military units can pick and choose anything they want for missions...if it's a pistol chambered in 9mmP, it's a SIG. The CZ75B is the most common military sidearm in the world, but it proves the rule in firearms...you get what you pay for.

Otherwise, I'm surprised to see that there are such distinct preferences for the supposed ergonomic differences between CZs and SIGs...they are as close as can be imagined in mainstream brands.

My favorite CZ is my 75BD PCR; it is almost, but not quite, as accurate as any of my SIGs [and if you want the best of all, try a P229/.357SIG]. The outer finish is exceptional and the legendary CZ slide-to-frame fit is responsible for its fine accuracy. The alloy frame makes it quite easy to carry and, yes, it fits holsters designed for medium-frame SIGs.

It is not, however, a SIG; and it won't ever be because the mfr. will never spend the extra time and money to place it on par. Spend the cash for aftermarket parts to make your 75B comparable if you choose, but then you could just as easily own a SIG.

One more note, please. Those of you who own SIGs, CZs and Glocks and claim to shoot them all well have my admiration...transitions between real pistols and plastic bricks with weird grip angles aren't easy. ;)
 
Agree with the last sentence.
A friend can shoot well with whatever he picks up.
M. Ayoob once described "programming his brain" for whatever loaner gun he had for a class or for self defense in a strange place where he could not bring his own.
So it can be done, just not by me.
 
Blade First said:
Our most elite military units can pick and choose anything they want for missions...if it's a pistol chambered in 9mmP, it's a SIG.

I've seen the same claim made about the H&K Mark 23 -- with the same supporting evidence (i.e., none.) Then too, the SIG P226s now being used by the U.S. NAVY SEALs are not the same P226 you and I can buy. And the finest SIGs I've owned, used, or shot, had STEEL FRAMES -- and they're heavy -- and typically not used by military types. And these steel-frame guns are not comfortable CARRY weapons.

Most of these claims seem to come from people very distant from the elite units being discussed, and in many cases the claims seem to be restated versions of advertising copy from gun mags. I've spent many long hours trying to find data or evidence to support such claims, and it's seemingly impossible. If you've found any reliable/verifiable data about who uses what, in what numbers, please share it with us.

Blade First said:
The CZ75B is the most common military sidearm in the world, but it proves the rule in firearms...you get what you pay for.
CZ's Marketing claims that they have the most-widely used service pistol in the world may possibly be true, but "most widely-used" is NOT the same as "most-used." CZ has made a lot of sales to small units around the world, but not a lot of BIG SALES to BIG ORGANIZATIONS. A few of the former Communist Block militaries are starting to use CZs, and the new P-07 and P-09 seem to be gaining traction in a number of areas, including Asia.

The Israelis liked the CZs so much, they started making their own (based on the Tanfoglio version). They built the Baby Eagle, and other guns like the DAVID -- all variations of the CZ design. The Turks did the same: bought some, and then started making their own, under license. There ARE a lot of CZs in use in the Middle East, but it's hard to get any credible numbers. There are MANY, MANY CZ-pattern guns in use, however.

And we probably shouldn't mention how many hundreds of thousands of handguns Beretta has sold to the U.S. Department of Defense, alone... Other mlitaries have bought them, too.
 
I greatly prefer the CZ75 over the SIG226. SIGs are great guns, but I feel the are overpriced for what they are. I am a guy that is all about value for dollar, and CZ wins in that regard.

Also, performance-wise, both are accurate and reliable, it will depend on shooter skill and not pistol design. I do like that CZ's slide ride inside the frame, but it is hard to rack. I also think the CZ triggers are much nicer, the aren't as spongy and have a nice sharp break... but that is all opinion.

Good Luck either way!!!
 
I greatly prefer the CZ75 over the SIG226. SIGs are great guns, but I feel the are overpriced for what they are. I am a guy that is all about value for dollar, and CZ wins in that regard.
Funny thing I think the opposite. The day I took my SIG at home from my LGS, disassembled and inspected it, I felt like I stole it rather than purchased it... Not the same feeling when we purchased the CZs... Again, the quality of the machining and finish, the trigger and the overall smoothness is not in the same league and the different price reflects it.
 
Last edited:
Funny thing I think the opposite. In my opinion the SIG was a steal, not so much our CZs... Again, the quality of the machining and finish is not in the same league and the different price reflects it.
Well, I see that you're a SIG guy, which is fine (one day when my paychecks are better, I will join the club). But with CZ75's around $500 and SIGs at $800-900, I have a hard time seeing the extra money in the gun. Then again, I'm a CZ clone for $300 kinda guy...
 
Well, I see that you're a SIG guy, which is fine (one day when my paychecks are better, I will join the club). But with CZ75's around $500 and SIGs at $800-900, I have a hard time seeing the extra money in the gun. Then again, I'm a CZ clone for $300 kinda guy...
I have to say I'm a (recent) SIG guy for more than one reason. Some are subjective (trigger and safeties set-up, grip feeling, etc.), some are objective (materials, machining, finish, etc.). I thought I was a CZ/Tanfoglio, heck even a HK P30 and Walther P99 guy (all guns I have good experience from) but in my hands the SIG outperforms all of them; if you add that I prefere the SIG look and feel, then you have a SIG guy!
I purchased it when I had the money and the opportunity (kind of a "once in a lifetime" purchase) but as I said IMHO it was a steal, even at that price (and in my Country it's well over 1000 euros...).
 
After reading these threads it's not quite fair for me to compare accuracy because I'm basing my observations on a well worn P225 which has gotten loose and whose finish is well faded after the years. I would expect that the Sig given German fit and finish requirements would be a more costly gun and smoother and more refined as a result.

As more of a 45acp guy, comparing my Springfield Armory 1911 to my Dan Wesson or Les Baer isn't apples to apples, not even close because the finish on the SA is crude. For twice the price I expect more and get it in the 1911's. At almost that same cost difference ratio for the CZ vs SIG 9mm's (in my area) I would expect the same observation to be true.

Difference in accuracy for the 1911's is based on the purpose: combat/self defense looseness vs target/wad gun tightness (i.e.Bullseye) standards. The Dan Wesson isn't a wad gun so it wouldn't be expected it to be as accurate as the target/wad Les Baer, but in real life there are no alibi's :)

Don't know if that's the same with the 9mm's being discussed. In real life combat or self-defense I clearly would prefer the SIG, if only for the slide outside the rails for grip.
 
What is that green thing in the photo post #57?

I'm still pondering how a few here seem to believe that the out-of-the-box accuracy of any CZ can compare to that of a SIG, pistol for pistol. Perhaps some whose experience is only with CZ can shoot them with fair accuracy, but you take a shooter experienced in both pistols and the SIGs will generally deliver better accuracy ... that's my experience.
 
I had both

Both are excellent guns

But.....

The SIG is better built IMHO

The SIG trigger is MUCH better out of the box in both DA and SA mode
(It is night and day)

Many people get the trigger job done on the CZ
 
Old Dog said:
I'm still pondering how a few here seem to believe that the out-of-the-box accuracy of any CZ can compare to that of a SIG, pistol for pistol. Perhaps some whose experience is only with CZ can shoot them with fair accuracy, but you take a shooter experienced in both pistols and the SIGs will generally deliver better accuracy ... that's my experience.

I like'm both, as I've said.

I also shoot (or did shoot) a good bit of IDPA. Don't see many SIGs in IDPA, which is meant to be a bit like real-life Civilian self-defense shooting. (I'll admit it's not, really, but it's more like it than IPSC [except, maybe, production] or BULLSEYE.) You don't see a lot of SIGs in any of those venues, except some marvelous SIG X-Fives in IPSC and USPSA. The SIG X-Fives are not your father's SIGs. They cost a lot more than your father's SIG. They are not typical of SIGs. At the recent (2014) IDPA Nationals, there were a number 97 Glocks (mostly 34s), 87 S&W Pros, 4 Springfield XDs, 22 STIs (1911-like guns), 21 CZs, and 49 1911s from various makers. Not a single SIG. That should make some folks wonder why, if SIGs are so marvelous in the hands of savvy shooters like you, we don't see them in the gun game that most closely attempts to simulate the real world of self defense?

I have had a bunch of CZs and a bunch of SIGs. The SIGs included 3 or 4 P220s, a P220 Match, a P220 Super Match (sold this past weekend), several P226s, a P-239, a Gray Guns-tuned P-228r, a SIG P226 X-Five Competition in .40, a SIG GSR 1911, and a P-210-6. My only SIG at the moment is the Gray Guns P-228r, which is about as nice as you'll get without paying more than $2000; it will probably be up for sale in the next month or two. (To be replaced by a Sphinx SDP.)

The only one I miss of all of the guns now sold is the P-210-6, but that was a love-hate relationship: marvelous accuracy (a 1.75" five shot group at 55 yards on the proof target), but tiny sights, awkward mag release, a hammer that bites many hands, a safety lever that was too stiff, and sights that could cut you if you did a hand-over slide movement (I bled more than once in a match.) At one point in time I badly needed a second vehicle, and selling the P-210, a S&W 52-2, and a collectible Luger bought me a very nice pickup -- I missed all of three guns, but I needed good transportation.

I have only one CZ right now -- a mildly tuned 85 Combat. But I have had MANY CZs over the years: pre-Bs, Bs, several compacts, a CZ-40B, two CZ-100s (one in 9mm and one in .40 -- hated them both!) and a 97B. I've also had several Sphinx 2000 guns, and still have a well-tuned (semi-custom) AT-84s. I have also owned several Witnesses from a Sport Long Slide in .45 an .40, to a variety of 9mm, .40s, and .45s. The CZ 85 Combat is very nice, but the AT-84s may be the best of the bunch. I think the Sphinx SDP may be as good a shooter as the At-84s, and possibly more accurate -- but that's unresolved, right now.

I'd argue that you simply CAN'T make sweeping statements like you've made above, or like many of the CZ enthusiasts have made. When I read such unbalanced comment, I think there's more at play than just knowledge of the guns in question. I would argue that some guns fit some people better than other guns, and THAT is the variable that you simply can't address when making such claims.

I have two tuned S&W M&P Pros that are simply marvelous, and were I competing actively now, I'd probably be shooting them. I'm retired and don't have as much money for gun games (and ammo) as I once did... :(

I also have a Glock 38 (with only a Ghost trigger kit installed) which I shoot better than any .45 I've owned, including the P220 Super Match. (The P220 SM is more accurate from a rest, but I don't have a rest that I can carry with me when I carry concealed, or when I shoot in competition. Were I doing IDPA actively again, it would be the Glock 38 rather than the P220 SM if I felt like shooting .45. The Glock 38 is my home defense gun, kept in a small bedside gun safe for when things go bump in the night.

It's not as simple as X is better than Y when the shooter is an experienced shooter. That's BS.
 
Last edited:
I own both, but the Sig is the only one I carry regularly. I never carry the CZ. First, it is plain heavy, and a bit butt-heavy at that, so it wants to pull-away from the body.

As others have said, the Sig just exudes quality. Racking the slide of both, it becomes immediately apparent that someone spent quality time with the Sig perfecting the slide to frame fit. The CZ is a bit clunky and crunchy when racked, the Sig is so buttery smooth & quiet.

IMO, the Sig-lite night sights are the best on the market. I also find the OEM MecGar mags to be a higher quality than the CZ. topping of a mag on the CZ when new required a hammer and a floor jack.

I do love shooting my CZ though, but I have to say even though both are stone cold reliable, I feel more confident with the Sig on my hip.
 
Interesting comment on the mags, akelroy. I own a few CZ mags. IIRC, two mec gar and four CZ packaged ones. The CZ mags were made by mec gar as well.

Just for a point of reference.
 
I own both, but the Sig is the only one I carry regularly. I never carry the CZ. First, it is plain heavy, and a bit butt-heavy at that, so it wants to pull-away from the body.

As others have said, the Sig just exudes quality. Racking the slide of both, it becomes immediately apparent that someone spent quality time with the Sig perfecting the slide to frame fit. The CZ is a bit clunky and crunchy when racked, the Sig is so buttery smooth & quiet.

IMO, the Sig-lite night sights are the best on the market. I also find the OEM MecGar mags to be a higher quality than the CZ. topping of a mag on the CZ when new required a hammer and a floor jack.

I do love shooting my CZ though, but I have to say even though both are stone cold reliable, I feel more confident with the Sig on my hip.
CZ also makes lightweight alloy framed, and polymer framed pistols which are lighter. Many often think that CZ only makes the 75B.
 
If a gun is not used in IDPA and/or IPSC means nothing in my book. On the contrary I think that when a gun is not used in IDPA and/or IPSC matches then is a good gun. I also prefere to compare out-of-the-box guns.
 
On the contrary I think that when a gun is not used in IDPA and/or IPSC matches then is a good gun.


Surely this is a non-native-English-speaker statement. Because, if taken literally, it makes zero sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top