CZ vs Sig

[schmeky]

I completed a concealed handgun course today. The instructor was a retired State Police officer. He was a strong proponent of the 1911, BUT ONLY in the hands of an experienced shooter. I completely agreed.

He was also an advocate of the Sig line of autos. He let me examine his Sig 228, and put a couple of magazines through it at a B-27 target.

On the other hand, I have a CZ 75. I was expecting a HUGE difference between the Sig and CZ. Don't get me wrong, the out of the box Sig was really sweet, BUT, the DA pull was not significantly better than my CZ, however, the SA pull was a little better on the Sig.

Acccuracy wise, I couldn't detect a significant difference offhand shooting. What I did notice is the CZ is more ergonomic in the grip area. In addition to being a big 1911 fan, I love the dual capability of the CZ, i.e., DA or condition 1, as opposed to the DA/SA/Decock Sig.

Lastly, I had to consider this: is the Sig worth $700+ to the CZ's sub-$400.00 price?

 

[Croyance]

Worth is a nebulous subject.
How disposable is the money? If you are Bill Gates, do you even notice the difference in cost?
Can you get any real world benefit from the improvements? A skill question.
Do you get internal satisfaction from pride of ownership of a more expensive & better item?

The Sigs also come with better sights out of the box, IMO.
You also should be aware that, in all items, at some point price increases faster than apparent quality and improvements. When something is already good, it takes a lot of work to make incremental improvements that have any worth - and don't compromise some other function.

I disagree with your instructor. It isn't that a shooter needs to be very experienced to handle a 1911. They need to be aware - just like anybody handling a cocked gun in SA mode needs to be.
I've met plenty of people with experience who weren't very aware in their field.

 

[XLMiguel]

I have both a SIG 228 and a CZ75 PCR. They are very comparable guns in every respect, and IMO, the CZ is the better value. I have more rounds thru the SIG, but the CZ doesn't give anything away to the SIG in terms of accuracy, reliability, fit and finish, and I can't realy make up my mind as to which feels better in hand. You can't go wrong with either, but bang for the buck, the CZ wins (and I'm pretty much a SIG bigot, also own or have owned a 225, 226, 232, & 239, all "9's") - YMMV

 

[Mayo]

Sorry to say, but CZ can't hold a candle to the SIG IMO. Doesn't matter which 1 cost more the SIG is better.

 

[Deer Hunter]

An amazing statement, Mayo. However, it lacks any backing whatsoever. Please enlighten us on why the Sig brand of pistols is so much better than the CZ line.

 

[cookekdjr]

I've owned and shot SIGs and CZ's. I consider them to be equals. I personally prefer SIGs (generally), but I believe that CZ is one of the best armsmakers in the world, and would not argue with you if you considered them the best. If I had the money I'd buy an P-01 tomorrow.
-David

 

[wheelgunslinger]

Since I, like many others here, work for a living I choose CZ products. They fit my big mits, are accurate, they function well, and they have a large enough aftermarket to support them. I believe they're some of the best made civilian grade weapons on the market.
Sig does not, in my opinion, offer 3-400 dollars more value.
I have a passel of wheelguns. I have 1 CZ. It's because of this 1 CZ and how safe I feel with it that I can toy with the idea of buying a longslide frame and slide from Brownells and build a 1911 just to see if I can make one work.
But, like I said, I work for a living. If you can convince me that my 3-400 hard earned dollars is better spent on a Sig than a CZ, then I'll do it, since I'm not really given to Brand Whoredom. So far though, it's hard to beat CZ for a Good Quality weapon that does what you ask it to do.

 

[rellascout]

Sig and CZ are two of my favorite pistol lines.

I own several Sigs P228/P225/P220/P226 etc....

I own several CZs Cz 75B/P01/ Cz compact/40P etc....

The fit and finish on the Sigs is superior IMHO. They are clean inside and out. They represent some of the the finest production pistols in the world. I pull the trigger they go bang and send the bullet where I directed it.

The CZs are not so clean. When you inspect them closely the fit and finish is not as good overall. They are clean where it counts but rough in other spots. The DA is often stiffer and the SA is not as smooth. All of that said when I pull the trigger they go bang and they send the bullet where I directed it.

If you are paying $700+ for a NIB Sig you are paying tooooo much. You can get a CPO P229 9mm for $500 or a safe queen P228 for $600.

The CZ will get the job done. They are great weapons but lack the refinement of the Sig. Again IMHO. I do not consider the Sig worth $300 more than the CZ75B but I do not pay top $$$ for my Sigs. The used market is full of nice Sigs and there has been a great run on factory CPOs in the last 18 Months.

In the end beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Surefire]

I consider the Sig a little better if the guns were priced the same (IMO much better interior workmanship, and moderate reliability edge). Having said this, they are NOT the same price...and IMO the CZ gives you more gun for the buck than the Sig does.

Based on my CZs and Sigs, the CZs are usually considerably more accurate. Exterior workmanship is very good on both pistols, and ergonomics are top notch on both.

However, I've never had luck with CZs and hollowpoints. All of mine have had malfunctions with hollowpoints, ranging from just a few to a lot (depending on the exact CZ pistol specimen).

 

[Mayo]

Do some research for yourself. The 1 and ONLY arguement people have for choosing a CZ over a SIG is price---sorry but that doesn't cut it. Evryone says well the SIG is better(fill i n the blank)but for the price you get more bang for the buck with the CZ---IE the SIG is better but I want something not quite as good for less money.

 

[Mayo]

Consider this as well---the $400 vs $700 is just a starting price. After you have used the gun for a while and want another SIG, errr, gun then how much will you get for a used CZ vs a used SIG---comes out in the end

 

[wheelgunslinger]

Mayo,
I think my argument is that my CZ is dead reliable and accurate and that I'm not sure what spending more money will get me aside from a bigger bill. Fit and finish don't concern me. I don't care how neato something looks. I just want it to work and work properly. Weapons really are tools for me, so I shop for function.
So, explain to me how a Sig product is better than a weapon that costs less, functions just as well, and is as or more accurate than one that is super accurate.

 

[Mayo]

Again, anybody that does head to head comparisons rates the SIG higher(except in price) so it isn't as good because it's close. Only arguement is in price and that shouldn't be an option.

There are many reasons IMO the CZ isn't as good and needs to upgrade---
1. No decocker
2. The recoil spring guide rod is made of PLASTIC
3. Phillips head screws make it look
4. The magazine brake is an unwanted/uneeded feature
5. Trigger not as good

 

[VPJack]

Having both Sig's anc CZ's, at least on mine I find both to be exceptional firearms. Do I find the Sig's to be better made, more reliable, or more accurate? No. In some areas that have no relationship to function the metal may be slightly more finished on some individual guns, however I would not make a blanket statement saying that Sig is always superior. As to Mr. Mayo's statement that all the experts say that the Sig is the superior arm, no less an athority than Col. Cooper calls the CZ the finest 9mm service pistol in the world. As to which one to get, the one that feels the best in your hand and that you feel fits your needs the best. Myself, the CZ is the primary and the Sig is backup when I have to carry a somewhat smaller arm.

As to Mayo's list
1) you can get CZ with a decocker
2) yes the rod is a polymer, so is the frame on Glocks does it effect function or reliability? no
3) what does a grip screw have to do with function anyway
4) again this not a feature on all CZ's
5) this is subjective, every one that has shot my CZ and Sig have said that the triggers are either just as good or that the CZ's is somewhat better (neither have had any trigger work)

2&3 if these bother you all that much both can be readily replaced


Jack(just my 2 cents and worth every penny)

 

[Majic]

Well Mayo not everyone rates the vaunted SIG so high. The only SIG that equal a CZ is the P230/232 against the CZ-83 and even then the CZ has a higher capacity. The only SIG that greatly out class the CZ is the P210 (and you don't want to talk about it's price tag). Sigs have a higher bore axis making them more difficult to shoot. The CZ have better ergonomics. CZ does offer a decocker if wanted. Triggers are more of a personal taste and many find them comparable. Not all CZs have phillip head screws. Both the SIG and the CZ are reliable and accurate. Both are durable and have been used by various militaries.
So for the extra money you get to be a snob for a brand name, but nothing that shows where the extra money went vs other brands.

 

[Mark54g]

Mayo

Check the CZ 75BD, CZ P-01, CZ PCR, etc for Decockers. They are right there. My CZ 75B Stainless has excellent fit and finish. It is also accurate and a good looker. If you don't like the phillips head screws, you can change them out for $5 at a hardware store. I plan on buying some spares as I am afraid they'll strip over time.
I think SIGs are fine weapons. I never got to liking them, as they just didn't feel right to me. Sure, they were fine and soft shooting, but for some reason or other I can't seem to shoot them well. It is most definately the indian and not the arrow.
However, I am good with 1911s, my CZ, my beretta neos, my father's 92FS, etc. I also like some of the larger bore wheelguns, but that ain't happening for a while. PRoNJ is not forthcoming for handgun owners. Too much of a pain and too high a cost to make it easy.

 

[rellascout]

I really don't understand these types of pissing contests????

Why do these debates rage? Everyone makes their choice based on a personal aesthetic. Why do so many people feel the need to justify why they paid more or less for one brand or another.

If you are happy with your choice say so. I just don't understand why the need to put down another members choice in order to justify yours.

I buy what I buy becaue its my money and I buy what I like.

Enough said.

 

[Mayo]

Wow, I wonder why the SIG costs more then the CZ and the CZ costs more then a Kel Tec same guns right? They should all 3 cost the same.
Lexus should be the same as a Pinto--they both get you where you want to go and the Pinto gets better gas miles. I wonder why Yankee tickets cost more then Royals tickets---both pro teams that play ball. Bottom line---SIG outclasses CZ in every way and you know it. The ONLY 1's who choose a CZ over a SIG are the 1's who picked a CZ because of the PRICE!

 

[gc70]

Mayo, price is always part of the equation.

Personally, I prefer Sigs - not for the minor differences in quality, but because I prefer the overall design of the guns. Sig's decockers are easier for me to use than any other design. Sigs also fit my hand better than any design other than 1911s.

What's to criticize about polymer guide rods, other than appearance? 1911s and BHPs do fine without even having full-length guide rods.

BTW, most Sigs have those horrible, cheap flat-head grip screws.

 

[Mayo]

Again, how is price a part of the equation. You p[ay more to start but get more in return

 

[gc70]

There are a lot of guns on the market and the decision to buy premium-priced brands reflects a personal opinion on the relative value of 'features' other than mechanical accuracy and reliability. I don't pay extra just because a gun has fewer machine marks in non-functional areas, but that's because I buy functionality. YMMV.

At any rate, price is part of the purchase equation unless a person is so fabulously wealthy than money doesn't matter. For most of us, there needs to be a good reason to spend our hard-earned money. And each of us weighs the costs and benefits differently.

 

[Surefire]

They're both good guns. What difference does it make what others buy or prefer?

Use what works best for you, or better yet just buy both!

 

[Tom Servo]

I'm a big Sig fan. I learned on a P220, and I own several. They're dead-on accurate, have great ergonomics and triggers, and I'd trust my life to any of them.

I got a CZ75B as a cheap "beater" gun at first. Once the trigger broke in, I realized something very odd: it shoots as well as any of my Sigs. It's never failed with any kind of ammo, and the ergonomics are different, but just as comfortable.

Out of the box, the sights are marginal, and the trigger needs about 300 rounds (and alot of dryfire) to smooth out. The DA pull is long for some (but I carry it cocked, so that's not an issue), and it's heavy, so you need a good holster.

With that out of the way, the trigger, though different, is quite good. The SA feels "springier" than on Sigs, and the DA is definitely stagier but by no means bad (compare it to, say, a PPK). Sure, the internals look pretty rough, but that's not a real concern.

Are Sigs worth the extra money? To me, yes, but I love the CZ as well, and it's my winter-carry gun.

Are you "settling" by buying the CZ? NO. It's a wonderful pistol, and if it fits your hands, don't feel that you're buying "cheap" with one.

 

[Croyance]

Mayo, price is a large part of this discussion because the original question was about price differential and worth. Would he get enough value from the Sig to make it worth the extra money?

Obviously your answer is yes. You say you pay more but get more in return. schmeky says as much, just questions if the more you get in return is worth the money.

Now, as to what points you actually bring up:
1.) Decocker - not everybody wants DA/SA. Many like cocked and locked. Besides, there is that CZ-75 decocker model.
2.) Plastic guide rod - it is not a load bearing part. Enlighten me on what forces are brought to bear on this?
3.) Philips heads don't look good to you. *** is this supposed to mean to anybody else?
4.) Magazine break isn't on every model, just like heel magazine releases aren't an all Sig models.
5.) Says you.

Sig to CZ comparison analogy to Yankees vs. Royals or Lexus vs. Pinto - you still haven't shown that the difference in quality is nearly the same. Talking smack doesn't mean you know what you are talking about.

 

[robctwo]

Schmeky. You have a great gun. I got the CZ75BD very early on in my pistol collecting, sometime in 2002. I got the Kadet Kit for it and shot the heck out of it in 9mm and .22. Never a failure until this week. My slide stop broke. Just sheared in two and noticed only when trying to swap out the .22 for the 9mm slide.

CZ customer service is great. I emailed Mike and he got back to me the next day, confirmed that a new slide stop was in the mail. I didn't even expect it for free! I've got tousands of rounds through this gun.

I had to have a BHP. I paid more for the BHP than the CZ with the Kadet Kit! Was it worth it? I had to have a Sig. Being a 9mm junkie I looked around. Couldn't justify the 210. I bought a 226 Stainless Stock, a semicustom gun from Germany. It cost three times what the CZ with Kadet Kit cost. Was it worth it? CZ P-01 is a keeper, much less than the BHP or the 226. Just as accurate. Just as reliable. Did I need it?

You have a great gun. There are a lot of other great guns out there. How many do you need? Probably three. Pistol, rifle and shotgun. How many can you afford or justify to the wife? If I had been told that I couldn't have another gun after buying the CZ75 I would feel perfectly safe and able to shoot side by side with most folks running factory guns of any price. Relax. Shoot the heck out of your CZ. Save your pennies. Get into reloading, even 9mm. Enjoy the sport.

Do not go to the Sig website and look at the the 226 X-5, the 220 SAO or the GSRs.