CZ75B vs Beretta 92FS

[Milkmaster]

I always keep a 9mm pistol around for something to shoot that is cheaper than .45ACP. I have had a 92FS for a few years. It shoots easily and smoothly, fits my hand, and has never had a stovepipe or FTF round. I use the cheapest ammo I can buy in it.

Recently I have become curious about the CZ75B in stainless that has been talked about a lot on THR. I want to know what the shooting differences between the two are to those who have fired both. I like the sexy look of the CZ, but is it a crude piece shooting experience compared to the Berretta? Comparisons please...

 

[atblis]

There's

I find the two guns completely different, so one being better than the other will almost entirely be subjective. In theory the're both full size, high capacity, 9mms but...

I've never had a problem with either, but usually find the 75B to be more accurate. They both have their + and - .

The only thing that I'll say is clearly better about the Beretta, is that due to the frame over slide design of the CZ, the slide isn't very tall, and is a bit harder to get a grip on. The Cz75 is a truly superb handgun, as is the 92.

http://www.gunweek.com/2002/feature0110.html

but is it a crude piece shooting experience compared to the Berretta?

Nope. People will try and make that argument. Pointing out machining marks is the usual thing. So what? It is a gun. Does the absence of machining marks make your GlocklerSigUndSauer shoot any better. Nope. So, basically you paid more money for what?.... CZs are usually way more accurate than they have any right to be. I have something like 7 of them right now, and they all will shoot under 3" 10 round groups at 25 yards.

Now, what you do run into with CZs is that they do make some lemons. Their quality control seems to be a little suspect at times. CZ-USA is usually helpful, sometimes not. Recently they seem to have slipped a little. I am giving them some slack becuase I like thier pistols so much. I think their in the process of expanding, and are a bit disorganized. The vast majority of the time, they are excellent pistols.

 

[rbernie]

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=182562
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=233537

Also, Stephen Camp has separate CZ and Taurus PT92 (almost identical to the Beretta) reviews on his site: http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/OtherHandguns.htm

 

[wally]

Since the CZ75 and Taurus PT-92 both do cocked and locked for me its a toss-up. But I rarely shoot my Beretta 92 as I got it before I learned I don't like DA/SA guns so if you want a shooter, I'd say get the CZ75 over the Beretta 92 and flip a coin for the CZ vs Taurus PT-92.

--wally.

 

[schmeky]

Had a Beretta 92 many years ago, great gun, extremely reliable, but was a little to big for my tastes for a 9mm. Grip was a little blocky. I sold it.

Have a CZ-75, and despite the "rough" maching remarks thrown around from time to time on various forums, the marks are not externally visible for 1, and make absolutely no difference in the overall quality and accuracy of the CZ for 2. My CZ is a keeper.

Both are excellent overall, both are very different from each other, and either will be a great choice. Based on my experience, CZ will be more accurate than the 92.

CZ's have some weird aura that makes them somewhat addictive, I call it CZ-itis. I never got "infected" by the 92.

 

[armoredman]

I liked shooting the Berretta 92 at the rental range I worked at. The huge, bulky size made it a natural for low recoil. Fun pistol, quite accurate. My CZs are better guns, IMHO. And that's all you will have, is objective opinion. Both guns are made by European quality gunmakers of international reknown. CZ fits me like acustom made glove...for 2/3 the price of a 92.


Does this look "crude"? BTW, my gun, my camera.

 

[10-Ring]

I have had my 92fs' since 1992....10's of 1000's of rounds later they just fee like the most natural guns to pick up & shoot than any of my other guns

 

[Laughing Man]

Beretta 92FS all the way = ]

 

[bad LT]

I want to like Berettas, really...

However my hands are not that large. I have a hard time shooting either a Beretta or CZ double action.

The CZ75B allows for a single action first shot, so that is what I prefer.

YMMV

 

[PaladinX13]

Not a fan of a slide-mounted safety on the 92FS, but if it's nothing but a range gun for eating 9mm, you probably don't need to trade "up" unless you feel strongly about it. I mean, your whole reason for 9mm is saving costs... buying a new gun kind of undermines that.

 

[Gixerman1000]

I own several of the Beretta 9XFS guns and a CZ75B stainless, they are both great shooting pistols and are extremely reliable.

I had a CZ75B in the two tone finish and it to was a very good shooter but the satin nickel finished frame would tarnish real bad where your hand came into frequent contact with it and it was very hard to remove the discoloration with out polishing the area so I sold it to a friend who just wanted a good reliable handgun and bought the CZ75B stainless, I have been nothing but happy with the stainless model.

 

[Ohioan]

I have no experience with the Berettas... But man, I love my CZ-75B.. it's my favorite gun. When I want to shoot something accurately, and quickly, I grab my CZ-75B. It's handy for bowling pins... I can hit the tops pretty easily

 

[obxned]

Buy an EAA Witness - it's as good as either and a lot less money.

 

[dleong]

I own about a dozen CZ pistols, with three of them being 75Bs (two 9mm, one 40 S&W). A few months ago, I purchased a new 92FS from CDNN.

On my first range visit with the 92FS, I couldn't get the thing to group worth a darn at 25 yards. Some shots weren't even appearing on the target at all. This was a far cry from the sub-3" groups my 75Bs were capable of at the same distance with my target handloads. Needless to say, I was disappointed, and thought I had made a bad purchase decision with the 92FS.

I mentioned the situation with the 92FS to a good friend who shot competitively, and he suggested that perhaps it liked a different type of ammo. My 9mm 75B shoots most accurately with 124 gr. projectiles, and that's what I had on hand to feed the 92FS on its maiden range outing. I decided to give the 92FS another try, this time with some 115 gr. handloads.

I didn't think a difference of 9 grs. would have much of an impact on the Beretta's accuracy, but apparently it did, as the offhand groups went from a shotgun pattern to a nice, tight sub-3" (and occasionally a sub-2") group at 25 yards. The groups were centered about 3" left and high of the bullseye, indicating that the sights needed to be adjusted for that particular handload recipe, but I was ecstatic that 92FS was finally achieving the same accuracy as my 75Bs.

I concur with what's been said thus far in this thread about both the 92FS and 75B, and don't think you'll go wrong with either one.

Here's an image of my 92FS, before I added the adjustable rear sight and Hogue grips:



And this is my 9mm 75B wearing Trausch grips:

 

[DMK]

Both are good guns. Both have a following. I say it's personal preference.

When I was looking for a 'Wondernine', I did the usual research and the Beretta 92 looked very nice to me. I did some shopping around, handled some Berettas but was put off by the sticker price. The low price of the CZ75 initially won me over. 6 years later, I'm very impressed with my CZ-75 for it's accuracy, reliability, versitility and comfort. In fact I've liked all the CZs I've tried. I'm a huge fan.

Now, I have a friend who was also looking for a 'Wondernine'. He also did a bunch of research and was stuck on getting a Beretta 92 (even though I tried to convince him to buy a CZ). After much shopping and comparing, he bought a beautiful stainless 92 Brigadier. We've done a bunch of shooting together and his Beretta is a nice pistol. It shoots great, it's reliable and he loves it.

I just prefer the CZ75. It shoots just as well as the Berretta, feels nicer to me and certainly keeps up with it reliability wise. Plus I think it just looks sexier.