CZ75B vs The old standby, Baretta 92FS/M9

[browncoatdawn]

I have an old CZ75, the B model would be my new 9mm service size pistol, in 9mm, and the older gun would be retired, in near perfect shape, in box. I am the second owner.
I know the CZ is a stout pistol, and I have little experience with the 92FS and am not sure what the difference is between that and the M9 version I see once in a while... rarely lately. I do not know if the M9A1 versions have come out to the civilian markets yet. I could go for the insight on the differences in the FS and M9 versions, also comparisons for anyone who has used both. I have large hands with somewhat shorter stubby fingers, consequently i really don't like many large gripped guns like the old Glock 21, or the DE. Thanks for the input.

 

[psyopspec]

The M9A1 has been on the market for some years now.

I have average size palms and shorter fingers. This is something that caused me to ultimately decide I didn't like the pistol when it was issued to me in the military, but as a range gun I don't mind it. The reach from backstrap to trigger was further than I would have liked, the safety could be manipulated in error while working the slide, and even with a normal firing grip it was also not easy to consistently reach the slide-mounted lever. I also had to shift my grip to reach the mag release more than some pistols I own.

I never had any accuracy or reliability issues with the pistols I used in the Army. I went out of my way to take care of mine, including having an armorer look at it whenever the opportunity arose. On my first tour, one of my magazine springs took a set; from then on I supplied my own and never had an issue. Of course others will report negative experiences, which should be expected with any weapon issued in the hundreds of thousands to people with varying levels of responsibility for maintenance and taking care of it. Not using it to pound in tent stakes seems to help.

The FS vs. M9 differences are cosmetic, but even these lines have blurred in recent years. Military M9s contained more metal parts for the longest time, but in 2011 I was issued one with a plastic guide rod. I believe I've also seen some issued M9s with a slanted dust cover as well. I'm sure others can help you get deeper into the weeds, but generally the M9 and the 92fs will be indistinguishable.

 

[JShirley]

I can use the M9 and similarly sized handguns (Taurus 92/99), but the CZ feels better in the hand, more grippable if you have medium-sized or smaller hands.

The 92 frame works fine, but the CZ is just easier to carry and slightly easier to shoot. That "slightly easier" would probably become much easier if you were dumping a lot of rounds downrange in relatively little time. The most rounds I've fired at a time with the M9 have been for Army or Army Guard qualifications.

 

[browncoatdawn]

Thank you on the 92/M9 and CZ info so far

I appreciate this a lot. I know that these are all issued to different militaries, and units, not to mention police. I look at that factor to determine how a weapon holds up. Police maybe do not use theirs often, but does SWAT or do HRT's use them? It makes a difference. I handled the neighbors M9 a bit ago, after posting, and found that the trigger reach was just too long for me to be comfortable, and the safety seems like it was just a bit awkward. I prefer the Taurus frame mounted safety to the slide mounted safety.
So now, to keep in my budget, I am looking at the CZ primarily, and the Sig 2022, 9mm. I have read reviews and reports and found them all favorable. I might prefer the 226 or 229, but they're crazy high in price right now. I do want a 239 in 357sig, so if anyone has one in any finish, or even worn finish, and would like to part with it, I would be interested lol.
I prefer metal frames mostly, but I don't want to carry my MK "2.5" Hi Power, as reliable as it is, accurate, and beautiful as it is, I want to keep it for those nostalgic times when I want to show off my pieces of history, and don't want to batter my old war horses to death with some of the higher end ammo I carry. I must admit, I do love my Gen 4 Glock 20.

 

[JTQ]

I handled the neighbors M9 a bit ago, after posting, and found that the trigger reach was just too long for me to be comfortable, and the safety seems like it was just a bit awkward.

For me, the double action trigger reach on the CZ 75 seems longer than the Beretta 92/M9. Certainly, you could just go single action, cocked and locked with the CZ 75, but I also have trouble reaching the little "half a jelly bean" of a thumb safety. Certainly not as easy for me as my 1911.

The Beretta does have a fatter grip, and while the slide mounted safety is not easy to operate, other than decocking the pistol, which I could do at "ground speed zero", I'd never use it, so I don't see that as much of a problem.

While the CZ 75 does feel better in my hand than the Beretta 92, I'd rather have the Beretta and live with the fat grip and slide safety, than the long reach of the CZ 75 DA trigger and thumb safety.

 

[ZeSpectre]

I have a CZ75B "police" which is a decocker model (no safety). I'm a guy with just larger than medium hands and long fingers and the CZ "locks" into my grip perfectly. I handle a 92F without issue as well but the butt does feel more like holding a beer can.

If things are muddy/wet/slippery I have occasionally had a harder time getting a grip on the CZ slide as it's "inside the rails" design give you less surface area and I have never had this issue with the Beretta.

Both are all steel and heavy (by today's standards) but the Beretta just "feels" like a much larger gun to me.

Seriously my experience has been that both are great guns. I tend towards CZ pistols because they fit my hand like they were custom designed for me.

 

[BCRider]

I own both the Beretta, an older pre-b 75 and have a CZ SP-01 Shadow.

I found my head nodding in full agreement on all counts with psyopspec's post. His experience mimics my own on all counts.

Up this way handguns are sporting tools. But I use mine in IPSC and IDPA matches a lot. So perhaps there's a bit of "performance under pressure" that you may relate to your own experience and needs.

My pre-b model 75 is my go to gun for IDPA. I've used my Beretta for our IDPA practice nights but I seem to switch the decocker/safety inadvertently a few times too often to trust myself to use it in any matches. So it's pretty much become a range toy. But I do like the gun enough that I'm going to keep it.... for now at least.

I take large to Xlarge gloves depending on brand and style. So while I don't have the largest hands they are bigger than average. Even so the Beretta is a handful. I don't have any accuracy issues with the first double action shot coming out of the holster but it's likey not too far from that point. Coming from a CZ75 you would most certainly notice the little extra reach needed for that first shot situation. I know that I do if I shoot them back to back at all. But once into SA mode after that first shot each is about a wash in relation to trigger pull. Espcially if you train to ride the reset point instead of fully releasing the trigger for each shot.

Sitting on the table the Beretta is a slightly bigger gun. But the alloy frame makes it a slight bit less noticable when riding on your belt. Nothing like the difference from the CZ to a polymer gun. Just enough to notice when you stop and consider it.

Oh wait... I'm thinking about the Shadow to Beretta. The plain jane 75 is within two ounces of the same weight at the Beretta. So I'd call it a wash. No one can tell that slight a difference in pull on the belt... .

92fs vs m9? I doubt there's enough to notice. Mostly it's the straight vs slightly angled lower line to the forward dust cover. I can't imagine that they would feel any different to actually handle and shoot.

All in all I find that the CZ 75 platform just becomes part of me. It sits in my hand like it was designed to fit me from birth. To draw and shoot my CZ it feels like my hands just suddenly sprouted sights and the ability to go "BANG!". On the other hand the Beretta never blends with you like the CZ does. You always know you're holding something out there. It shoots just fine. Darned nice in fact. But it simply never seems to dissapear in my hands like the CZ's do. Possibly because I'm always thinking about the upcoming reload and concentrating on not pulling the decocker/safety down when I rack the slide.

Now if I had to carry a gun around all day on my hip in the real world instead of at the range this would have a whole other ending. Both the CZ and Beretta are big and heavy for a CCW gun. If I were allowed to carry CCW I'd be all over the smaller and more compact guns in polymer.

In fact in thinking about it the Beretta is the only handgun I have with a slide mounted safety of any sort. It'll likely be the last as well. I won't ditch the gun due to this. I like it too much in other ways to do that. But I likely won't use it in any matches other than our local Speed Steel meets due to the slide mounted control which I just can't get used to avoiding.

 

[viking499]

If you like everything but the trigger reach on the CZ, CajunGunWorks can solve that problem with a reach reduction trigger kit. I have it on all my CZ's. Made a world of difference for my little piggys.

 

[returningfire]

CZ 75B is the best, most accurate handgun ever built, in my opinion. I've
got 1911's, a 92FS, Para's, Smiths, Com bloc pistols etc. If I could only have one pistol it would be the CZ75B, I would trust my life with it. It will last a lifetime.

 

[beatledog7]

I qualified sharpshooter with the the first time I ever fired it, and carried one in the Balkans, but I never really warmed to it. That was before I owned a gun of my own. I have two CZ-75s and still occasionally assist in m9 qual shoots. The CZ fits me way better, and I shoot it better. YMMV.

 

[taraquian]

I am a CZ/clone junkie,.so my opinion is biased, but I was looking into a Berretta 92 simply because I could get mags for them. I cannot operate the slide mounted safety without concious effort and I found the grip to be slightly larger than the CZ, but about the same as my Witness Match. I liked the gun overall but I think I will look for a Taurus as it has a frame safety that I'm more comfortable with.

Of course if its not a carry gun (or competition in my case) then the safety operation is not as big of a concern...

 

[hAkron]

I find the Beretta a bit big for my hands as well. I also prefer frame mounted safeties. I have a Beretta, it's not bad, but I'm not in love with it either. It came with Hogue grips, I bought a set of stock plastic grips which made it a bit thinner. Maybe VZ grips would make it thinner still?

I use VZ grips on some of my CZ's and they make the already perfect grip of a CZ even more perfect.

 

[tarosean]

Maybe VZ grips would make it thinner still?

I have VZ's on my A1. If they are slimmer its not by any noticeable amount. Feel on the other hand you already know about.
I attempted to put some Hogue G10's from a Compact on my Type M. However, those were actually to thin for the M's transfer bar. It did have me wondering if the full sized are that thin as they might make a huge difference in grip. I may order a set for my FS just to see..

 

[Blakenzy]

If you like the CZ75B but ache at the trigger... get a CZ75B "Omega", which is exactly the same as the standard CZ 75B but with a simplified, improved DA/SA trigger system. There is considerable difference, specially in DA mode. You can tell if it is an omega by the Ω symbol on the slide, and the black trigger (common CZ75B's have a stainless trigger).

 

[golden]

Beretta for me

I owned both a BERETTA 92 and CZ 75. Both are good guns, but between them, I go with the BERETTA 92 hands down. The original CZ 75 design has a frame mounted safety that will not safely drop the hammer like the BERETTA 92FS will.
If I am going to carry a double action handgun, I was the hammer to be down, not cocked. You can lower the CZ's hammer manuelly, but the BERETTA's hammer dropping safety is better and safer to me.

Note: the first generation BERETTA 92 had the same type of frame mounted safety before changing to the 92S version which moved the safety to the slide.

Some of the CZ 75 clones have a slide mounted safety and if I really wanted another CZ, I would go with one of them.

Jim

 

[Furncliff]

I thought the Beretta felt like a brick when compared to the CZ75b. My CZ is ten years old and has been completely reliable. An added attraction is the Kadet 22 LR conversion... highly recommended.

Having said all that I would buy a 92 if I found the right one... just because I'd like to try it.

 

[Shipwreck]

I've owned almost everything at one time or another... Constant buying over the years... When I got the Beretta bug again, close to five years ago, it was just perfect for me. Love the 92.

Over the past few years, I slowly sold off my other stuff, and have almost only 92s. Love the platform.

 

[Pilot]

The original CZ 75 design has a frame mounted safety that will not safely drop the hammer like the BERETTA 92FS will.
If I am going to carry a double action handgun, I was the hammer to be down, not cocked. You can lower the CZ's hammer manuelly, but the BERETTA's hammer dropping safety is better and safer to me.

If you can't SAFELY lower the hammer of a semi-auto pistol on a live round, you have to question your ability to have one. I've done it with 1911's, Browning Hi Powers, CZ, Berettas, etc safely for 30 years.

I own, and carry CZ's and Berettas. I really like both the CZ-75's and Beretta 92FS. CZ makes pistols that have manual safeties, AND decockers. The CZ-75BD, 75D PCR, P-01 are examples of decocker CZ's. The newer P-07, and P-09 have Omega trigger that can be configured by the owner in either manual safety or decocker mode.

There is no reason to not own a CZ because of the safety.

 

[BSA1]

The Beretta 92/M9 has been in military service since 1985 and has been used in combat across the world in all types of weather conditions. Enough said.

The CZ design has stood the test of time. The late Jeff Cooper liked the design although he disliked the 9mm caliber.

With them being equal in quality and relibility the prepper in me says that every serious firearm owner should have a firearm that uses the same military magazines and caliber, either the 92/M9 or AR...ideally both!

 

[bannockburn]

I have small hands and short fingers so both the CZ -75 and the Beretta Model 92 are a bit of a reach for me in with the DA trigger. The only full size Berettas that I actually like the grip shape and trigger design on are the Vertac models.

 

[huntershooter]

I have always felt the Beretta 92 to be absurdly oversized for a 9mm pistol.
The CZ is marginally smaller.

 

[Thompsoncustom]

If you like the CZ75B but ache at the trigger... get a CZ75B "Omega", which is exactly the same as the standard CZ 75B but with a simplified, improved DA/SA trigger system. There is considerable difference, specially in DA mode. You can tell if it is an omega by the Ω symbol on the slide, and the black trigger

Have to comment on this. You are correct as the standard trigger and Omega are totally different internally and the Omega does have a better out of the box trigger but the Standard has the highest potential. With some tuning the Standard trigger will out perform the Omega in every way and there are a lot of different customization routes you can take with the standard trigger that aren't available with the Omega.

 

[Skillet]

I've always been a hardcore CZ fan, I love the design, the low bore axis, the way it fits into my hand, and the accuracy. when I bought my 75b, I looked at both pistols side by side, held them both, and I went with the CZ just because of the ergonomics. I don't mind the 92, I just personally think that the CZ is prettier. you cant go wrong with either, to be honest, I would look at them side by side and decide. But there are MANY CZ nuts on here that own multiple. if that says anything.

And, I mean, just look at it. It like watching a sunset over a lake in Alaska with the mountains in the background.

 

[4tsmith]

(Impo) It was hard to reconcile the reasons why my medium small hands could never get comfortable with the Beretta 92/M9,until I picked up a Taurus PT92 AFS.
Suddenly the grip was more comfortable,the trigger reach seemed shorter and the alloy frame seemed to balance better in my hand. In short order it became clear that the gun could be carried DA,hammer in the safe notch for a lighter,shorter DA trigger pull or cocked & locked with an impossible to accidentally activate de-cocker.(advantage Taurus?)

The only negative I can think of for the CZ75b,is the slippery front and back straps and perhaps the lack of a more 1911 style safety lever.( all fixable issues)

 

[sirgilligan]

I have shot both the CZ and the Beretta. The outing with the Beretta also included a SIG 226 and a Glock (don't know Glocks but it was a full size 9mm). For the day I shot the Beretta the best. All were equally accurate (group sizes about the same), but the sights on the Beretta had me on target better.

With that said, I prefer the CZ and the Browning Hi-Power over the Beretta. The CZ has me on target easily. The cost of a new CZ is very reasonable. The Hi-Power points and shots great (the CZ is like the Hi-Power in that respect), but the cost of the Hi-Power makes me treat it different.

I vote CZ with a slight edge over the Beretta, the Sig, and the Glock.