Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by Treo, Jan 31, 2008.
1) Trigger: The trigger is really nice when it is broken in, but in DA mode it is a longer pull than that of a Sig or H&K.
2) Finish: Black polycoat and gun blueing.......definately behind the times.
3) Extractor: Its a good extractor, but the design is not as robust as a lot of others out there. Locking the action open, inserting a cartridge manually with no magazine, and slaming the action shut on the cartridge may result in a broken extractor.
4) Decock: A Sig or H&K will perform a full decock, the CZ decocker only goes into half cock. So, you end up with 3 trigger conditions instead of only 2.
5) Slide grip: The frame wrap around slide design is great for accuracy, but bad for handholds. Sweaty, weak, or gloved hands will have trouble cycling the action.
So, there are negatives, but just like a Glock, Sig, or H&K I can come up with just as many negatives to the design if not more.
In the end, I think the CZ 75 design is one of the best around. My favorite.
No weapon is perfect, but the CZ-75 is a very nice firearm.
The stock sights aren't all that great, but that is easily corrected with Meprolights or Trijicon night sights. Also, there's a good number of companies that offer aftermarket sights including fiber optic.
Actually, I believe both H&K and Sig also decock to the half cock notch. I know that the USP I used to have did so, as did every other H&K I have had my hands on.
I was surprised at the level of quality of construction when I picked up my PO1 at Thanksgiving, that and the accuracy of the little guy. And it was like there was no warm up period required to exercise superior shooting skills with it. I picked up the thing, fired the thing, and everything went into the black at 15-yards, like it had been in my hands forever. Now I'm thinking it's time for a stainless 75, what the hell, there so superior for the money, I mean priced at Ruger level but certainly above that level of quality, really right up there with any of the big three or four in terms of quality and even above it in accuracy...If my PO1 is representative of all there pistols, then they really are the best machine for the money I've ever seen or handled. Mine was landed for just $489.00...
Actually I've never owned an H&K until I got a P30. The P30 goes into a full decock, so I guess the USP goes into half cock. The Sig P200 series of pistols goes into a full decock. I've owned 4 of them and use one on duty.
That's because they are that great...There's no question that CZ knows how to make a firearm, I'd like to hear anyone argue that.
I'd like to know what the one bad comment was.
With the front sight you use a punch to tap out the roll pin, then you use a plastic sight adjustment punch to tap the front sight out of the dove tail. With the rear sight you just tap it out of the dove tail as well. Some CZs like the P-01 have a securing screw which you just unscrew then tap the sight out of the dove tail.
When installing, most night sights don't have the little roll pin cutout for the front sight. So, you'll need a hobbiest rounded file to file a cutout for the roll pin to pass through(easy to do) using the stock front sight cutout as a measuring guide. For the rear sight, just tap in the new sight. If it is too tight, you may need to use a fine file to take off some of the metal on the sight so that you can tap it in. I also like to add a tiny bit of blue loctite to the front(before putting the roll pin back in) and rear sights(after you've sighted the pistol in at the range) to ensure that they don't move during the vibrations of firing. What ever you do, DON'T use red loctite......you'll never get the sights off again without destroying them as it forms too strong a hold.
I always install my own sights and have never had any problems. I only use Trijicons, they are by far the longest lasting and more durable. Here's my CZ P-01 in NP3 finish and installed Trijicons:
the original CZ 75
Q - What was the design change that is added with the B suffix?
I read of the CZ75 Compact .40 S&W - said it's 37.8 oz
empty - then the spec. on the full size 75B said 2.2 lbs
isn't that 35.2 oz. The Compac with the shorter barrel and
slide by .8 inch has to be lighter than a like steel frame 75B
Q? The compact .40 S&W has a 10 rd capacity what's a full size
CZ 75B magazine hold other than California versions of course.
Q? Any issues with the .40 S&W cartridge in the CZ 75B
Q? I haven't heard mention of a magazine disconnect Is there one
or not? I like the better trigger design than the BHP
Obviously, I'm in the market for a .40 S&W CZ75B & since I have a full size
1911 I'm leaning toward the CZ75 Compact .40 S&W It is
DA/SA w/o the decocker?
will be my next pistol.
Should l order one in black poly, blued, or stainless?
I'll help you with what questions I know the answers to:
The "B" stands for firing pin block safety. It was added to the CZ 75 as an added safety feature to prevent discharge when the pistol was dropped on the ground.
The compact steel framed models are lighter than the full sized steel framed models.
No issues with the .40 in the CZ, but the 9mm is considered to be more reliable due to cartridge feeding characteristics.
No magazine disconnect on the CZs.
Your choice. The Blued version will be more pretty than the polycoat, but less durable and more rust prone. The polycoat will be more durable than the blued along with being more rust resistant, but not as rust resistant as the stainless. The stainless in my opinion is the most beautiful, rust resistant, and there is no finish to be scratched off.
When I buy another 75b, it will be a stainless model.
Other than just saying that both are high quality guns, I think that description is based on three things:
1) Slide rails inside frame rather than outside, like the Sig 210 (or is this all / many / most Sigs as well?) and certain others. I'm not qualified to say if that's an important feature, but a) it's found only in otherwise excellent guns, so far as I know, so it can't be all bad and b) So long as they're not at the expense of any other important attributes, it's nice to see guns have unusual features / design choices.
2) Grip (angle, contour, checkering) which in its stock configuration seems to lock in many people's hands in a way that many other gun's stock grips do not. And the better the grip, the more recoil seems to magically go away. Even though they don't look all that similar, the sum of the various design decisions in making the grips on Sigs and Czs result in a feel that is (for me) oddly similar. Some people compare it to grasping a well-rounded bar of soap; I'm not sure I want any of those people next to me at the range
3) (related to (2)) -- pointability. Everyone has different body geometry, but for me Sigs and Czs are both very high on this measure -- pointing where I want to shoot and pulling the trigger does a better job than it does with most of my other guns. This is not to knock the others, though -- I may be a touch more accurate with my S&W 625, when aiming carefully, but I think less so (even having fired not many rounds through the 75 yet) than with the 75 when firing more intuitively.
Now, you can pay less for a lower-end Sig and still get good quality, and you can pay quite a bit for a dolled-up Cz, but I still like the comparison, and think it's largely accurate. And I generally like "poor man's [thing]" description -- I take that as high praise in most cases. Like monkfish ("poor man's lobster"), though it seems that until not that very long ago, lobster was poor man's lobster
Warning: TERRIBLE, DESPICABLE, AWFUL computer-related analogy follows, and I apologize for demonstrating how bad analogies can be. That said ... 1911 = Windows. Glock = Mac OS (Classic). Springfield XD = MAC OS X. Cz = Linux (Partly because there are so many clones and near copies, it's about as open source as guns get.) Ahem
Or is SIG
A rich man's CZ???
CZ is what people buy when that is what they want, and they want to pay less for a differant fit, feel and name.
CZ and SiG are not related, except for being on the same continent. SiG was a co-operative effort of a German company, and a Swiss company, and CZ started off in 1936 as a state arms factory to resist the Nazis. While SiG was in the Free world, CZ was behind the Iron Curtain. They really share very little design features BY design, more by coincidence.
Be as it may, I like CZ, it works very well for me, and I trust my life, and my families lives, to one every day.
Anyways I also read negative things about the CZ in .40....but it seems like everyone that has one loves it. I know I already love mine and don't regret the purchase one bit. I would have prefered stainless, but I can't get that here in California.
Separate names with a comma.