Oldnoob
Member
Yes.
Own both.
BHP C series
CZ75B SA
Own both.
BHP C series
CZ75B SA
Is a Browning HiPower Worth $300 More Than a CZ?
- Thread starter Tecolote
- Start date
- Status
Fishslayer
Member
Oh man. Don't really know (or care) about value or worth of one against the other but THAT is one beautiful piece of iron. :drool:
Nope, I don't think so.
I like the CZ better than the HP.
I'd consider the CZ75 SA if if was just blued or stainless rather than that polycoat stuff.
Functional accuracy for most shooters? I'd say about the same. DA/SA vs SA.. I'll take SA every time.
CZ makes a great gun. Is the BHP worth 300 more? If your pockets are deep enough.. maybe.
Functional accuracy for most shooters? I'd say about the same. DA/SA vs SA.. I'll take SA every time.
CZ makes a great gun. Is the BHP worth 300 more? If your pockets are deep enough.. maybe.
When I was looking into getting a Hi Power I took a good hard look at the CZ's. They are nice guns in their own right, but I ended up with the BHP in the end and I'm happy I did. I bought a new Mark III with the epoxy finish and replaced the stock plastic grips with Hogue rosewood pieces. The gun is smooth as glass and is a great shooter.
Ash
Member
No. There's nothing about the reliability, accuracy, accessories, build quality, or design that makes the Hi Power worth $300 more.
I've owned them both. I still own CZ's.
As far as investment, neither is a good investment. No handgun or firearm is a good investment. Only a few arms, such as Finnish Mosins which have tripled in value over the last ten years, or the super rare varieties that can be encountered among other arms represent good investments. As investments, firearms are lousy.
But, they are adequate hedges against inflation and as a general rule keep their value if purchased used.
I've owned them both. I still own CZ's.
As far as investment, neither is a good investment. No handgun or firearm is a good investment. Only a few arms, such as Finnish Mosins which have tripled in value over the last ten years, or the super rare varieties that can be encountered among other arms represent good investments. As investments, firearms are lousy.
But, they are adequate hedges against inflation and as a general rule keep their value if purchased used.
No.
strykerfire
Member
there is a lot of reason why it cost more. It's historic value alone demands that premium. Firearms Not good investments??? You should by quality guns. Thats the worst statement i've ever read. Tell that to my High-Power Inglis. And all my other "investments" i have. I can hear them all laughing at your statement in my gun case... Make the voices stop!
Yes, the CZ75 is underpriced for what you get and the BHP is overpriced compared to many firearms if you look at it that way.
If you look at it from the standpoint of it as something that through normal use will last you a lifetime, then BHP's, Sigs, HK's, etc are not overpriced.
Browning/FN could be charging less for the Hi Power, sell a lot more of them and make as much or money but they treat it as boutique gun, charge $900, which discourages many new buyers from trying out the gun.
I have not bought an new BHP since I paid $377 in 1990 but will eventually pay the Browning ransom and buy a new one so I have the latest example of it.
I just bought a new CZ75B for $442.99 and am amazed by it, accuracy, ergos, the way the DA/SA is set up. It is the best DA/SA I have ever owned which includes Sig, HK, Beretta. It completes my trifecta of Nines I will always have and never sell. The other one being my Gen 2 Glock 19 bought in 1995.
Find a way to own both the CZ and HP.
If you look at it from the standpoint of it as something that through normal use will last you a lifetime, then BHP's, Sigs, HK's, etc are not overpriced.
Browning/FN could be charging less for the Hi Power, sell a lot more of them and make as much or money but they treat it as boutique gun, charge $900, which discourages many new buyers from trying out the gun.
I have not bought an new BHP since I paid $377 in 1990 but will eventually pay the Browning ransom and buy a new one so I have the latest example of it.
I just bought a new CZ75B for $442.99 and am amazed by it, accuracy, ergos, the way the DA/SA is set up. It is the best DA/SA I have ever owned which includes Sig, HK, Beretta. It completes my trifecta of Nines I will always have and never sell. The other one being my Gen 2 Glock 19 bought in 1995.
Find a way to own both the CZ and HP.
12131
Member
Not to me.
Ash
Member
strykefire, I have been buying and watching guns for decades. Guns are not good investments as a general rule. Quality guns, in fact, often make the WORST investments. Let's say I bought a quality Finnish Lahti back in 2000 for, say, $1,000. That's a quality, valuable piece. Today, it's worth somewhere around $1,500 to $1,700. That's between 3 and 4% return. How about a nice Springfield M1A. I bought on in 2003 for $1,300. The same one sells, used, for around $1,600 today. That's 2% return. Take an M1 Carbine that in 1998 was worth $400 before the Saving Private Ryan and Call of Duty price increase of $900 today. Big jump, right? Nope, that's just 5%. Check out that Hi Power that cost $450 back in my 1995 Guns Annual that costs $800 today. That was an outstanding 3.25% Take out inflation and you grew a whopping .5%. That cheap Finnish 1927 Mosin-Nagant stepped barrel that I paid $50 for brought me $450 ten years later. Now that was 24% return. But, the cheap Norinco SKS I got in 1998 for $99 that I sold for $250 last year earned me 6%. Firearms are not good investments. They are good hedges against inflation.
As far as history with a High Power? What history, pray tell, is there in an FN Hi Power made, say, in 2010? 1995? 1980?
NIB, there is nothing about an FN Hi Power that makes it worth (or even cost in manufacturing) $300 more. OR can you tell me how one cast-frame, fixed barrel-bushing, single-action medium-capacity pistol can be worth $300 more than another cast-frame, fixed-barrel-bushing double action high-capacity pistol? FN had more history than CZ? Really? Read your history and come back. Belgians better than the Czechs? Really? When FN started operation, Belgium was lumped with Spain when it came to cheap arms. Shotguns, revolvers, and autos from either nation were poorly-regarded in the world. Belgian copy and Spanish copy were dirty words. Like FN and Astra, both countries could make quality products, but history if anything shows the opposite from both nations.
As far as history with a High Power? What history, pray tell, is there in an FN Hi Power made, say, in 2010? 1995? 1980?
NIB, there is nothing about an FN Hi Power that makes it worth (or even cost in manufacturing) $300 more. OR can you tell me how one cast-frame, fixed barrel-bushing, single-action medium-capacity pistol can be worth $300 more than another cast-frame, fixed-barrel-bushing double action high-capacity pistol? FN had more history than CZ? Really? Read your history and come back. Belgians better than the Czechs? Really? When FN started operation, Belgium was lumped with Spain when it came to cheap arms. Shotguns, revolvers, and autos from either nation were poorly-regarded in the world. Belgian copy and Spanish copy were dirty words. Like FN and Astra, both countries could make quality products, but history if anything shows the opposite from both nations.
Last edited:
Vonderek
Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 1,536
Hey Ash, those returns are actually pretty good for these times! And at least they're consistent. Ask a guy who bought a house in Miami or Las Vegas in 2006 if he wishes he had bought a crate full of Lahtis instead. Or someone who put his 401K into NASDAQ stocks in 1999. I guess the point is, a quality firearm will at least hold its value and perhaps rise over time. Which is more than can be expected from an investment in say, automobiles. But I do understand and agree with the point you are making.
Bottom line, guns should not be looked at as 'investments' in the traditional sense as assets one buys and expects to grow (unless one buys and sells transferable machine guns.) Getting back to the topic..will a BHP throw a 115 or 124gr piece of lead $300 better than a CZ? No. But for someone who wants one and is willing to pay the premium, why not? And in 20 years if he wants to sell it, it will probably still be worth at least $300 more than the CZ.
Disclaimer: I own both and am not willing to part with either. They are both wonderful handguns and a pleasure to shoot.
Bottom line, guns should not be looked at as 'investments' in the traditional sense as assets one buys and expects to grow (unless one buys and sells transferable machine guns.) Getting back to the topic..will a BHP throw a 115 or 124gr piece of lead $300 better than a CZ? No. But for someone who wants one and is willing to pay the premium, why not? And in 20 years if he wants to sell it, it will probably still be worth at least $300 more than the CZ.
Disclaimer: I own both and am not willing to part with either. They are both wonderful handguns and a pleasure to shoot.
For some reason Browning Hi-Powers and Cz-75s have been lumped together as similar guns. Other than that they both are generally 9mm and the bullet comes out the front they are quite unalike. If you like either of them and like the price, buy them. Both are fine firearms.
I agree that there are some that think they are more close related than the really are. That being said in a world of polymer framed pistols, the CZ75 and BHP are both all steel pistols of similiar dimensions, capacity, chamberings, etc. I think that's one reason they are frequently compared.
Whether the BHP is $300 better is only up to the person paying the money.
Some of the BHP mystique is not in it's ability to through a 9mm round downrange but in the history, pedigree, etc. Only some will appreciate that and be willing to pay for it.
Some may actually find the BHP a better shooter than the 75 and some will find the opposite.
I personally think the esthetics of the BHP and history surrounding it (I'm from Browning's hometown for Pete's sake) trumps the CZ 75 so I chose the BHP and enjoy the two I own.
Wags
Member
Dieudonne Saive was from Belgium, not France. But it was France who contracted FN to build a pistol that became the Hi-Power which France never adopted. Easy to get confused.
I'd own a Hi-Power over the CZ 75 myself.
StrikeFire83
Member
Nope. At least not to me.
dogtown tom
Member
CZ had forty years to come up with something that was a substantial improvement over the Hi Power........didn't happen.
Bigger and heavier do not a beauty make.
Bigger and heavier do not a beauty make.
Ash
Member
How many people copied the Hi Power? How many the CZ? Seems like firearms engineers across three continents prefer the CZ.
In any case, I consider them equal, with each having an advantage depending on use. As such, the Hi Power is not worth $300 more.
And, firearms are not a good investment. They are a hedge against inflation - which means they will not lose their real value over time as a general rule.
In any case, I consider them equal, with each having an advantage depending on use. As such, the Hi Power is not worth $300 more.
And, firearms are not a good investment. They are a hedge against inflation - which means they will not lose their real value over time as a general rule.
MrDig
Member
The Hi-Power and the 1911A1 are the two designs that are the most copied.
The Hi-Power was the original "Wonder" 9, How can I possibly say that? it has been produced longer than any other "Wonder" 9 in existence.
Sorry to burst that bubble but the CZ 75 began production in 1975. The Hi-Power began production in 1935.
So with 40 years of production experience who copied who?
The Hi-Power was the original "Wonder" 9, How can I possibly say that? it has been produced longer than any other "Wonder" 9 in existence.
Sorry to burst that bubble but the CZ 75 began production in 1975. The Hi-Power began production in 1935.
So with 40 years of production experience who copied who?
If you're going to compare a BHP and a CZ, why not compare apples-to-apples. Look at one of the SAO CZ's. Those are often set up for competition, as well as general use, and the cost is pretty comparable.
I do think it's notable that CZ's (in either SAO or DA/SA configuration) can be competitive in the action pistol games. BHPs are generally not.
BTW, I think they're both terrific guns. The ergonomics and control layouts are similar, they are both somewhat slim (the HP more so, but at the expense of some capacity), they both have those lightening profiles to the slide near the muzzle... and both of them generally come with a less-than-stellar trigger that can be made very good with some work. I've shot a couple of tuned-up CZ's that had absolutely awesome triggers.
I do think it's notable that CZ's (in either SAO or DA/SA configuration) can be competitive in the action pistol games. BHPs are generally not.
BTW, I think they're both terrific guns. The ergonomics and control layouts are similar, they are both somewhat slim (the HP more so, but at the expense of some capacity), they both have those lightening profiles to the slide near the muzzle... and both of them generally come with a less-than-stellar trigger that can be made very good with some work. I've shot a couple of tuned-up CZ's that had absolutely awesome triggers.
SharpsDressedMan
member
I have both, love both, but carry the Hi Powers more. Size and weight are the main factors. They both shoot great. All 9mm.
Ash
Member
The CZ-75 is no copy of the Hi Power, except perhaps for the barrel. The trigger is largely their own design, but give credit to Walther for the double action auto pistol not Browning. The slide is more related to the SIG 210, and the safety is entirely CZ's.
But, shall we list those who made Hi Power copies versus those who made CZ copies (or had them made)?
Hi Power
John Inglis
FEG
Kareen
Arcus
FM
Norinco
CZ-75
Tanfoglio
ITM
Sphinx
ASAI
Israeli Military Industries
BUL Transmark
Springfield Armory
Armalite
Sarsilmaz
Canik
Stearling
Rock River
CZ-Strakonice
Gamba
Bernardelli
Norinco
What is that I hear, a bubble bursting?
Still, I consider them equal designs and still consider $300 too much an increase for an FN product.
But, shall we list those who made Hi Power copies versus those who made CZ copies (or had them made)?
Hi Power
John Inglis
FEG
Kareen
Arcus
FM
Norinco
CZ-75
Tanfoglio
ITM
Sphinx
ASAI
Israeli Military Industries
BUL Transmark
Springfield Armory
Armalite
Sarsilmaz
Canik
Stearling
Rock River
CZ-Strakonice
Gamba
Bernardelli
Norinco
What is that I hear, a bubble bursting?
Still, I consider them equal designs and still consider $300 too much an increase for an FN product.
SharpsDressedMan
member
Now do the numbers. The HP started 77 years ago, and has been produced every year since them, sometimes on several continents.
- Status
