SIG 229 or CZ-75B
- Thread starter jod78
- Start date
- Status
HorseSoldier
Member
Both are good, neither would be my first choice (for Sigs I'd prefer a real P228 -- 229 just doesn't feel as well balanced in my hand; for CZs I'd rather have a P-01 or SP-01).
That said, I would probably go with the CZ. Both are reliable and solid designs, but the CZs fit my hand about perfectly.
That said, I would probably go with the CZ. Both are reliable and solid designs, but the CZs fit my hand about perfectly.
I had a Sig P228. I still have a CZ 75BD and a CZ SP-01.
For me, the ergonomics on the Sig were bad. I found it almost impossible to keep my thumb off the slide stop because of where it was placed. Also, the P288/229 is a compact gun, so my hand didn't fit the grip well.
The CZ, on the other hand, fits like a glove. Between the two, I like the grip on the SP-01 better - although the 75 is fine. The CZ triggers tend to need a little work, but I like the DA/SA and I have no complaints with either of them. I use the SP-01 as my firearm for USPSA and it always perform much better than I do.
For the money, I don't think you could go wrong with the CZ -- but you really need to try them both and see which one works best for you.
Jim
For me, the ergonomics on the Sig were bad. I found it almost impossible to keep my thumb off the slide stop because of where it was placed. Also, the P288/229 is a compact gun, so my hand didn't fit the grip well.
The CZ, on the other hand, fits like a glove. Between the two, I like the grip on the SP-01 better - although the 75 is fine. The CZ triggers tend to need a little work, but I like the DA/SA and I have no complaints with either of them. I use the SP-01 as my firearm for USPSA and it always perform much better than I do.
For the money, I don't think you could go wrong with the CZ -- but you really need to try them both and see which one works best for you.
Jim
armoredman
Member
CZ. The only SiG that worked well for me, (shot most of them), was the P220. Someday I'll get one for the collection.
But for SD, CZ all the way.
But for SD, CZ all the way.
MikeRussell
Member
There is someone that posts on one of the forums I browse that has a signature line that pretty much gets to the point...
CZ, the working man's Sig (or something to that effect)
CZ, the working man's Sig (or something to that effect)
hrgrisso
Member
Well...
A lot of this is always going to come down to personal preference. Just search all the other posts about CZ's versus Sigs and vice versa.
But this
Sig, the mans gun.
How's that? lol!
Get the gun that fits you best that you can afford.
A lot of this is always going to come down to personal preference. Just search all the other posts about CZ's versus Sigs and vice versa.
But this
wouldn't be around if there wasn't something to it. So I'll fix it.
Sig, the mans gun.
How's that? lol!
Get the gun that fits you best that you can afford.
DirksterG30
Member
That would be me.
jod78, I'm curious why you are comparing a full-sized pistol with a compact. The compact CZ pistols would be any of the following: PCR, P-01, 75 Compact, P-06. Any of those would be comparable to a P229 in size. Also, the 75B has a manual safety, and the P229 has a decocker (unless you go with the DAO DAK trigger).
Of the 2 you listed though, I find the CZs have better ergonomics for me than SIGs do. I prefer the location of the CZ decocker, and I find the grip on CZ's fits me better than any other pistol I've tried. My CZ P-01 and my wife's PCR have both been extremely reliable,and the polycoat finish holds up very well.
Some people complain about the tool marks on the inards of the gun, but they don't affect function at all (truth be told, a Sig P226 Navy I used to own had similar tool marks on the underside of the slide.)
The only downside of the CZ for me, is that my P-01 makes me think I'm a better shooter than I really am. It is deadly accurate.
I don't deny that SiGs are good guns; I just can't see spending $300 more for a SIG over a CZ. The CZ will do anything the SIG will, and for a lot less $.
I have a like new 229 DAK that I got for a good price. Nice gun, not sure I'm crazy about the DAO. It's fairly light, but I know I could be a better shot with DA/SA.
Plus I see Bud's has the 75B for $377. tack on $25 to ship and $20 to FFl = 422. Not too shabby
75B is DA first shot and SA on remaining, correct?
Plus I see Bud's has the 75B for $377. tack on $25 to ship and $20 to FFl = 422. Not too shabby
75B is DA first shot and SA on remaining, correct?
DirksterG30
Member
The 75B has a manual safety, that allows for either a SA first shot with the safety engaged, or DA first shot with the safety off (the safety will only activate when the hammer is back, like a 1911.) The 75BD has a decocker, so it can only do DA first shot.
Incidentally, if you really like your 229 except for the DAK trigger, SIGArms would probably be able to convert it to DA/SA for you for $199.95: http://www.sigarms.com/Products/documents/2007CustomShopServicesPriceList.pdf
1BLINDREF
Member
Thats a strange comparison - apples and oranges. The CZ75 is a full size gun and DA/SA.
The P229 DAK is a compact with double action only.
I like and have them both. Both guns are quality weapons. I CCW the P229 DAK .40S&W.
My advice would be to shoot both and then decide for yourself.
Good luck
You can get the P229 in DA/SA also - do your homework!
P. Plainsman
Member
I had a SIG and sold it. (Bought a sweet S&W 629 with the proceeds.)
I have two CZ pistols and wouldn't dream of selling them; they're my most often used guns.
SIGs are very well fit and finished, but the design has some problems. In particular, I didn't get along with the SIG's high bore axis. Flippy, slow to recover. The CZ 75 platform has an excellent, low bore axis, like many of the other guns favored by practical shooters -- 1911 and Glock among others.
Also, despite all the vaunting about SIGs' accuracy, in fact, I got mediocre results. My CZs are much more accurate in my hands.
SIGs tend to come with superior first-shot DA triggers to the decocker CZs like my P-01. That's the only advantage I'd give the SIG, and it's a qualified advantage: my non-decocker CZ (a standard 75B, selective DA/SA with manual safety) actually has a nice smooth DA trigger, comparable to a SIG's.
I might try SIG again somewhere down the road (maybe for a .40, since CZ's .40s don't have as good a rep as their 9mms). They're quality guns. But for a 9mm I think CZ's the easy choice. It's just a better gun design.
I have two CZ pistols and wouldn't dream of selling them; they're my most often used guns.
SIGs are very well fit and finished, but the design has some problems. In particular, I didn't get along with the SIG's high bore axis. Flippy, slow to recover. The CZ 75 platform has an excellent, low bore axis, like many of the other guns favored by practical shooters -- 1911 and Glock among others.
Also, despite all the vaunting about SIGs' accuracy, in fact, I got mediocre results. My CZs are much more accurate in my hands.
SIGs tend to come with superior first-shot DA triggers to the decocker CZs like my P-01. That's the only advantage I'd give the SIG, and it's a qualified advantage: my non-decocker CZ (a standard 75B, selective DA/SA with manual safety) actually has a nice smooth DA trigger, comparable to a SIG's.
I might try SIG again somewhere down the road (maybe for a .40, since CZ's .40s don't have as good a rep as their 9mms). They're quality guns. But for a 9mm I think CZ's the easy choice. It's just a better gun design.
DirksterG30
Member
The CZ is not as easy to field-strip as a SIG, but it's not that much harder either. On the CZ you retract the slide until the marks on slide & frame line up. Then, push the slidestop out from the right side of the gun with something non-marring like a plastic pen cap. The slide comes off, take out the recoil spring & guide rod, remove the barrel, and go to work.
The underside of the CZ slide is a little more complex than the SIG (CZ has locking lugs for the barrel), so cleaning there is a little more complex. Also, on my decocker CZs, the mechanism is a little more complex and takes a little more time to clean than the SIG decocker, but I've never had any issues with it. I just hose it off with CLP, follow with degreaser & relube.
rbernie
Contributing Member
The Sig P226 would be a better comparison to the CZ.
I have bunches of both. I love both, equally but differently. I prefer the lines and handling of the CZs and yet feel that the Sig is ultimately a better design.
I have bunches of both. I love both, equally but differently. I prefer the lines and handling of the CZs and yet feel that the Sig is ultimately a better design.
schmeky
Member
Agreed on the 226/CZ-75 comparison, I also own both of these. They are both outstanding examples of the modern autoloader.
The question is whether the Sig is worth the premium price over the CZ.
I say no.
The question is whether the Sig is worth the premium price over the CZ.
I say no.
Last edited:
1BLINDREF
Member
Design problems?? Because you don't shoot them well doesn't mean that they have a design problem. They just don't fit you well.
I don't shoot Glocks well, but I wouldn't say that they have design problems.
I'll agree with you that CZs are accurate and well designed guns, but I wouldn't say they are better than Sigs, they just fit you better.
I think you'd get a pretty strong argument against that statement if you compared a CZ75 with a Sig P226 from the Sig faithfull.
Again, IMHO it all comes down to what each individual person shoots better.
As for me, I shoot them both equally well and would never sell my preban CZ75 or any of my Sigs.
Ash
Member
I have a CZ-75 and a SIG 220. The 220 and its successor, the 226, is not a "better design" but rather a different design. As a matter of fact, the original 220/226 was a design that focused to cheaper manufacturing. Stamped and pinned construction and all. The 75 has always been fully-machined with design elements that SIG deemed too expensive to manufacture and abandoned (the lock-up and interior slide rails of the SIG 210).
In any case, both are fine pistols and certainly equals. That the CZ is much less expensive makes it the better deal.
Ash
In any case, both are fine pistols and certainly equals. That the CZ is much less expensive makes it the better deal.
Ash
CraigJS
Member
CZ's are very easy to strip..
bl4ckd0g
Member
I sold my p226 in .357SIG after I purchased a 9mm CZ-75B. I absolutely hated the SIG trigger since it lacked any feel during its break. The SIG felt "flippy", but it was laser accurate and I had fun shooting man-sized targets (rocks) at 50 yards.
I installed ergo grips and fiber optic sights, then had the trigger stoned on my CZ-75B. It's disgustingly accurate as well, but I only use it as a range gun and leave my "home defense" to something else.
I installed ergo grips and fiber optic sights, then had the trigger stoned on my CZ-75B. It's disgustingly accurate as well, but I only use it as a range gun and leave my "home defense" to something else.
Gary G23
Member
I own both.
I like both.
The CZ is more ergonomic.
Sig is more reliable out of the box.
All of my CZs have required tweaking to be 100% (I'm not saying that is an issue for me, but it might be for some people).
I like both.
The CZ is more ergonomic.
Sig is more reliable out of the box.
All of my CZs have required tweaking to be 100% (I'm not saying that is an issue for me, but it might be for some people).
Ala Dan
Member in memoriam
Time For Me Too Weigh In
The SIG
The SIG
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked