Sig 229 or CZ P-01
- Thread starter nolyaw
- Start date
- Status
graywolfkayak
Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2006
- Messages
- 20
Thanks for the info Armoredman, but I think that this person really didn't know the answer; it was the first time I've seen her at this shop. I'm going to see if I can find a local range that has this gun available to rent.
Autolycus
Member
I would suggest an HK P2000 or a Walther P99. The interchangeable backstraps might be a bonus so you can all shoot the gun. The same with a Sig Pro.
Todesengel
Member
nah, i don't have a beef with CZ. It just is what it is...a cheap decent gun. you can't compare it to a sig. that would be like comparing a Ford to a BMW.redhat said:It appears Todesengel has a beef with CZ...or maybe he's never fired or owned one!
daysleeprx
Member
Get the CZ, and then use the $200 you save towards a kadet kit. Twice the fun and almost the exact same price!
Don't think that Ford is an accurate comparison. A Honda Civic may be better. Inexpensive (relatively) but has a bulletproof clutch and can and often are made into racers. Or maybe the Subaru WRX, cheaper but higher performance than many marquee brands.
schmeky
Member
I have a P-226 and a CZ-75. They are both excellent pistols, but the CZ is a much better value. My $399.00 CZ shoots as well as my $500.00 Sig, in addition, the CZ has less felt recoil and has been as reliable (100%) as the Sig.
My wife has a P-01 and absolutely loves it. Never had a single problem with any kind of ammo. We also bought the Kadet conversion for it...works great, but she prefers shooting 9mm Her first pistol, now in her nightstand, was/is a S&W M&P in .40
Her first pistol, now in her nightstand, was/is a S&W M&P in .40
armoredman
Member
All the SiGs on the rental range broke,including a P220 and P230, but the CZs did not. Having said that, I would love a P220 someday, very comfortable 45.
Everyone has thier individual tastes, and some people have been unlucky enough to get the proverbial lemon, (which every company makes!), and that sours them forever.
That's the beauty of the huge number of firearms on the market today, as somewhere there will be the one that works perfectly for you.
Everyone has thier individual tastes, and some people have been unlucky enough to get the proverbial lemon, (which every company makes!), and that sours them forever.
That's the beauty of the huge number of firearms on the market today, as somewhere there will be the one that works perfectly for you.
Last edited:
roc1
Member
I have the P01 and love it.This pistol fits my hand better than any I have owned.I also have three 75B"s and a Sig.The Sig is a great pistol in fact Sig and CZ are my favorite autos.I would save the money and get the CZ it is the best value in handguns today.
Good Luck
roc1
Good Luck
roc1
robctwo
Member
I also own a P-01. I have the Kadet Kit, which I bought for the 75BD but it fits on the P-01 perfectly. I also own a 9mm 226 Stainless Stock and a 220ST in .45. I love those Sigs, but the CZ goes everywhere with me.
HorseSoldier
Member
I'd say between a 229 and an P-01, go with the P-01. If you can find a CPO or other good quality used P-228, that's more of a toss up. Just my opinion, but I've never warmed to the P-229, which feels clunkier and more top heavy than the P-228 in my hand.
I own both CZs (CZ-97B, SP-01, P-01) and Sigs (P-220, P-232, sold my P-226) and as far as I can tell the main difference between CZ and Sig is that when you buy a Sig, you're paying for some German guy's state subsidized healthcare and three weeks paid vacation. No quality difference, in my opinion, the price differential is purely because skilled labor and machinists are a lot cheaper in the Czech Republic than they are in Germany (or, now that Sig has a factory here, in the US as well). Build Sigs in eastern Europe or build CZs in western Europe and the retail costs would swap out.
I own both CZs (CZ-97B, SP-01, P-01) and Sigs (P-220, P-232, sold my P-226) and as far as I can tell the main difference between CZ and Sig is that when you buy a Sig, you're paying for some German guy's state subsidized healthcare and three weeks paid vacation. No quality difference, in my opinion, the price differential is purely because skilled labor and machinists are a lot cheaper in the Czech Republic than they are in Germany (or, now that Sig has a factory here, in the US as well). Build Sigs in eastern Europe or build CZs in western Europe and the retail costs would swap out.
Baphomet
Member
I would simply like to point out that with a Sig P229, if you start with one chambered in either .40 or .357 Sig you can change barrels (nothing more) and shoot all three calibers out of the same pistol: 9mm, .40 and .357 Sig. You won't even need 9mm magazines, the .357/40 mags will feed 9mm ammo just fine. No need to change slides, springs or anything else. Just drop in the barrel and go. You can NOT convert a 229 that was originally chambered for 9mm though. 9mm Sigs are 9mm only, always and forever.
I don't know if something like that matters to you, or not, but I thought I'd point it out.
I don't know if something like that matters to you, or not, but I thought I'd point it out.
I will try to get a picture of the inside of my Sig compared to the inside of my CZ's and you will change your mind once you see the the factory tool marks and roughness on my 2 CZ compared to the smooth flawless metal on my Sig. Cz is a good reliable gun but I mean quality wise they can't hold a candle to Sig, the cheap painted on finish on my po-1 leaves a lot to be desired of and started chipping around the mag release within the first few weeks. The two guns mentioned are not even in the same league but on the other hand CZ's can be had much less and do go bang when the trigger is pulled. It all falls down to how much money you want to put into the tool, also if you think that someday you might want to trade or sell the gun for something else don't get the CZ because they have no resale and you will take a good loss. BTW I love my Sig and my 2 CZ's and just wanted to give my FIRST HAND 2cents, and either way you can't go wrong
also to consider if it matters to you, the Cz's are pretty uncomplicated when it comes to controls. It lives up to the KISS priciple imo.
Slide stop and safety are the only two controls by the Cz slide. The Sig I shot had 3 (+ take down lever/pin?) and the slide stop just in front of the safety. As Ayoob said some monkey thumbed shooters may have a problem hitting the slide stop riding the safety.
Having shot both types, my hands fit the Cz better, which if money is not an object is more important, right?
Slide stop and safety are the only two controls by the Cz slide. The Sig I shot had 3 (+ take down lever/pin?) and the slide stop just in front of the safety. As Ayoob said some monkey thumbed shooters may have a problem hitting the slide stop riding the safety.
Having shot both types, my hands fit the Cz better, which if money is not an object is more important, right?
Walt Sherrill
Member
The two guns mentioned are not even in the same league but on the other hand CZ's can be had much less and do go bang when the trigger is pulled. It all falls down to how much money you want to put into the tool. BTW I love my Sig and my 2 CZ's and just wanted to give my FIRST HAND 2cents, and either way you can't go wrong.
I think they're in the same league - in terms of performance, but not price.
You sound like the guys at GUNTESTS mag -- if there is roughness inside the gun that doesn't affect function, they think its a problem. I think that much of the extra work done by SIG to polish up everything inside is work spent on stuff that doesn't really matter. If that extra work doesn't make the gun more reliable or accurate, who cares?
All this said -- I don't personally care for the P-01, and prefer other CZs more. (I don't like decockers, for example.) I also don't like the higher SIG bore axis. And the transition from DA to SA is more awkward for me and others using the SIG.
I think its really a matter of BUDGET and EGO. Buy the gun that best fits your needs. Sometimes the extra money buys functionality, sometimes it doesn't, but it always buys bragging rights.
I think they're in the same league - in terms of performance, but not price.
You sound like the guys at GUNTESTS mag -- if there is roughness inside the gun that doesn't affect function, they think its a problem. I think that much of the extra work done by SIG to polish up everything inside is work spent on stuff that doesn't really matter. If that extra work doesn't make the gun more reliable or accurate, who cares?
All this said -- I don't personally care for the P-01, and prefer other CZs more. (I don't like decockers, for example.) I also don't like the higher SIG bore axis. And the transition from DA to SA is more awkward for me and others using the SIG.
I think its really a matter of BUDGET and EGO. Buy the gun that best fits your needs. Sometimes the extra money buys functionality, sometimes it doesn't, but it always buys bragging rights.
atblis
Member
Yeah
I've owned BMWs. German engineering isn't everything some make it out to be. I am now a very pleased Honda owner.
People are just going to cheer for their favorite pistol. My favorite is CZ, but I'll admit that SIG is an excellent choice as well.
You'd be satisfied with either pistol.
If you like the SIG more get that
If you like the CZ more get that
If price matters to you get the CZ
Accuracy is a wash
Reliability is a wash.
Durability, edge goes to CZ.
BTW. The finish on CZ isn't technically paint. It is a rather durable polycoat. SIG's finishes aren't particularly famous for being durable.
I personally like starting people out with a 22 so as to avoid flinches but...
I've owned BMWs. German engineering isn't everything some make it out to be. I am now a very pleased Honda owner.
People are just going to cheer for their favorite pistol. My favorite is CZ, but I'll admit that SIG is an excellent choice as well.
You'd be satisfied with either pistol.
If you like the SIG more get that
If you like the CZ more get that
If price matters to you get the CZ
Accuracy is a wash
Reliability is a wash.
Durability, edge goes to CZ.
BTW. The finish on CZ isn't technically paint. It is a rather durable polycoat. SIG's finishes aren't particularly famous for being durable.
I personally like starting people out with a 22 so as to avoid flinches but...
That should be perceived "quality". I guess you need to justify paying more for something somehow.
daysleeprx
Member
So the roughness inside affects the quality of the gun how? If the gun is accurate and reliable, I fail to see how this would be an issue. Are you looking at the insides of your gun when you shoot it?
You're a weird one, mastinson. You loved your P-01, then you decided it had to go for a Glock because you'd heard they last forever even though you never had a problem with the CZ, and the coating on the CZ wasn't to your liking and yada yada yada.
Just sayin' your views are a little... mercurial.
Just sayin' your views are a little... mercurial.
I will give an amen to that.
The decocked DA to SA transition with the SP-01 isn't a problem - I'm just about as accurate either way, with minimal practice on the transition.
The same move with my P226 is huge, and I never feel like I know when the hammer's going to drop in DA. Maybe it's because the SA pull is somewhat lighter and easier than the CZ.
If I had to choose one for a carry gun, where DA was important, I'd go with the CZ.
- Status
