Why Do You Carry A CZ?

[CZF]

Why Do You Cary A CZ?

My reason: RELIABILITY! CZs have proven to be the most reliable
guns in my experience..and i've owned or shot most all brands.
I'll add that Durability of the steel frame and well designed slide
goes hand in hand with being reliable..it won't shoot if it is broken.

I feel that is a gun is not reliable, it is not worth much. Doesn't matter
the caliber, or how it fits your hand..Reliability is Job One!

CZUB has a long history of fielding surperbly reliable weaponry...
I'm sure that the forthcoming RAMI will be no exception to the rule.

 

[Hellbore]

I carry a CZ because it's the only handgun I have other than a .22 LR Ruger Single Six

I got one of the CZ40B's from CDNN for $250. I am still impressed at what a good gun it is for the price.

 

[chevrofreak]

doesnt the CZ40 and RAMI design use an aluminum frame?

 

[Hellbore]

yes

 

[VG]

I don't carry one, but CZ75's were pretty good guns for the money at $325. Triggers aren't great, not particularly accurate, some people don't like the "polymer" finish, and inside finish is far rougher than would ever be tolerated in a U.S. made pistol.

 

[jdrobins]

I am now starting to carry my P-01, I have a holster coming from HBE and then I will be carring it pretty much full time, my P-01 replaced my USP357Compact (I sold it) the P-01 has a better trigger and ergo's than the USP and it compete's with my Sig 228 (My Favorite gun all time) I have just got a PCR for the purpose of my B/U CCW, but now that the RAMI is coming out it will become my CCW Pistol. The reliability that I have seen from my 2 CZ's compares to my USP and Sigs across the board all very reliable.

Jim

 

[armoredman]

My CZ75 Compact was extremely accurate, dead reliable, and looked great. The interior fit and finish were superior to many other brands, both American and foreign. Are you comparing a CZ50 to a modern gun, or a CZ52? The older communist produced guns, the 50/52/70, do exhibit a cheaper finish, and sometimes tool marks not acceptable to American consumers, but the CZ75/85 series guns I have seen/owned/shot were much above that old standard.
The polycoat finish is not everyone's cup of tea, but so what - I can't stand Glocks, either. Nothing against them, they just don't fit me, and the CZ has a far sleeker appeal, and fits my hand like a glove.
My Witness, a CZ clone, has ridden my hip for over 13 years, and works perfectly all the time, every time.
I will get another CZ some day, and enjoy it as a shooter, and depend on it without hesitation to defend me and my family.

 

[Roger Williams]

I don't carry one, but CA75's were pretty good guns for the money at $325. Triggers aren't great, not particularly accurate, some people don't like the "polymer" finish, and inside finish is far rougher than would ever be tolerated in a U.S. made pistol.

Ummmmm.... Huh? In my personal experience with CZ75's, that makes NO sense whatsoever.

First off, the CZ75 is an excellent pistol at any price - if you get one for $325, run fast because you stole it! I have never felt a CZ with a really BAD trigger, but some could use a little smoothing (usually clears up by itself in a lot of cases). Not particularly accurate? Shaaa, right. If you don't like the polycoat, they also have the glossy blue, nickel, 2-tone, OD green, etc... and last but not least, I have seen the insides of some American made guns that look pretty bad next to a CZ.

The CZ you looked at may have been a lemon or something. I have never seen one that was really a bad gun at all.

 

[Shake]

Some of the more knowledgable CZ guys will probably chime in here, but if you saw a CZ with a rougher interior finish in polycoat, they are probably military overruns.

I'm fairly certain if you were to compare the inside finish to a newer one, a compact/PCR, P01, or a gloss blued or nickel finish CZ, you'd come away with a favorable impression.

In all reality, the interior "finishing" of a gun does little to nothing for the gun except give guys like us something to talk about (maybe makes it easier to clean?). Sure it can be an indicator of overall quality, but it won't affect the shootability of the firearm.

Shake

 

[PCRCCW]

I completely agree with Roger.......

The guns VG has played with may have been "not so nice" but Im on #14 for CZ's and In all honesty they are as nice as anything Ive owned Beretta, Sig, Kimber, Walther, etc etc etc....ok maybe not my STI...but they are a hell of a gun.

Accuracy is better than most guns costing 50% more and Ill put my guns up against anything well beyond that price.

The machining is rough only where it doesnt matter. Yes, a Sig may or may not have a better inside surface where it doesnt matter.
And the most quality guns IVE EVER SEEN are not made in the USA.......

My PCR and CZ40's machining EVERYWHERE put my Kimbers to shame.
But they are Alloy frames and the machining is nicer than the steel framed CZ's Ive owned.

I just gotta disagree with you.......respectfully of course.

To each their own..........and I carry mine because the go bang EVERYTIME I PULL THE TRIGGER WITHOUT FAIL.................

Shoot well.

 

[pistolwhipped]

I have several weapons that I carry. One is the CZ PCR. The PCR fits my hand better than any weapon I own. It shoots as well as any pistol I own.
It always shoots when I pull the trigger. That about covers it.

 

[matthewdanger]

I got rid of a USP Compact .40 to get my P-01. It is superbly accurate and 100 % percent reliable. The fit is tight and it is finished reasonably well. I carry it everyday and I have yet to find it's equal for the price or even for twice the price, except for maybe another CZ.

 

[Sean Smith]

At its price point, there is the CZ-75B... and then there is everything else.

 

[Steve Smith]

I've owned and carried a lot of pistols, but after getting a PCR with 14 rd mags and one of the HBE holsters that's similar to a Sparks Versa Max 2, I'm happier than I've been with anything else. What a carry combo!

 

[wildehond]

I owned a CZ75 pre B that I bought very second hand. The barrel was pitted in two places. It was VERY accurate. And very reliable. I shot is for a couple of years and a couple of thousand rounds. I only sold it to pay for university. I miss that pistol every day. I carried that handgun for all that time cocked and locked and never had a problem. I even came off my motorcycle twice with it on. After the first tumble I had to search for half an hour in the bushes to find it. Still cocked and loocked and now damage. That is why I am looking for one to replace that one now.

wildehond

 

[nonquixote]

My PCR is probably my favorite gun that I've ever held. Most decent guns are dependable and more accurate than I am, so for me the deciding factors for a CCW are price, appearance, concealability, and hand feel/pointability.

I got my PCR for $390 from my local dealer. Judging against their other prices, I think this was mislabelled, but I know a bargain when I see it and snapped it up. They are out of PCRs now but have P-01s selling for something like $480. I got my 97B there for $600 previously.

I think the PCR is a very good looking gun. This is very subjective of course, but I prefer CZ's graceful lines to many of its competitors' more blocky appearance.

Concealability is great in my HBE Pro IWB Holster. 14+1 rounds in a small lightweight package held securely to my side. Hard to complain about that.

Then we come to the final criterion, the thing that truly made me a fan of the CZ75 line of handguns, being the way they grip and point in my hand. As I've said elsewhere, I've never held a gun that felt or pointed better for me than my PCR. Some came close, Sigs and Hi-Powers come to mind, but none better, and usually at a higher price.

I would be the last person to try to pursuade anyone else on matters of taste, but I think you can see from my opinions above why I choose to carry a CZ.

Nonq

 

[Ankeny]

Ergonomics. My CZ shoots where I look. It is also accurate and reliable.

 

[VG]

Roger Williams wrote:

Ummmmm.... Huh? In my personal experience with CZ75's, that makes NO sense whatsoever.

First off, the CZ75 is an excellent pistol at any price - if you get one for $325, run fast because you stole it! I have never felt a CZ with a really BAD trigger, but some could use a little smoothing (usually clears up by itself in a lot of cases). Not particularly accurate? Shaaa, right. If you don't like the polycoat, they also have the glossy blue, nickel, 2-tone, OD green, etc... and last but not least, I have seen the insides of some American made guns that look pretty bad next to a CZ.

The CZ you looked at may have been a lemon or something. I have never seen one that was really a bad gun at all.

I look at it regularly. It's a CZ85 combat. With a trigger job and barrel recrown by Teddy Jacobson. It's the one in the middle. If they were made in the U.S. they'd be glued to the shelves. Which one do you have? When they were selling for $175 in military Rod & Gun clubs in the early 80's, they were a good deal.

 

[jdrobins]

VG, Since you don't seem to like your CZ and it's so bad, I'll give you a $100 to take it off your hands!, BTW Nice Sig.

Jim

 

[VG]

Yeah, I tried to sell it, and most of those people who think CZ's are so wonderful either didn't have any money or wanted to trade even more obscure firearms for it. This is what leads me to believe that most people who buy CZ's are getting their info off these forums and buy one primarily because they are cheap. If you think yours is the best, most accurate, most reliable pistol ever made, hey, knock yourself out. But beware that most gun buyers don't read these forums.

It's not a bad pistol, and has some very good attributes. But as Teddy Jacobson says, "There are better choices." I'm keeping it, but prospective CZ owners should shoot one first before buying one just because they are cheap.

Gun Week test of CZ 75 and Beretta 92

Swedish Bikini Team shoot CZ's

 

[PCRCCW]

VG...great post....seriously. I like the way you word it

"This is what leads me to believe that most people who buy CZ's are getting their info off these forums and buy one primarily because they are cheap."

So in your opinion most are "keyboard shooters"....hmmmm OK!

Interesting.....IMO, after 14 CZ's and owning Sigs, Beretta's, Rugers, S&W's, Taurus, Rossi, Stars, Kahrs, FEG's, Walthers.......1 or 2 firearms you may consider....better than a Jennings, on a good day...maybe?

I still think they are the best gun around and the best priced deal around currently.

I wont comment to harshly of you and your comments and showing the only known article in the history of gun rags where they test the 85 w/ 3" groups @ 25 yds......Ive got lots like it with slightly different results.

I think your post speaks for itself "IN LEAPS AND BOUNDS" about your stand and general attitude.............

As a final note.....man, I just cant help but notice how you base your opinion off of 1 gun, a gun rag and from what I can gather..alot of information gathered off of this forum..........how Ironic............hmmmmmmmmmmmm!

But you posted the Bikini team...........classic and timeless

Shoot well.

 

[PCRCCW]

Shoot well.

 

[CZF]

Compared to my P-01, the 92FS and 75B MIL that i had were total
junkers. Poor fit and finish, alongside horrible triggers.

So much.. that i'll not even look at another BUSA Product. There
is a used Police Special with hi-caps.. that has been sitting at the
local gunshop. Instead of PS , they should have called it the POS!
What a horrible example of Mr. Beretta's fine design. The stainless
92F made in Italy seems to be much better overall. I like the design,
but CZs fit me wayy nicer.

I think with the 75B MIL you are getting the Least example of CZUB
craftsmanship. Something like the 85 Combat or 97B is much better.
People complain about the triggers on 75Bs and judge all CZs by
that one gun. They also make a big deal of the CZ's slide. I guess
one should know how to clear jams, but having 100% reliable CZs
to date. I don't really practice clearing malfunctions...it isn't that
big of a deal if you are used to CZs. With a 1911 one should be
practicing alot!

 

[Roger Williams]

I look at it regularly. It's a CZ85 combat. With a trigger job and barrel recrown by Teddy Jacobson. It's the one in the middle. If they were made in the U.S. they'd be glued to the shelves. Which one do you have? When they were selling for $175 in military Rod & Gun clubs in the early 80's, they were a good deal.

Well, with the work you've had done on it, I bet it shoots great! I still don't know why the country it was made in has anything to do with it. Would they be somehow better if they were made in the U.S.? I have seen MANY U.S. made guns that look shameful as far as fit & finish is concerned. There are great guns made all over the world. (I see HK USP's flying off the shelves all the time!) If CZ's were made in the US, and they jacked the price up to $650, would they shoot any better? No. Would people respect them more? It seems so. (and that just boggles my mind)

I'm a big supporter of buying American made products, but why pass up a $350 firearm that shoots like a $600 one? In this case, I'm more concerned with getting a great gun at a great price than country of manufacture. If I saw CZ75's selling for $175, I'd buy every one I could get my hands on!

I own and enjoy a CZ75. It's stock except for a set of rubber Hogue grips. I have friends who own MUCH more expensive guns that say the CZ shoots better.

 

[buttrap]

I got one of the Turk Army over run guns for $321 including shipping a few years ago. I though it would make a good beater gun for the truck and while horse packing. I was really shocked at how tight the slide to frame fit was and how well it shot,too nice to use as a beater. I use a Walter for that now.
Now if it just had a wider hammer and was in stainless.........