Battle Of The Budget Autos, CZ75B or Ruger KP95?

[RugerOldArmy]

I like Ruger revolvers...but we're talking semi-auto.

The CZ ergonomics are just outstanding. If you point without even looking at the sights, it just seems to go spot-on. The grip is just perfect.

I have the single-action 75B with aftermarket night sites (XS), Wolff Springs, and grips (just prefer wooden grips, there are a few good grip makers). Everybody who shoots it has the same reaction "Damn, that's Nice! What the hell kind of gun is this?".

Out of the box it is very accurate, preferring 124 gr 9mm. No FTF/FTE on mine with plated, hardball, Gold Dots, or Golden Sabres.

Stick with Mec-Gar for aftermarket Mags.

The only downside is the trigger is just a little long (if you're already spoiled by 1911s), but it light and crisp (again, mine is the SA model. I'm a single action type of person).

These things are a steal. I'll never sell mine.

 

[Bemo]

If you're going to abuse it

Get the Ruger, no need to waste a CZ.

 

[dmftoy1]

I've got a P94 Decock only and it's ate EVERYTHING I've fed it without a single hitch. I even burned 300-400 rounds of Egyptian Sub-machinegun ammo (corrosive) with it and while it was very hot ammo it didn't even phase it.

Just my .02

Have a good one,
Dave

PS - I found that putting a set of hogue grips on the P94 drastically changed the "feel". (although it is a big/heavy pistol)

 

[albanian]

I had a P-95 and a CZ-40b. I have not shot the CZ-75 yet but it looks like a winner. I would guess that both are going to be extremly reliable and that the CZ-75 would tend to hold the edge in accuracy. The CZ is heavier and a little larger overall but the Ruger is not really a small gun. The Ruger can be fired fast accuratly. I have never seen a Ruger auto jam.

It really is a toss up. CZs have some drawbacks, like the trigger is a long reach and the SA is not very good. The finish isn't going to hold up well compared to a SS Ruger. The Ruger is slick in the grip. It is also top heavy. My P-95 was not accurate unless I was shooting it at full speed.

If the cost was the same, I would get the CZ because they have a higher resale and I have not had one yet. If I had to choose one to go into a gunfight with tomorrow and I couldn't test it out before it happend, I would take the Ruger because out of the box it will probably shoot any ammo and I am familiar with it. There is nothing about the P-95 to inspire pride of onwership because it is all business. It is no nonsense and built like a truck. I think the AK-47 analogy is apprapo to the P-95.

 

[chaim]

I have a CZ 75B, I have had a CZ 40B and a Ruger P89.

The CZ is by far a nicer pistol. Much better ergonomics, much better fit and finish, much more accurate.

Both are quite reliable.

I like the CZ far better than the Ruger. However, you say you want a beater. You may want to define what you mean by beater. To me that is conjuring up images of being thrown in the back of a truck or floor of a car and going several range trips without oil and cleaning- being driven hard and put away wet kind of stuff.

If you are going to abuse it I would go with the Ruger. Not that it is necessarily more likely to survive it, the CZ is a military weapon so it should do fine. I'd simply be far more willing to abuse a Ruger that belonged to me than a CZ and when the finish started to look bad I'd feel far less bad about it. Buy the CZ and you'll find that you want to take care of it (the only auto pistols that look as good or better are the Beretta 84 in nickel, the Beretta 92 in Inox, the FN/Browning High Power, and a nice 1911).

 

[Walt Sherrill]

They're both good guns. Try them both before you buy. Some folks find the CZ trigger a little LONG (in DA mode).

The CZ (depending on model) lets you start from cocked and locked, which is a big deal for some (me included).

The RUGER P-95 looks big, but looks are deceiving -- pull out the tape measure and you find its not nearly as BULKY as it looks.

CZ customer service is generally very good, but RUGER'S is outstanding.

I had a P-95 once, and the only thing I didn't like was the trigger--and a gunsmith said you can't do a lot to improve them (he did improve it)-- and the decocker. I traded it away moving to a SIG. I kind of wish I still had the P-95. Good solid gun.

(I have mostly CZs, now, with a SIG GSR and Browning HP, and a couple of CZ clones.)

 

[Pilot]

CZ. Its a fine quality firearm at a decent price. Rugers make great revolvers, but I'm not a big fan of their semi-autos. Same wth S&W.

 

[Brian41]

I realy like CZs and Rugers and dont think you can go wrong either way, but the 100 difference definately does not compromise any reliability in my opinion. I will say that i like the ergos of the CZ much better than the Ruger.

 

[albanian]

I had a Ruger P-89 before the P-95 and there is a really big differnece between them. The P-89 is a big chunky tank of a gun that I never warmed up to or shoot very well. The P-95 was much smaller and lighter and for some reason was very easy for me to shoot it well at high speed. It didn't have much target accuracy but for what it was designed for, it worked great. The only other full sized 9mm double auto I could shoot as well as the P-95 is my Beretta 92fs.

There is absolutly nothing wrong with the Ruger P-95. I am very picky about my guns and I say it when something doesn't measure up. The Ruger is not a gun that you are going to brag about or show to your friends but it works and does what it is supposed to do. The P-95 with de-cock has the same controls as a SIG and SIG has the safest and best set-up of all makers. DA/SA with no safety and a decock lever is just about as simple and reliable as it gets. It may take some getting used to to shoot DA/SA but it can be learned. I have shot this type of trigger for so long, I can't remember what problems I ever had with it. I don't have any problems with the DA/SA transition and I am not an expert shooter by any means. I shoot a lot but mostly just at paper.

 

[RON in PA]

In my experience, the Ruger is the better gun for reliability and as it breaks-in develops a decent, not great trigger. The CZ may feel better in the hand.

 

[Ivy Mike]

Hmm, people in your area must really love CZ's to charge $100 more for them.

I got my CZ-75B for $360 plus tax and background check. Came to just under $400 out the door from a local shop. Rugers of varying model are usually withing $30 of that.

That being said, I'd buy the CZ first, but would have no problem picing up a Ruger. The Rugers are built like tanks. They are said to be rated from the factory for +P+. Can't say the same for CZ although mine (the 75B)has no problems feeding and firing +P ammo.