CZ-75 owners - do you know what you're talking about?

[SDDL-UP]

Okay CZ owners!

How many of you own at least five different brands of semi-auto handguns and think the CZ is as good or better than anything else?

I own...

1911 (Kimber)
BHP (made in Belgium)
HK USP
Glock
CZ

...and to me the CZ's are the best of the bunch! I've shot Sig's and Ruger's a fair amount too, but they've just never "done it" for me. Fine guns, but just not something for me.

Now I think a lot of CZ owners are like me and have significant experience with other handguns, and have learned to appreciate the greatness of the CZ-75 design.

What do you think?

CZ "homers" can check-in too! I'm obviously not going to tell you that you're wrong for being a homer, but maybe tell us how you came to be a CZ homer?

 

[budder]

Well, I don't own 5 different brands of semi-auto handguns, but I've shot many more than 5 different brands. My 75 SA is one of the best.

 

[armoredman]

I worked an indoor rental range for a year and a half, where one job was to test fire incoming trade in sidearms, and maintain the rental handguns. I fired everything on the market up to 2002, including almost every model of Glock, SiG,(with the exception of the 210, of course - NOBODY traded THAT in!), Taurus, Ruger, HK, (yes, we had a P7 on the rental range with the USPs), Springfield, Beretta, Llama, (couldn't sell it, why not rent it.), Colt, (including the All-American 2000, yikes), and I know I am forgetting a few brand names.
After all of it, CZ still works better and fits better than anything else on the market. The only sidearms I liked almost as much as CZ was the SiG P220 .45, and Beretta 92FS, while too big and bulky for me to be comfortable carrying it, was indeed a fun range gun, up 'till it broke.
I saw every brand break, too, including ALL above mentioned manufacturers, with the following exceptions - CZ autos, Ruger autos, and Smith revolvers.

 

[S&W620]

Well, I've owned a CZ-85, Springfield Loaded 1911, a G19 and G17 an M&P as well as an HK USP to go along with a Smith revo.

Was the CZ better than the rest? No.

Were they as good as the rest? Yes, except for the HK. It truly is in a league of its own IMO.

However, CZ's are about as fine of firearm as one can hope to buy. I'm very pissed I sold mine.

 

[Hauptmann]

Each pistol design has its own advantages and weaknesses. The CZ 75 is a very good overall pistol and has many more advantages than weaknesses. When you compare the CZ 75 or other designs you can see those advantages as well as those weaknesses. When it comes to weaknesses versus a Sig, the CZ has a longer double action and single action trigger. Trigger reach overall is also more of a stretch. There is less gripping area on the slide for cycling the action verus a Sig. This is evident during high stress or combat shooting where gross muscle movement is all that you have available because your heart rate is around 200bpm. The CZ will not go into a full decock, this means that instead of keeping it more simple with two trigger conditions, you now have three which increases training time. Those are the operational issues on the CZ that I think other designs are better with. Other issues to look at are the thin/weak extractor, weaker barrel to slide lockup, and weaker trigger return spring.

The Sig has its own weaknesses, as well as a Beretta, or 1911. Some days I think the Sig is the ultimate pistol, the next day I think my CZ is the ultimate pistol......in truth there is no ultimate pistol design. Just equally impressive alternatives.

 

[Omega]

I am down from 13 CZs to 4:
- PCR, SP-01, CZ97, CZ82
and I still have a few other semi, among them - SIG, H&K, Glocks, Les Baers, Makarov, Walther p99, Witness Tanfoglio, Benelli, etc.
I wouldn't say that CZs are THE BEST guns there, but they are better than many. Probably they are the best in only one aspect - cost (that is going up little by little) I think in $380-$450 they are the best guns.
Just my 2 cents

,

 

[Marshall]

For the price, they're good enough.

 

[SDDL-UP]

S&W620,

That's funny to me because I actually BROKE my HK USP-40! The trigger bar broke with about 2000 rounds through it and it was NEVER abused in any way. This and the fact that the barrel is so high in relation to the grip makes me like the USP less than I thought I would (had it now for 13+ years). I still think it's a fine gun though.

Hauptmann,

I agree the CZ-75 isn't "perfect"... we'll leave that little fantasy to Glock homers (I also own a Glock and love it so don't flame me!). I appreciate your input as a CZ and Sig owner. Thanks.

Marshall,

I'm just curious about those kinds of comments... spend twice what you would on a CZ-75 (you pick the variation) and tell me how the given firearm of YOUR CHOICE would be significantly better than the CZ?

 

[Ghost Tracker]

Jeff Cooper (R.I.P.) said the CZ 75B was his personal pick of the "Wonder Nines" available at the time. His opinion packs a lot more experience than mine. I'm a SA autoloader fan & the CZ easily behaves like one. Good Choice!

 

[obxned]

Come on now, there are hundreds of different gun models that are all reliable and accurate enough. The things which make one gun better than another are the 'feel' and the features. Both of these are subjective.

As far as price, CZs and a few other makes that aren't the current favorites do give you a lot for your money. Sadly, CZs seem to be gaining in popularity and the prices may continue to rise.

 

[deanodog]

Other guns have better sights and a shorter DA trigger reach. CZ's are very good for the money but it surely could use better sights. Even the lowly sigma has better sights than CZ's. I prefer the feel of the M&P9 better.

 

[Coronach]

I prefer the BHP to the CZ75, but that's like saying I prefer an Aston-Martin to a Rolls-Royce. Adequate, sir. They're both adequate.

Mike

 

[BayAreaTactical]

CZ is a very under rated firearm. They make a quality firearm, and for the money they deserve more attention than what they currently get. They shoot very well and are not particular with the ammo is used in them. But at the end of the day, when you are talking about quality firearms, it is how that firearm fits and feels in your hand that matters the most.

 

[Marshall]

For the price, they're good enough.

Marshall,

I'm just curious about those kinds of comments... spend twice what you would on a CZ-75 (you pick the variation) and tell me how the given firearm of YOUR CHOICE would be significantly better than the CZ?

First of all, that's just one comment. Second of all, it wasn't a bad one. Thirdly, many guns fit that same comment, the CZ-75 is not alone. Fourth, what they said. Sights, trigger reach and feel are poor and, to me, the trigger gaurd is ugly and too big, the rails on the .40cal are ugly and show wear, the trigger and hammer should be black, they look cheap but, it's a nice functioning gun and good enough for the price. If the price keeps going up I'll be harder pressed to say that. Fifth, significantly better to whom? Significantly better to me is all that matters?

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

Let's see, I own pistols made by:

Beretta
Colt
CZ
Glock
Mauser
PA-63 (whoever makes that thing)
Ruger
Smith & Wesson

The CZ-75B .40 S&W is my carry choice.

PS, the CZ-100B is a piece of garbage.

 

[SDDL-UP]

Marshall,

EXACTLY! I'm curious as to what handgun would be significantly better for you.

CZ offers three dot sights, three dot luminous sights, three dot tritium sights, competition fiber optic sights, and fully adjustable sights. That's totally okay if you don't care for any of them, I'm not saying you should.

When you say "for the money" and "good enough" I am just curious that's all. For the money compared to what, a Hi-Point or a Wilson Combat? Good enough compared to what?

 

[saltydog452]

I'll play.

My 75 Compact is the DA/SA model.

In DA, the trigger reach is too long for non/NBA hands.

In SA, the thumb safety ledge is too skinny for positive engagement under stress at speed.

Geo Smith at EGW is working on building up that ledge.

In DA/SA, I prefer the 228.

In SA only, I had much rather have the BHP.

The 92FS isn't even close to either.

Maybe I'd have a different opinion if I had bought the SA only version.


salty.

 

[-terry]

I own
Walther P99c
Sig P220
Buckmark
CZ75B

I like the CZ best for it's fit, reliability, and appearance. I paid 700 or so for mine after the competition rework. I'm always pleased when I pick it up and just hold it.

 

[Trebor]

I sold all my HK P7's because I shot my CZ-75 better. That tell you anything?

 

[ZeSpectre]

I own (or have owned) around 15 different pistols from a variety of different manufacturers and of a variety of different "luxury" levels. There are three of mine that really shine where out of the box accuracy, reliability, and consistency are concerned.

c.1979 Ruger Security Six (.357 Magnum Revolver)



c.1999 SIG 229 (.40 S&W)



c.2006 CZ-75B (.40 S&W)

 

[Marshall]

I'm curious as to what handgun would be significantly better for you.

Why do you care so much what I like? There's a whole lot of hanguns I would rather buy than a CZ-75. Throw in revolvers are there's even more. A P-01 would even be one of them. All but one or two are more expensive, to speak of anyway. Which brings me back to my original statement. For the price, they're good enough.

 

[bigmike45]

3-Wilson Combat 1911's
1-Browning Hi Power
1- Springfield XD45 Service
2-Taurus PT-145's
1-KelTec P-11
3-Ruger Redhawks
1-Ruger GP-100
1-Ruger SP-101
and of course
1-Stainless CZ75B

The CZ is a great gun, fun to shoot, accurate and dependable.

 

[SDDL-UP]

Marshall,

I care what you like because you cared to post in this thread SPECIFICALLY titled "CZ-75 owners - do you know what you are talking about."

From what you have posted I don't know if you even own a handgun! The thread was meant for a comparison of the CZ-75 and other auto-loaders. If you don't want to provide us with useful information - don't post!

 

[Marshall]

Opinions are useful information, that's half, if not more, of what this forum is used for. It's just not the information you want to hear. For someone that doesn't know if I own a handgun or not, or have ever owned a handgun or not, or what brand and model they were or presently are, you sure assume a lot. I missed the part they required a history of handguns and the part that said don't offer an opinion if you don't provide one. You did ask for CZ owners right? I figured you were including ex-owners too.

You asked what handgun would be better to me. I told you there are quite a few, not just one. I told you what I didn't for care for about them too, specifically. It's just not the particular information you want to hear.

Why? Because you want to argue that the CZ is the best gun on the market, I don't. If it is the best to you, great. You want to go tit-n-tat on specific guns, I have no desire to do so, we could go all night. It's not that important to me. If that get's your panties in a wad, sorry.

If this was just suppose to be a chearleading raw-raw CZ thread, I apologize.

 

[BrokenArrow]

When the PCR tested the CZ75, there were 7 malfunctions in 15,000 rounds. The 2 CZ75s, and 5 CZ75Bs I have owned were about that good. Could probably do better in mil-spec type testing, but I haven't heard about it if they have.

The first 20K guns delivered of the 40K gun PCR contract were rejected for problems BTW. Anybody can mess up anything. Ask Beretta.

Thats about what the M9 did in 1985's testing. Newer production contract guns are doing much better, 1 in 17,500, and slide life is from 55K - 95K.

The M11 (SIG P228) had 1 in 15,000 (3 guns x 5K rounds).

The FBI's 1911s had 7 in 80,000 (4 guns x 20K; two guns had 0 in 20K).

The FBI's Glock 40s had 0 in 120,000 (6 x 20K).