My mind tells me GLOCK, my heart says CZ

[Mulliga]

I'm debating my next carry gun - either a GLOCK 19 or a CZ P-01.

Logically, I know the GLOCK will be far easier to shop for - mags, holsters, and other paraphernalia are obviously everywhere. I know I shoot the GLOCK as well as any gun I've tried, and I know they're as accurate and reliable as any off-the-shelf duty gun. I've shot several 19s and the design fits my hand pretty well.

Then I come to that plastic front sight (new GLOCKs still have those, right?). My gut recoils at the thought - good Lord, the finish on my steel CZ-75 sight is worn from daily carry - how would a plastic sight fare? And why a plastic sight on a gun that costs about $450 new?

I know the P-01 is heavier, carries one round less, is as fat as the G19...I even prefer the "safe action" trigger to DA/SA. But I'm having trouble pulling the trigger on the GLOCK. Is this rational? What considerations, other than pure utility, do you put into your CCW?

 

[10-Ring]

I resisted Glocks for a while. You really can't hurt a Glock, it will go bang every time you need it to and they're still a bit of a bargain. Go w/ the Glock

 

[Gary G23]

I've owned both. I still have the CZ.

 

[Geronimo45]

If you're willing to carry the extra weight, go with the CZ. Just because it's concealed doesn't mean it shouldn't look good. After all, if you're going to shell out 450 dollars, it ought to be good looking.
I doubt that the glock sight will wear off, though.

 

[RandomMan]

Both?

If had to choose one, it'd be the Glock, why? Because it's easy to get the Glock grip reduced to something my small, but oh so manly, hands can handle. The CZ is just too fat for me.

So, my choice? Purely practical which one shoots best, which one fits best, which one conceals best?

-Rob

 

[mattf7184]

Chose other, check your PMs.

FWIW, I noticed damage on my stock front plastic sights for some odd reason so your concern is valid. No problems with my steel night sights.

 

[JLStorm]

I have never shot a CZ, so I cant comment on that, but I had a job about 4 years ago that required I carry a Glock and I did not like that gun at all. I didnt like the feel or the weight, and I really had a hard time knowing I didnt have an external safety, so mentally I wasnt completely comfortable with the gun. Once I was no longer working on that contract I sold the gun and bought something else.

On the up side, I recall maybe 2 jams in the 5,000 or 6,000 rounds I shot through that weapon

 

[Steelharp]

Have both in front of you. Pick one up. Close your eyes, and point with it. Open your eyes. See which one points more natural for you. That's the one.

Me, a Glock points at the ceiling, and the CZ points where it should.

 

[SAG0282]

Of those, I would/did pick the GLOCK. While CZ is a FINE handgun, the GLOCK can't be beat in terms of pure function over form and rugged simplicity, key attributes in a great combat/defensive handgun.

 

[slicknickns]

If you can only have one, go with the Glock. Versatility. A handguns asthetics are important, but not important if you only have one. Plus you have the knowledge of the Model 19's adoption internationally. It's the official sidearm of the Swedish Airforce, one of best airforces in the world. It's used by many police agencies in the United States and all over the world. The 19 of course, not the 17.

 

[Nail Shooter]

G19, lots of firepower in a small, light, reliable package. If the plastic front sight bothers you, get it with night sights--problem solved.

NS

 

[RyanM]

I'm a functionality guy. Can't help it. Every single choice I make is dominated by pure pragmatism.

For carry though, the most important thing is how well the gun points. You should be able to close your eyes and draw the gun, then open them and find that the sights are aligned perfectly. With a Ruger SP-101, this is absolutely effortless for me. My Glock 23 usually ends up with the top of the front sight about halfway down between the rear sights. A teeny bit low. To me this is acceptable, given the higher capacity, and the fact that .40 S&W is practically a ballistic twin of the .357 magnum, from typical CCW sized guns.

If I ever carried a 1911 I'd be dead if I had to use it. All I'd do is make the bad guy "dance."

Also, you can get a Glock OEM metal front sight for $16 + S&H. A set of both front and rear non-night sights can be had for under $40. My plastic front sight has held up okay though, despite the fact that I'm using a holster that's actually made for the G26, so a half inch of the muzzle sticks out the bottom. But I got it cheap, so I can't complain.

 

[Furncliff]

The cz has one added advantage not yet discussed.

When you run thru a full mag and the BG is still a threat, you can beat him into submission with the two pound tire iron disguised as a handgun.

I like mine.

 

[Phil DeGraves]

Glock as long as you don't mind magazines that break when you drop them, front sights that come off, pulling the trigger before being able to field strip it, triggers that don't always reset, a safety that is dubious at best and ergonomics like a brick.

 

[pax]

Glock magazines break when you drop them???

20,000+ rounds into my Glock 26, in multiple classes and serious defense practice, doing speed reloads, running & gunning in gun games -- and I've never had a magazine break from dropping it, or stepping on it, or landing in a mud puddle, or even from *sigh* sending it through the wash in the back pocket of my jeans.

Never had a sight come off, either. Love the positive reset on the Glock, and really love the simplicity of design and reliability of function. The gun fits my hand perfectly and points where I want it to shoot. I've always thought it was a good gun.

But I guess I never realized Glocks and Glock magazines were so fragile. I'll have to start babying mine now!

pax

 

[wally]

Glocks are great in terms of reliability, problem is there is no gun I shoot worse (I've a 17 and a 21). I hit much better with the CZ75 or the XD. I think both the Glock and XD are "ugly" but for me the XD is a beuatiful gun to shoot, the Glock shoots ugly for me.

Unless you are like me and want to eventually end up with one of everything , I'd suggest trying to shoot each model before buying.

--wally.

 

[Phil DeGraves]

I train LE and others. Specifically, magazine floorplates and locking plates. And both the front and rear sights get torn off during wounded officer reloading training.

 

[pax]

Phil ~

I train others, too. Have done plenty of one handed reloads & other wounded-defender drills and helped instruct plenty more. Never seen the sights problem you refer to -- nor have I seen dead Glock magazines from doing reloads.

Have seen a number of 1911 magazines die from being stepped on, and several lesser types of magazines give up the ghost just from getting a stern look.

But in several years of doing this, I simply haven't seen what you say you've seen with Glocks.

pax

 

[armoredman]

Weight differance? According to both factory official websites, the actual weight differance is 4.8 ounces. I'll bet every single person on this website has more than 4.8 extra ounces bouncing around we could get rid of, and we don't notice it.
Now carry something like a 1911, or a SiG P220, or even a Smith model 19, and you might notice some extra weight, but my PO1 is very very easy to carry. A good holster makes all the differance, too.
Yes, the PO1 mag holds 1 less. Yes, the G-rock is .22 inch narrower. No, the G-rock has no soul...
I will say this for the terrible tupperware - in a year and a half as a range officer at a rental range, I saw one G-rock break, a G17 with 200,000 rounds through it, broke the slide under the ejection port. The rest jammed, but never broke, and we had many of them. By way of comparison, when I left, almost all of our HK USPs were either at the factory for repair, or were about to go.
Oh, I have never had a CZ break, either.
Buy what fits you. If it's the Drastic Plastic, then go for it, and do whatever upgrades you have to, to make it work for you. If it's the PO1, don't worry, there are many holster firms out there like High Noon, who can hook you up with excellent holsters.
Of course....I am a little biased...



PS, I qualify every year on the G-rock 17 and 19, so I can shoot the deadly Legos.

 

[aguyindallas]

With 7 Glocks in the safe an 0 CZ's, I say go with the Glock.

Parts (like you would ever need any) are cheap and SUPER easy to get. They have great warranty service (like you would ever need any). The front sight is a weak point, no doubt, but you have many options. First...night sights, second, I think Glockmeister has a steel front sight for like 15.00 or so.

Of cours mags, holsters, accessories of every time are ALWAYS readily available for anything Glock.

Best of luck in your decision and whatever it is, be safe!

 

[riverdog]

I have guns in the safe that are things of beauty. 1911's and older blued S&W N-frames. They shoot well, are reliable and just look good. Then there's the Glock G19 that is in my range bag and has spent zero time in the safe. . .

 

[Desertscout]

Specifically, magazine floorplates and locking plates. And both the front and rear sights get torn off during wounded officer reloading training.

I find this incredibly hard to believe. We train more folks in our state for CCW than anyone in the state. We have a 3 additional defensive handgun classes and train lots of folks in all of them. We do one-handed drills in all of them. I have attended at least 12 professional handgun courses in which the overwhelming majority of the weapons were Glocks. My employees and I all shoot Glocks and we practice a lot.

I have never once witnessed a problem with an unaltered, properly installed Glock magazine baseplate. I have seen a couple of front sights get knocked off but never a rear sight. One should replace the cheesy factory sights as soon as you get the gun anyway.

 

[Cliff47]

I remember reading somewhere that the CZ75 was designed as a combat pistol in the first place. It is built to industrial strength standards, and will last as long as you can lift the pistol into a shooting status, and squeeze the trigger. The frame-in-slide design is reminiscent of the SIG 210, and it's just about as accurate (disgusting in a pistol right out of the box). Any body for the working mans SIG, get a CZ75 in the flavor of your choice. If I sound a bit prejudiced, I am, and proud of it.

 

[Phil DeGraves]

I am not speaking from "what I've heard" but what I have personally seen. Based on my subjective personal experience, I would not own a GLOCK when there are so many other good guns out there. And I am not doubting that other people have not had any problems. A lot of people I know and respect love the GLOCK, but I personally have a hard time trusting them based on MY personal experience. Considering the numbers I deal with, the problems I have seen are a pretty small %, but I just can't warm up to them.

 

[Desertscout]

I remember reading somewhere that the CZ75 was designed as a combat pistol in the first place. It is built to industrial strength standards, and will last as long as you can lift the pistol into a shooting status, and squeeze the trigger.

All of this can also be said of the Glock. Accuracy of the Glock is as good as most out-of-the box service pistols and better than most.