why a makrov over a CZ82?

[justin22885]

i like the CZ-82 a lot, im well aware and familiar with their feel, trigger, the fact theyre double stack, and general build quality... the question i pose is compared to these, what qualities of the makarov would lead someone to choose one of these over the CZ82?

 

[mgmorden]

Simpler design. Looks a little better imho. Not a big difference either way. I've got one of each but if I HAD to keep one I'd keep the makarov.

 

[OilyPablo]

Makarov have heritage and well heritage and some looks. But I sold all mine. Just not a comfortable gun in my hand. At all.

I still love what they look like.

CZ-82 is a born shooter. It points naturally for me.

 

[usp9]

Pretty much the same nut falling from different trees. The Mak may be a little easier to conceal, but sights aren't as good as the CZ's. Both bested by more modern designs IMHO. Good for their day but their day has passed.

 

[Tallball]

My FiL has a CZ83 and I have a Russian Mak. They are both great pistols. I think I prefer my Mak just because of the way it fits my hand, but they are both great guns. You can't go wrong with either.

The CZ83 is the 380 model, and my Russian Mak is the export model in 380. We both preferred the more common cartridge.

 

[AZAndy]

De gustibus non est disputandum. In matters of tastes, there can be no disputes.

 

[justin22885]

i do see where the makarov appears to be a simpler design, the parts count would appear to be far fewer, much less springs and small pins as all components seem fairly robust, very similar to the walther PPK

since the mak has that one piece wrap grip id imagine improving the feel, ergos, and pointability of a makarov is as easy as swapping the grip

 

[Ohen Cepel]

I much prefer the 82. More refined, 50% more rounds, better trigger, safety works better for me, in general I think it is simply a better firearm.

The Mak has more movie appearances and history maybe but little else for me.

 

[kokapelli]

Personally I prefer the Bersa over both because it's lighter and has a much better DA trigger then either the Mak or the 82.

 

[Grunt]

I have both and prefer the CZ82. However, what keeps things from being a slam dunk is the CZ magazine release is a PITA to manipulate.

 

[Capybara]

Why not own both? It's not like buying them is going to break your bank account. I'll throw in a Radom P64 in the middle for good measure too.

 

[MikeJackmin]

The Mak has one significant advantage of the CZ - a hammer-drop safety.

If your pistol is intended as a defensive arm, you'll frequently need to chamber a round and then safely lower the hammer. I'm perfectly comfortable with lowering the hammer under my thumb, but I can understand why others would not be.

You could carry the CZ in condition one (loaded chamber, thumb safety on) but there is no firing pin block or grip safety to back it up. A dropped gun could fire, a small but significant risk that every person would need to evaluate for themselves.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

Isn't the Mak notably thinner?

I don't have one and am an unapologetic fan of all things CZ but the girl's got some width.

Less snaggy hammer too.


Todd.

 

[justin22885]

im personally comfortable with lowering the hammer with my thumb as well, so the decocker really means nothing to me, actually id prefer it didnt function as a decocker for that reason.. i believe the walther is the same way and of course the makarov is just an eastern block copy of that

so let me pose this question, what would make a walther better than the makarov? the PPK is just as simple, likely better build quality, but is it as rugged and reliable?.. is it worth costing as much as a makarov and CZ82 combined?

i do think a bulgarian makarov would be a nice match to my bulgarian AK-74

 

[MikeJackmin]

I don't trust PPs or PPKs for serious use because they have an odd failure mode that bit me once.

If the safety lever works loose, it can droop a bit. The raises the hammer block safety partially into position to block the hammer. When the trigger is pulled, the hammer falls, striking the hammer block and shoving it back into position. This robs the hammer of enough energy to prevent it from firing the cartridge.

In practice, it means you have click instead of bang, and when you inspect the gun everything looks to be in order.

It's a shame because they are otherwise pretty cool little guns - sleek, thin, beautiful, and often with nice sights.

 

[HankC]

For the size of CZ82, I will just get a 9mm. Mak is the right size for the round.

 

[Pilot]

I prefer the slimness of my Bulgie Mak and Polish P-83 for carry.

 

[justin22885]

i think ill have to get a bulgarian mak.. if it doesnt fit just right then i'll just carve myself a newer, more ergonomic grip

what sort of rifling is in these? its not polygonal i hope

 

[BSA1]

Easy. My definite chose is...

 

[Paladin7]

I have both... mainly due to getting a good deals on the CZ-82.

I prefer the Makarov, because it is a MUCH simpler design, almost Glock-like, totally reliable and very accurate.

The CZ-82 has a lot of nice features, but it is a Rube Goldberg kind of design. Just look at the parts diagrams for both pistols.

To me, simple designs, reliability and accuracy trump the better CZ-82 features... YMMV.

Both are very fun guns to shoot and you won't go wrong with either. I'm happy I have them both.

 

[Sistema1927]

I own all three, Makarov, CZ82, and P64. Here is the verdict:

The P64 has the worst DA trigger of the three, but almost the best SA. It has the worst sights of the three. It holds the least amount of ammo, and has the heel mag release and no external slide stop. It has a decocker safety, but is difficult to operate. It is, however, the smallest of the three.

The Makarov is right in the middle of the two. Recoil isn't as bad as the P64, and about the same as the CZ82. Ammo is greater than P64, but less than the CZ. Trigger pulls in both DA & SA are decent. Sights are larger than those on the P64, but smaller than the CZ. The external slide stop is a plus, but it still has the heel mag release. The decocker safety is also a bit funky.

The CZ82 has the best sights going away, and the largest ammo capacity by far. It has the best trigger in both DA and SA of the three. Ambi safety and ambi mag release are big pluses. it also has the external slide stop. It is the largest of the three, but not by much.

All three are accurate and fun to shoot. All three feed any 9x18 ammo. All three are inexpensive enough (I don't dare use the word "cheap" since they are all well made) that most people could own all three. If you could only have one the vote would have to go to the CZ82.

YMMV, but that is my assessment.

 

[justin22885]

well, i'll probably own both, however the makarov seems like the better pistol id rather have to rely on for its simplicity, each component in the mak is simple, robust, and there are far fewer parts to break, lose, or otherwise have to replace and those that do seem easy to fabricate, so it strikes me as a pistol that would be easy to keep around forever even in the absence of the internet for spare parts as well as its magazines i would be able to fabricate from sheet metal if needed since it is a single stack

so to discuss ammunition, i noticed hornady is making 95 grain XTPs for the mak and with factory loads, these will achieve about .55" of expansion at around 13 inches of penetration in soft gel through 4 layers of denim i believe the test i saw was... this is impressive for such a simple, rather small blowback pistol... i was planning to convert such a pistol to the german 9x18 police cartridge which is essentially the same thing but with a more common .355" bullet, but with the XTPs available for hand loads i have less incentive to convert it

curious.. anyone ever considered installing a PPK thumb release?

 

[lincen]

I have two CZ-82's, and ten or so Makarovs. Enjoy both but shoot my Bulgarian Makarov the most. One definite advantage of the Makarov is that you can detail strip it and have it back together within an hour. Don't even think about detail stripping the CZ-82, 3-4 hours just to get one spring in place. Another plus is that all internal parts are readily available for the Makarov and will work in guns made in all four countries.

As to the Walther comparison, the Makarov is similar only in outside appearance, believe me. BUT the FEG PA-63 is a slightly modified Walther design. So much so that on a gunsmith video for the Walther PP and FEG's they use a PA-63 and just explain the difference in the Walther.

 

[BSA1]

One other thing to consider is getting extra magazines for them. I have not found a source for Makarov and only some P-64 mags that look well used.

With the CZ it is easy to find factory magazines in new condition.

When I brought my Mak and P-64 I made sure I got two magazines with them.

 

[jimbeaux82]

I have had both and I much prefer the CZ 82.