CZ pistols

sfbruner

Regular
Rating - 100%
43   0   0
Location
Over there
I am curious about what it is that makes the cz pistols quite popular. This is not a complaint about them as I admit I have limited experience but I was over at the local gun shop yesterday with a friend who is looking to purchase his first pistol and we both handled the 75b SA, the shadow, and the 85 models.

The 75b and the 85 felt real clunky and cheap. The SA trigger was horrible.

The shadow was a bit more solid.

In comparison the sigs and the 92 beretta quality and finish seemed much better.

My friend and I were not too impressed with the CZ but i know many of you swear by them so what is it about them?

Thanks.
 
I've never handled a recent CZ 75/85 that felt cheap. Not sure why you've come to that conclusion. The best selling point on the CZ is the natural and comfortable grip angle. The triggers on the 75B or 85B/Combat are gritty out of the box but smooth out nicely after some use and dry firing. The Beretta and Sigs have a very good quality finish and it's marginal better than the CZ's but that also depends on what finish you are looking at on the CZ. You need to shoot all 3 and you will feel the difference. The CZ is the easiest to do follow up shots with due to the lower bore axis meaning the slide is inside the frame so all the recoil goes straight down your arm.
 
Last edited:
And i Quote

sfbruner "The 75b and the 85 felt real clunky and cheap. The SA trigger was horrible.

The shadow was a bit more solid."

You gotta be smoing something.:onCrack:
 
The slide-inside-rails is similar to the Sig P210, but what I really like about the Shadow is how easy it is for the owner to improve an already good trigger, simply by replacing the mainspring.
 
CZ75b has a good trigger, Shadow has an excellent trigger. I had a CZ75b and bought a Sig 226 Elite with SRT, will never go back. Better ergonomics for me anyway. Nothing wrong with the cz75 or shadow, like others-you must be smoking the good stuff if you think they are cheap. Best bang/$ for a steel pistol.
 
Thanks for the input. Like I said I know they are very popular hence they must be pretty good' I personally liked the quality on the SIG and Beretta better but that's me.

I am not interested in 'my gun is a cz and its the best ever so you must be smoking something' replies so just save it or tell me what it is you love about it.
 
did you notice the price difference on the cz vs the beretta/sig? thats where the finish difference comes in.

cz strong points: grip fits most people very naturally, the trigger is very crisp and short for a double action, very low bore axis, natural and easy to get a very high grip on, a competition ready gun with 4 mags goes for $750

cz cons: stock finish is crap looking (but strong), the "stainless" version somehow costs more but its really just silver paint substituted for black paint.

Bias: I dont own a CZ of any sort and highly doubt I ever will (1911s!) but I do own a sig which I love but when I head out to compete it sits in the safe.

edit for clarity on what I ment about the finish
 
Last edited:
I am curious about what it is that makes the cz pistols quite popular. This is not a complaint about them as I admit I have limited experience but I was over at the local gun shop yesterday with a friend who is looking to purchase his first pistol and we both handled the 75b SA, the shadow, and the 85 models.

The 75b and the 85 felt real clunky and cheap. The SA trigger was horrible.

The shadow was a bit more solid.

In comparison the sigs and the 92 beretta quality and finish seemed much better.

My friend and I were not too impressed with the CZ but i know many of you swear by them so what is it about them?

Thanks.

"not impressed" by looking at it?
 
cz cons: stock finish is crap looking (but strong), the "stainless" version somehow costs more but its really just silver paint substituted for black paint.

cZ makes two stainless steel versions of the 75B; one is brushed and the other is polished. Where do you get the notion it is silver paint?
 
cz cons: stock finish is crap looking (but strong), the "stainless" version somehow costs more but its really just silver paint substituted for black paint.

cZ makes two stainless steel versions of the 75B; one is brushed and the other is polished. Where do you get the notion it is silver paint?

sorry, I should have been more specific. Those 2 are stainless but ones like the shadow duo tone often get labelled as stainless but its really just the silver version of the regular finish
 
Dollar for dollar you would be hard pressed to find a better pistol then the CZ Shadow,extremely well made,quality materials,and VERY accurate....You can pay more for something more flashy but that's all you'd be getting imo...
 
I own a CZ-75 Shadow, didnt plan to buy it, always wanted a SIG-226 but the feel in my hand sold it. Now i have both and the SIG rarely leaves the safe, the CZ has really impressed me for all of the reasons already stated above.

Most particularly the grip angle and as the shadow is a little heavier i found the ability to put a second shot on target very easy, it is not as snappy as other 9mm's

Dont get me wrong, i am not knocking the SIG and have no plans on selling it but for my ODPL shooting the CZ wins out every time.

As others have suggested you need to shoot them side by side and then decide for yourself.
 
CZ - reliable, decent trigger, decent accuracy, inexpensive, easy to clean.

Love my SP01. Not a single regret 5000 rounds later.

I dunno what feel cheap means.
 
Yeah I disagree about it feeling cheap. I do agree though that its a bit chunky and the trigger is not the best out of the box. Accuracy and reliability are excellent though and they are reasonably priced.
 
I would agree that the cosmetics of a Sig or 92FS would be better, but you are paying a premium for them. You can spend a fortune or a get a good trade off between money and reliability. You are the one paying the bills, buy something you like.
 
Back
Top Bottom