CZ75 vs Sig P226

I had a CZ-85 Combat that I dropped hundreds of dollars worth of gunsmithing into, and it would still lock open with rounds in the mag, and fail to extract once every other mag.

HKfan said:
I am not an ardent defender of the CZ or anything, but it is annoying for me as an enthusiast and misleading for the poster with the original question for people to just say that the P226 is better "hands down" or as just said "not as reliable."

I would like to see those two posters just explain from experience or even what they have been told why they say this is so.

Just because the CZ has not gone through military tests says NOTHING about how reliable it is. In fact, CZ's have fairly loose tolerance levels and so I would suggest that it may do quite well.
Click to expand...

Dude, seriously: Listen to yourself. It bugs you when people "... just say that the P226 is better "hands down" or as just said "not as reliable.", then you say "...fairly loose tolerance levels and so I would suggest that it may do quite well.

:)

Tolerance levels have zilch to do with it, in isolation. My friend's SVI never malfunctions, and it's built so tight it's like a swiss watch... that said, I've never had a malf with my Block.

Go to the CZ forum, and read the hundreds of threads about failures to extract, and failure to lock open. CZ quality has totally #### the bed, IMHO.

I'd shoot an SP-01 in production, if I thought CZ could build a good gun. Once bitten, twice shy.
 
Bartledan said:
Dude, seriously: Listen to yourself. It bugs you when people "... just say that the P226 is better "hands down" or as just said "not as reliable.", then you say "...fairly loose tolerance levels and so I would suggest that it may do quite well.

:)
Click to expand...
I see that you edited out the talking out of your ass part but I still have to say HKfan's point is a fair one. There's a lot of #### talking going on in these forums in general, and it's not uncommon for people to call a high quality firearm from a reputable gunmaker a piece of crap because they don't like the plastic frame, the location of the mag release or because some other subjective/trivial matter. I'm not defending CZ (I have little personal experience with those guns) and not saying that the issues that you have experienced are genuine, but it would really help if people mentioned specific examples of malfunctions that they personally experienced when dumping on what is generally considered a quality firearm.
 
capp325 said:
I see that you edited out the talking out of your ass part but I still have to say HKfan's point is a fair one. There's a lot of #### talking going on in these forums in general, and it's not uncommon for people to call a high quality firearm from a reputable gunmaker a piece of crap because they don't like the plastic frame, the location of the mag release or because some other subjective/trivial matter. I'm not defending CZ (I have little personal experience with those guns) and not saying that the issues that you have experienced are genuine, but it would really help if people mentioned specific examples of malfunctions that they personally experienced when dumping on what is generally considered a quality firearm.
Click to expand...

What I edited out was something that I felt, on re-reading, didn't come across in the friendly and joking manner it was intended. In a real conversation, my tone of voice and body language would have revealed that. Neither of those is perceptible on a message board, so I edited. Your bringing it up is a bit of a #### move, pal. Incidentally, my tone of voice right now is derisive, and my body language involves two upthrust middle fingers.

bartledan said:
Wow, I wish someone told that to my CZ, which was the least reliable piece of #### I've owned.
Click to expand...

Notice the "my CZ"... Does that lead you to believe it was some sort of magical, mystery CZ? Some sort of CZ dream I had? I HAD a CZ. It pissed me off royally.
 
Bartledan said:
What I edited out was something that I felt, on re-reading, didn't come across in the friendly and joking manner it was intended. In a real conversation, my tone of voice and body language would have revealed that. Neither of those is perceptible on a message board, so I edited. Your bringing it up is a bit of a #### move, pal. Incidentally, my tone of voice right now is derisive, and my body language involves two upthrust middle fingers.
Click to expand...
This may or may not be palpable to you, but I do not possess the ability to read you mind and extrapolate things that you have not stated explicitly. I would suggest to you that telling someone that they are "talking out of their ass" in response to a perfectly benign post does not exactly come across as "friendly". In fact, it does quite the opposite. Oh, and you can take those two upthrust middle fingers and shove them up your ass. Maybe that'll clear the massive stick you've got stuck in there.
 
capp325 said:
This may or may not be palpable to you, but I do not possess the ability to read you mind and extrapolate things that you have not stated explicitly. I would suggest to you that telling someone that they are "talking out of their ass" in response to a perfectly benign post does not exactly come across as "friendly". In fact, it does quite the opposite.
Click to expand...

THAT'S WHY I EDITED MY POST, GENIUS!
 
CZ is like Ruger, made of solid materials which should last a lifetime, but definately unremarkable and unrefined........
The high-end tuned IPSC CZ's are a different story, but then when you get into that price range there are better options.
 
CZ all the way for the price, and it is super comfy. The 97b can put a mag load on a paper plate at 100 m with elbows on the bench , gun held , not rested , for an 8 inch group.:cool: Never fired my 75 yet but it feels better in my medium size hand than the 97 B which is a handfull, but I like em both very much.
Frank
 
OK, I'll weigh in. I have a Springfield P9 (CZ clone, probably one of the better ones) and a SIG P226. The SIG feels a slight bit bigger in my hand...As for reliability, I haven't had any problems with either of them so far.
Fire both, see what you are comfortable with.
Oh, and ignore the 'Wizard of OZ' types standing behind their curtains pontificating about this one is definitely better or that one absolutely sucks. I have not encountered very many 'absolutes' in my so far short and uneventful life. Everything is subject to interpretation. Get whichever is best for you...
 
KDX said:
My mistake. I had assumed that the knock offs would feel similar to the original guns. I know the quality would not be same, but I don't anticipate shooting too much either.
Click to expand...

The feel of any gun is pretty subjective, so nobody can decide that but you.
 
Bartledan said:
Wow, I wish someone told that to my CZ, which was the least reliable piece of #### I've owned.
Click to expand...

:confused: :confused:
Well, as the purchaser of your 85 combat, I'd sure like to know what was up.

After a couple teething sessions down at the Edge (200+/- rounds), I would have to say it is now running like a champ (1500 +/- and counting).
I think it sucks that you felt like you banged your head against the wall with this one,:( but it shouldn't discourage you from ever owning another.

You wouldn't be 'Luckypierre' from the CZ forum would you?

Gentlemen, back to your regularly scheduled SIG/CZ debate.;)
 
I'd like to apologize for misreading the initial question. I feel the CZ has a much better feel interms of the grip than a sig. I find the sigs can be a bit bulky in comparison to other DS guns. However I do have to agree with Bartledan and IML for their comments/opinions on the CZ failing. At the last 4 three guns I've been to I've seen atleast one CZ at each fail. Could be ammo could be shooter, could be gun. Either way they always fail. As was mentioned STI 1911's and other brands don't follow this trend, and they seem to be a lot tighter in tolerance. The fact that the CZ hasn't been put through the same tests as other guns is a completely relevent point. FOr most of us it makes little difference, we're shooting paper for fun or competition. For other who's lives rely on good gear its paramount that these guns be proven. Last time I checked i haven't heard of or seen anyone in the sandbox packin a CZ. albeit that's not the best way to determine if a gun is quality or not but it sure does give a solid indication of what has proven itself enough to be trusted.

On a side note, lets not forget that CZ was using plastic components in its trigger groups. I believe they've switched to aluminum now, only after repeated failures. IN the end the CZ line of pistols is a descent gun but no where near as reliable or proven as others like the Sig line.

CF
 
beltfed said:
:confused: :confused:
Well, as the purchaser of your 85 combat, I'd sure like to know what was up.

After a couple teething sessions down at the Edge (200+/- rounds), I would have to say it is now running like a champ (1500 +/- and counting).
I think it sucks that you felt like you banged your head against the wall with this one,:( but it shouldn't discourage you from ever owning another.

You wouldn't be 'Luckypierre' from the CZ forum would you?

Gentlemen, back to your regularly scheduled SIG/CZ debate.;)
Click to expand...

Don't worry. I only flogged it after getting all the problems fixed. I dropped over $300 worth of gunsmithing into that thing.

Before I sold it, I put 200 rounds without a stoppage through it... after getting the chamber polished, replacing the extractor 3 times... aargh.

By that time, I was way to bitter to still shoot the thing.

"capp325" said:
Heh, that's one reason why I'm reluctant to buy used guns.
Click to expand...

I have not, nor will I ever try to rip someone off. Go have a peek at my feedback.

I ate, what, $400? $500? on a deal that gave beltfed an essentially new gun. Yeah, I sure am crooked:rolleyes:
 
However I do have to agree with Bartledan and IML for their comments/opinions on the CZ failing.
Click to expand...
:confused: what exactly are you dissagring with? I was simply saying that I heard from a lot of people about their problems with CZ's reliability....and I don't think Bartledan is making anything up.
 
Bartledan said:
I ate, what, $400? $500? on a deal that gave beltfed an essentially new gun. Yeah, I sure am crooked:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Bartledan said:
I had a CZ-85 Combat that I dropped hundreds of dollars worth of gunsmithing into, and it would still lock open with rounds in the mag, and fail to extract once every other mag.
Click to expand...
Your words, not mine.
 
Last edited:
Don't know why every time X VS Y will turn into a can of worms. But let us face this, those gun been use by a lot of people for so many years, what wrong they can be interms of designs and workmanship. I have a CZ 75B and is my sweet heart but I also want a SIG 226 or 220 in 9mm. Buy them both is the best way to do.
Trigun
 
Easy kids,

I was only indicating that the CZ in question, in fact now runs quite smoothly.
'Don't base your opinion on just one experience' was what I was trying to convey.

Good luck with the rest of this #### fight, I'll let myself out now.:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom