CZ 50 in 32acp jam o matic?

gyvel- Ammoclip.com says their CZ50 mags are POS Triple K manufacture.
Click to expand...

You're kidding! Every mag I have bought from them has been of very high quality--Not what we have come to expect from Triple K. The steel used was thick, the followers worked very smoothly, and the floorplates weren't the cheap, folded sheet metal stamped "Mexico" typical of Triple K, and every one has been 100% reliable.

All I can say is maybe things have changed at Triple K.:o Egg all over my face.

And a new, original CZ 50 mag is $55.00 on eBay...:mad:
 
Last edited:
Sometimes even mag makers with bad reputations screw up and get it right. That may have happened, here, with the Triple-K mags.

That's certainly the case with the Pro-Mag mags for the Compact CZs. I've used them, off and on, for years without a problem. (I don't have any "compact" CZs at the moment.)

I first found those Pro-Mags during the Mag Ban, years ago, when Pro-Mag offered a magazine for the CZ-75B compact in .40 -- a gun that CZ said it was going to introduce, but never did. (Later models were similar, but not true "Compacts."

The Pro-Mag .40 mags worked beautifully with 9mm models, and a bunch of us on the CZ Forum used them with great success; they worked and were a lot cheaper than factory mags. The best outcome: we had hi-caps when hi-caps weren't allowed.

Did I use Pro-Mags for my full-size CZ? No -- Mec-Gar mags were available and at a very reasonable price.

(The Pro-Mags for the full-sized CZs also worked alright if you replaced the springs, but that made their price the same or higher than Mec-Gar.)
 
Last edited:
With good magazines, good magazine springs, good European 7.65 Browning ammunition (S&B, GECO, Fiocchi, or PPU), and proper maintenance and lubrication, neither the vz.50 nor the vz.70 is, in any way, a "jam-o-matic".
 
CZ 50 Mag Update

I blew 40% of what I paid for my(VG+) CZ 50 on a new mag from Ammoclip.com. Seller says it's Triple K manufacture. Here's what I got... nice, thick, STRAIGHT body, blued inside & out. Stainless Steel follower. Strong spring. Smooth operation by hand & 100 rnds. Sellier & Bellot .32 acp ball fed, fired & ejected w/0 problems. There are really few differences between vz 50 & vz 70 mags... 7 witness holes vs.8, different follower shapes & different shape of the poly pinkie rest. Both pistols can be found w/ flat bottomed mags. My new mags follower duplicates the CZ 50...the poly pinkie rest also. I am pleased.
 
CZ 50 Mag Update

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I blew 40% of what I paid for my(VG+) CZ 50 on a new mag from Ammoclip.com. Seller says it's Triple K manufacture. Here's what I got... nice, thick, STRAIGHT body, blued inside & out. Stainless Steel follower. Strong spring. Smooth operation by hand & 100 rnds. Sellier & Bellot .32 acp ball fed, fired & ejected w/0 problems. There are really few differences between vz 50 & vz 70 mags... 7 witness holes vs.8, different follower shapes & different shape of the poly pinkie rest. Both pistols can be found w/ flat bottomed mags. My new mags follower duplicates the CZ 50...the poly pinkie rest also. I am pleased.
Click to expand...

Apparently Triple K has reinvented itself. For years they sold cheap garbage made out of tin-can thick metal with welded seams that would split and (usually) crudely hand-filed followers made out of soft aluminum. Of course, the floor plates were generally only held in place by friction and always stamped "Mexico."

As I stated in my earlier post, I have bought several from Ammoclip, and they have all been of first rate quality. To find out they are Triple K just astounds me. There IS hope after all.:D
 
...when Pro-Mag offered a magazine for the CZ-75B compact in .40 -- a gun that CZ said it was going to introduce, but never did. (Later models were similar, but not true "Compacts."
Click to expand...

Walt, The CZ PCR is considered a compact by name. CZ did produce the CZ 40P, which is the same size as the compact 75B and PCR. It also has the same, alloy frame as the PCR/P01. There is question on how many they produced, but I love mine.






I do have the CZ 70 that was dressed up with Marschal grips. The grips were as expensive as the gun. No issues with feeding. It's a great, though heavy, gun with a very heavy DA pull but decent SA trigger. You can put lipstick on a pig.

 
larryh1108 said:
Walt, The CZ PCR is considered a compact by name. CZ did produce the CZ 40P, which is the same size as the compact 75B and PCR. It also has the same, alloy frame as the PCR/P01. There is question on how many they produced, but I love mine.
Click to expand...

I should have been clearer. A 75B Compact and a 75B compact denotes two different type of guns. The Compact was a steel-framed gun with a safety, while all other 75B compacts had alloy frames and decockers, with one or two exceptions (which were short-run models.) The frames of the steel and alloy models looked similar, but were subtly different. The 40B was classified as a compact, too. (That's one CZ I let get away I regret letting go, but I had an offer I couldn't -- at the time -- refuse.)

The P-01 and 40P you describe above all came out a number of years AFTER the CZ-75B Compact was first introduced, and long after the CZ-75B Compact in .40 was supposed to have been produced but wasn't. (Surprisingly, there were also a few CZ-85 Compacts produced back then, with ambi-controls and a safety... and a handful of 75B Compacts with alloy frames. I only personally know of one -- owned by a member of the CZ Forum.)

When CZ finally brought out their .40 versions of the various compact models, they had big problems with their compact mags, which is probably why the 40P used full-size mags with a spacer. The original .40 mags wouldn't function properly and the early/first "fix" was to modify the mags slightly and reduce capacity a bit.

I never really found out how that issue was resolved. I also don't know if anyone ever tried the Pro-Mag .40 compact mags in a .40 compact CZ, but I'd bet they would have worked fine.

The 40P used a 40B slide, and a frame based on the P-01 frame that had been modified to work with the 40B slide; the frame looked the same as the P-01 frame but wasn't. The PCR frame was different and the earliest ones weren't forged (like the P-01). The slides from the PCR or P-01 guns wouldn't operate on the 40P frame (or vice versa), and the Kadet Kit wouldn't function on the 40P frame, either. (I think a few people claimed to have made the Kadet Kits work on a 40P lower and a 40B lower, with some tweaking, but I never saw that confirmed.)
 
I never really found out how that issue was resolved. I also don't know if anyone ever tried the Pro-Mag .40 compact mags in a .40 compact CZ, but I'd bet they would have worked fine.
Click to expand...

I have tried to use the .40S&W Pro-Mags in my 40P. They are not totally reliable in feeding. 1 or 2 rounds per mag failed to feed totally. I tried new springs from Wolff with no luck. Same thing. The picture below is the Pro-Mag in the 40P. It looks a lot nicer. I feel the spacer looks clunky and adds a lot of length to the grip which negated the compact part of the grip. I'm still trying to figure out a cure for the Pro-Mags. Next I'm going to try SP-01 springs and then the full size mag springs.

 
This thread has a prominent ranking on google searches on one of my favorite milsurp firearms.

I just had to post that the negative rep of the CZ 50 circulating is undeserved. It is a great little milsurp firearm. Now that said, the magazines floating around are another matter. My original issue magazine, in my great shap CZ 50-- perfect. Other after market mag has given me the "jamomatic" routine of the original poster.

In my case, I have noticed that although looking newer, the feed spring in the poor working mags are much weaker and do not spit the cartridge out with as much force.

So, if you have such problems consider the possibility of the magazine being the problem.

If I had started with one of these bad knock off magazines I might have a different opinion of the cz 50.

However my experience with the 50 with a good mag has been very good.
 
What I would suggest first if dis assemble the mag that you have and streatch the mag spring a bit and then shove it back in and try it. If it fires the mag fine then you know that the spring in compressed.

I do not have your brand but have worked on others and the hotter .32acps that I load with a 90 grain bullet have seemed to make a difference.
 
Wolff Springs has springs for the CZ-50/70. You can order some from them. A lot of the used mags available have crappy springs.

Every horror story I read about 50s -- I had one some years ago -- tends to be mag related, and springs are often the cause.
 
Gavel, Don't rush right out and buy stock in Tripple K, I recently ordered several FI Model D mags from them for a neighbor's pistol. Upon arrival I knew we were in trouble as they sent Star DK mags that will not fit the FI.....sent them back and six months and several phone calls later I received the FI mags. In the package the plastic (originals are metal) floor plate on one was broken in two probably from stress of the spring and the second broke shortly after while loading it. Previously of three mags for a Star B one had the fixed floor plate blow off the bottome of a loaded mag as it was inserted into the pistol.
I no longer buy Tripple K but also advise others of my experiences.
Hopefully the OP's experience with his new mags will be free of disasters.
 
Does anyone know what the differences are between the CZ50 and CZ70? I know that the 70 is supposedly a slightly updated version, but I don't know what the changes were.

I lucked out and got my "surplus" CZ70 NIB. It came with an original magazine or two (too lazy to go check) and has yet to malfunction.

It would be fun to get some prettier grips for it, but the ones I have seen are kind of expensive.
 
Nodak1858 said:
From what I've read the safety is a bit different, and supposedly the metallurgy is better on the 70.
Click to expand...

I think it's the slide stop that is different. If I remember correctly, the slide will lock back with the last shot on the 70, but not on the 50. (Like everything else, my memory isn't as good as it used to be, and I haven't had a 50 or 70 for maybe 20 years.)

As for metallurgy: the steel in the 70 is better. I had a 50 and the slide's metal was such that it would gall where the slide hit the hammer as it cycled. After a while there would be a raised area on the underside of the slide that would continue to grow and cause the gun NOT to function. You could fix it for a while by filing it down. I didn't keep mine long enough to know whether it would eventually lead to failure.

All things considered, the 70 is the better weapon -- but I came to consider these guns more a novelty than anything else. The CZ-50/70 is very heavy for the caliber, and there are better .32s for comparable $$s -- and an array of small and .380s or 9x18 that are lighter, as easy to shoot, well, and not much larger.
 
Last edited:
I appreciate the replies. It is an okay little gun. More than anything I got it for my daughter to shoot as a range toy. But she is spoiled now. I got a great deal on a Colt 1903 and she doesn't care to shoot my other 32acp's anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top