I am going to get a CZ 75. I have shot one in 9 mm and liked it a lot. This gun would be to add to my collection and to use as a plinker. Now my problem is what caliber to get. Since I live in California I can't buy hicaps so I was thinking of buying the .40 (my feeling is if I am stuck with ten rounds I might as well get the .40). I am little concerned about durability and reliability since the CZ 75 was built around the 9mm. What is your guys opinions?
CZ 75 .40 vs 9 mm
- Thread starter mrat
- Start date
I live in Cali to and have a CZ 75 in .40 for the same reason,real nice,accurate shooter.OTHOH I shot a friends 9mm CZ and was amazed at how much fun it was to shoot.The CZ's weight makes it an excellant platform for the 9mm.Its more accurate and follow up shots are alot faster.I'm seriously thinking about buying one,even though I swore I'd never buy a gun meant to hold 15 rnds while I was limited to 10.
mrat,
I own both. The CZ 75B in .40 cal. that I own is more accurate than its 9mm brother, assuming you can trust the test target sent with each gun. The .40 handles recoil well and the "snap" isn't quite the issue as it has been with some other forty's I've fired. I really don't think you could go wrong with either one.
I have found no indication that the .40 is any less durable than the 9mm. Stronger recoil spring, full length recoil guide and heavier slide appears to do exactly what they should be doing.
--
Mike
I own both. The CZ 75B in .40 cal. that I own is more accurate than its 9mm brother, assuming you can trust the test target sent with each gun. The .40 handles recoil well and the "snap" isn't quite the issue as it has been with some other forty's I've fired. I really don't think you could go wrong with either one.
I have found no indication that the .40 is any less durable than the 9mm. Stronger recoil spring, full length recoil guide and heavier slide appears to do exactly what they should be doing.
--
Mike
The CZ75b's, like the High Powers just seem better fitted for the 9mm. Just MHO, and YMMV. Plinking and .40 just don't go together unless you handload. 9mm is cheap enough that you could almost save the cost of another CZ in ammo over a year or so of plinking. Course I'd download the .40 to save wear and tear on the gun anyhow, so it doesn't matter much to me.
Basicly, I'm with Sports. Make mine 6 .44's
Basicly, I'm with Sports. Make mine 6 .44's
The 9mm version of the CZ75 SA seems a bit more accurate.
According to the HANDGUNS test. 9mm is cheaper, and more
available overseas.
We will never see a 10mm CZ..and a .357 SIG is possible
by using a custom barrel in the .40s.
If you guys don't like the 75B, there is the CZ-100
and even the Z-40.Both are going for around $300
FREE CZ-USA Patches for new members!
Power Up!
According to the HANDGUNS test. 9mm is cheaper, and more
available overseas.
We will never see a 10mm CZ..and a .357 SIG is possible
by using a custom barrel in the .40s.
If you guys don't like the 75B, there is the CZ-100
and even the Z-40.Both are going for around $300
FREE CZ-USA Patches for new members!
Power Up!
I own both and shoot both.
But I shoot the nine much more often than I shoot the forty.
It just feels better and is more accurate in my hand.
At 30 feet, I can put 5 into a space the size of dixie cup with the 9mm. The forty groups are larger, more like the size of a fist.
It's not a big difference, but it's a difference.
All things considered, gimme the nine. In a defense situation, a well placed nine mm serves the same as a well placed forty... and if you need more than ten shots, well... you should've called for backup earlier.
But I shoot the nine much more often than I shoot the forty.
It just feels better and is more accurate in my hand.
At 30 feet, I can put 5 into a space the size of dixie cup with the 9mm. The forty groups are larger, more like the size of a fist.
It's not a big difference, but it's a difference.
All things considered, gimme the nine. In a defense situation, a well placed nine mm serves the same as a well placed forty... and if you need more than ten shots, well... you should've called for backup earlier.
VictorLouis
New member
I prefer the nine, but wouldn't steer you away from the .40. As mbott said, the design appears to be more than adequately beefed-up to handle it.
cz75
I shot my friends cz's in both 9 and 40 and then went out and bought an EAA Witness in both calibers. The EAA is an exact copy (as is the baby eagle) of the CZ's at a much lower price, and IMHO just as reliable and accurate. I used my .40 Witness as an IPSC gun for two years (read several thousand rounds, practice and compitetion) with great accuracy and no breakdowns. Even if you decide on the CZ, take a look at the Witness factory mags, they'll work fine and are much cheaper.
cjviper
I shot my friends cz's in both 9 and 40 and then went out and bought an EAA Witness in both calibers. The EAA is an exact copy (as is the baby eagle) of the CZ's at a much lower price, and IMHO just as reliable and accurate. I used my .40 Witness as an IPSC gun for two years (read several thousand rounds, practice and compitetion) with great accuracy and no breakdowns. Even if you decide on the CZ, take a look at the Witness factory mags, they'll work fine and are much cheaper.
cjviper
I live in Kali and am considering this very question. I went to the range on Saturday and rented both (shot them next to my SigP226 in .40).
My results:
The CZ handles the forty a little better than the Sig. The steel frame and lower bore helped. Also, I was more accurate with the .40 than with the 9mm. I know it's just me, but how I shoot it is what counts. I was shooting very consistent one hole groups at 30ft (slow fire). I was not that impressive with the 9mm. The 9mm has more of a distracing snap to me than the .40 did...not the expected result. Also the 9mm jammed twice, but I'm sure it was just dirty.
I walked away very impressed with the .40S&W and will probably choose it. Besides the couple extra dollars/box of ammo savings, I didn't really see a reason to get the 9mm. Give me a hi-cap mag and my mind might change.
As a non-hi-cap, non-carrying Kalifornian the .40 S&W CZ-75 came out on top!
My results:
The CZ handles the forty a little better than the Sig. The steel frame and lower bore helped. Also, I was more accurate with the .40 than with the 9mm. I know it's just me, but how I shoot it is what counts. I was shooting very consistent one hole groups at 30ft (slow fire). I was not that impressive with the 9mm. The 9mm has more of a distracing snap to me than the .40 did...not the expected result. Also the 9mm jammed twice, but I'm sure it was just dirty.
I walked away very impressed with the .40S&W and will probably choose it. Besides the couple extra dollars/box of ammo savings, I didn't really see a reason to get the 9mm. Give me a hi-cap mag and my mind might change.
As a non-hi-cap, non-carrying Kalifornian the .40 S&W CZ-75 came out on top!