CZ-75 vs Beretta 92?

Which one would you buy?

  • Beretta 92

    Votes: 52 37.4%
  • CZ-75

    Votes: 87 62.6%

  • Total voters
    139
  • Poll closed .
There are a lot of Beretta's for sale from the used police market which makes them one of the current best deals going for a good reliable all steel pistol.
The last time cheap used police guns were a great buy was when all those 5906 Smith's were flooded onto the surplus market.

But to the thread topic...

I bought a brand new Beretta Centurion many years ago (basically a 92 but with a flush barrel to the slide).
I like it a lot, but I recently bought a new stainless CZ-75 and I have to say that I much prefer the CZ for feel and accuracy. It's a natural pointer for me.

Still, if a person can pick up a nice 92 surplus for a good price, you probably shouldn't pass it up.
But, to choose between a new price 92 and a new price CZ, I think the CZ would be the no-brainer.
 
Thanks! I couldn't find any new CZ-75 BD for less than $350 and couldn't find any surplus ones either. Apparantly these Beretta 92S guns have been back to Beretta for inspection before being sold so they should ge good to go and I ordered an "excellent" advertised one with hand pick so it should be a good one.
 
Good choice. I prefer surplus and police turn-in pistols. It's hard to find a better deal than those Berettas. Be sure to write us a range report!
 
Thank you so much gang, I couldn't let the Beretta police gun slip by. I have a major weakness for unique guns with a story of Police or military service. We'll see how it is when it comes in!
Post pictures when you get it.

btw heads up, when you go to buy mags for it make sure you get ones have a cut out for the heal release.
Not all mags do these days, I know airtronic contract mags don't.. not sure about checkmate.. Beretta, MDS, and Mecgar 15's should have the cut, but get's spotty for the 17 and 18 rounders.

Ironicly you can also run Taurus mags in these, Last I knew factory 17 round Taurus mags still have the cut.

you'll see a rather sizable hole at the bottom as seen below.

i35og9.jpg
 
I've got both- used, and extremely happy with them both.

CZ- have a pre-B from 1992, bought my son one from 1988. The pre-B's have very smooth triggers (better than my Berettas). The guns do feel nice and are accurate.

Beretta- I have owned a 92FS for awhile now, this one made in 1994 in Maryland, with faded night sights, that was once LAPD (the gun does have P stamped on the trigger guard).

I've had several grips on both, have settled into rubber- factory for CZ, Hogue rubber panels (not the wrap) for the Beretta.

I just added a 92S to the mix, for about $275 total (gunbroker, shipping +ffl). The one I got has a nice blued finish, everything seems great.

I personally prefer the CZ 75 by a hair, but that's like saying I would prefer a Mustang over a Camaro. The guns are about equal in size, reliability. etc. They each have their own style.

I just looked at some of the usual sites, and I'm not currently seeing the used old CZ's for around $300. I have seen the Beretta 92S. What I'd recommend, then, is to get the Beretta 92S, and start putting a little away for the CZ, and when the next batch hits, get one of those too. And for the record, I voted CZ.
 
I've got both- used, and extremely happy with them both.

CZ- have a pre-B from 1992, bought my son one from 1988. The pre-B's have very smooth triggers (better than my Berettas). The guns do feel nice and are accurate.

Beretta- I have owned a 92FS for awhile now, this one made in 1994 in Maryland, with faded night sights, that was once LAPD (the gun does have P stamped on the trigger guard).

I've had several grips on both, have settled into rubber- factory for CZ, Hogue rubber panels (not the wrap) for the Beretta.

I just added a 92S to the mix, for about $275 total (gunbroker, shipping +ffl). The one I got has a nice blued finish, everything seems great.

I personally prefer the CZ 75 by a hair, but that's like saying I would prefer a Mustang over a Camaro. The guns are about equal in size, reliability. etc. They each have their own style.

I just looked at some of the usual sites, and I'm not currently seeing the used old CZ's for around $300. I have seen the Beretta 92S. What I'd recommend, then, is to get the Beretta 92S, and start putting a little away for the CZ, and when the next batch hits, get one of those too. And for the record, I voted CZ.
Yep! From what I hear Beretta ones should still have the lower hole.
 
Yep! From what I hear Beretta ones should still have the lower hole.
Yep! From what I hear Beretta ones should still have the lower hole.
If you get a 92S, a potential inexpensive source of spare mags are Taurus mags.

I was fiddling around with another pistol, a CZ 99 (Yugoslavian "Sig" type), and those have pretty rare magazines- dimensionally equal to Beretta (and Taurus), but has a front cutout for the mag release.

I ordered a couple of cheap Taurus mags to experiment with a dremel, and noticed that they have the hole in the base. I haven't shot with the 92S yet, but I can confirm that they fit and lock up, feed by hand cycling fine, and lock the slide back when empty.
 
I own both a CZ75B (Omega trigger system), and a Beretta 92FS INOX. I did a side by side comparison of the two a little while ago and here's my thoughts about the pistols.

I'll try to break it down point by point.

Overall feel of the gun (ergonomics mainly): The CZ75 with the factory rubber grips is BY FAR more comfortable than the Beretta, which is rather large and bulky. It's not a problem for me since I have L to XL hands. The shape of the grip of the CZ is far more contoured to the shape of your hand and thus, more comfortable. To compare apples to apples, my 92FS INOX also came with rubber grips from the factory. While it is comfortable to shoot, it's not anywhere near as comfortable as the CZ.
Slide manipulation of the Beretta is way easier since the slide is huge. Some people complain about the CZ slide because it sits inside the frame so not much slide real estate sticks out to grab on to. Once you get used to it, it's not really a big deal.

Size: The CZ is a smaller and slimmer design. It's great for carrying concealed.
The Beretta, on the other hand, is a large and bulky gun. It's really wide, especially on the slide, so concealing it will definitely be a bigger issue as compared to the CZ.

Weight: The CZ comes in at 32 oz's empty with no mag, the Beretta comes in at 28 oz's empty w/o mag. The INOX 92FS utilizes an aluminum alloy frame, and the open slide design so it comes in 4 oz's less. And yes, i actually weighed them.

Trigger: Since the CZ has the Omega trigger, it is by far better than the Beretta, and it just gets better with more rounds through it. I have probably close 5k rounds through my CZ and the trigger feels like its been worked. It's comparable to the Cajun gun works trigger mod that a lot of CZ owners do. Actually, I think it's better. In single action there's a fair bit of take-up, but there's a nice solid wall, virtually no creep, and a nice crisp break at about 3 lbs. In double action it's a fairly long pull, but that's what one expects from any double action. Weight comes in at about 7.5-8 lbs.
The Beretta trigger is great also. However, it's not as nice or crisp as the CZ trigger. Take-up is about the same, solid wall, but there's noticeable creep in the trigger, ok break. Pull weight in SA is approximately 4-4.5 lbs. Double action is probably closer to 10.

Shootability/recoil: Both guns are great shooters without a doubt. However, they're distinctly different. The Beretta is a delayed gas blowback design, and the CZ is recoil operated.
The Beretta is probably the softest shooting 9mm pistol out there in my opinion. The delayed blowback system in it delays the movement of the slide slightly which mitigates recoil A LOT. The CZ is noticeably more snappy than the Beretta.
So, in my opinion, the Beretta is easier to shoot faster accurately than the CZ, but the CZ is also fairly easy to shoot fast.

Accuracy: This, hands down, goes to the CZ. Simply put, the CZ is a tack driver. I consistently shoot groups with it that you can cover with a nickel at 10 yards (and I don't shoot it that often anymore). While the Beretta is accurate also, due to the just so so sights on it, it makes it more difficult to be consistent with it like the CZ.

Capacity: The CZ with the factory metal baseplate Mec-Gar mags holds 16+1, whereas the Beretta is 15+1. Obviously, there's aftermarket mags, and parts available for both guns to extend the capacity.

Aftermarket: CZ has grown in popularity A LOT in the last few years so the aftermarket has grown quite a bit for it. There's virtually anything available for both. From holsters, to sights, to grips, etc. This is a wash IMO.

Factory sights: They both suck quite honestly. The CZ sights are relatively small and harder to pick up quickly, however, this does lend itself well for concealment since they wont snag on anything. That said, they are easily replaceable with quality sights.
The Beretta sights are also bad. Not hard to pick up, but not the easiest to align for precision shooting (the reason why it's not as inherently as accurate as the CZ). The other really crappy thing about the Beretta is that the front sight is not replaceable; it's part of the slide. So unless you plan on getting some machine work done, you're stuck with it. The rear sight is replaceable.

The safety: The CZ safety is your typical safety. If you're familiar with a 1911; you're familiar with the CZ. As long as you practice disengaging it when you draw, it's a non issue. The safety cannot be engaged unless the hammer is back, so you don't have to worry about it. Or you can carry it cocked and locked just like a 1911.
NOTE: The CZ's with the Omega trigger can be converted to decocker only quite easily if that's all you want.
The Beretta safety on the other hand sucks because not only is it mounted on the slide, but because it's a safety and decocker in one. In my opinion, it should be one or the other, but not both. Also, switching the safety off is not anywhere nearly as intuitive as a conventional safety. This is where Taurus really did some good by putting the safety on the frame where it belongs (in my opinion).
NOTE: Taurus PT92's are made on Beretta's old machines, that Taurus bought from Beretta when they left Brazil.

All in all, I think both are great guns, and you cant go wrong with either one. Both guns have seen combat and have proven to be reliable, and well suited for both the self/home defense, and duty use.
The CZ is functionally easier to use, however, with a lot of practice, using the 92FS/M9 safety will become second nature. But that is the key to it, you MUST practice, otherwise in a defense scenario the safety of the 92FS could prove quite the hindrance when your adrenaline is pumping and you can't get your gun into the fight fast enough. Whereas on the CZ, just use the safety as a thumb rest and you'll disengage it every time.

Hope this helps.
 
Last edited:
Can't find much to disagree with anywhere in here, but I'll still vent my spleen. I shoot both these guns well, and did not hesitate to carry the Beretta when it mattered. I own a CZ, and prefer it to most of my pistols. It looks good, handles right, hits where I look very well.

I do not and will not own a 92 or any of its derivatives. I can neither forgive the Army nor abide that model Beretta for having retired the 1911. And I'm comfortable with that particular prejudice.
 
Buy the one that fits your hand best.
However, when the CZ-75 first came to Canada, several years before they were available Stateside(early 80's. No DA/SA then.), every one that came into the shop, BNIB, had a factory test target included. Every one of 'em had groups of about 2". Don't recall what ammo or the distance.
Been crying for years that they don't fit my hand. sniff. Fair bit bigger than a BHP(that does fit). Berettas don't fit either though.
Factory triggers are irrelevant. All new firearms require a trigger job.
"...for sale as surplus handguns..." Police guns maybe. Carried much shot and maintained little.
 
My gun-forum-unpopular view is that the CZ-75 series is very overrated for serious high round count shooting. The small parts quality, finish, and overall QC is inferior to Beretta's, in my experience and estimation.

On a personal level I have medium-large hands and find the 92 series very comfortable and the narrow slide of the 75 difficult to run at speed.

Using a G-variant Beretta with dovetailed front sights and quality grips eliminates most complaints about the 92, though frankly I think even the basic 92FS is still an excellent shooter.

I still own a 75, but 8 Berettas (4 92 variants, 2 PX4 variants, Cougar, Bobcat). I think the 92 is the superior pistol. Though for carry/HD I now use the Gen4 Glock 9mms, if I went back to a DA/SA system it would be Beretta in a heartbeat.

I have roughly 30,000 rounds through my 8 Berettas (and that estimate is on the low side) in about 9 years of shooting them and I have had 1 single failure ever: a cheap .22LR round out of my Inox Bobcat. :)

CZ does not make a bad gun at all, I just think Beretta makes a better one.

If you want a 75-series, I like the PCR Compact and P-01 the best. The PCR was the CZ I liked enough to own.

If you want a CZ to run seriously at high round counts, I'd go with their poly P07 or new P10. The P10C is a very nice G19 analogue, very comfortable in hand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
My gun-forum-unpopular view is that the CZ-75 series is very overrated for serious high round count shooting. The small parts quality, finish, and overall QC is inferior to Beretta's, in my experience and estimation.

High round shooting over a period of years or in one range session? The CZ 75 frame is steel whereas the Beretta is aluminum. I heard of CZ slide stops breaking but can't recall anything else.
 
Unless my memory is very hazy, the Beretta 92 is a short recoil gun. It does use a different method to lock/unlock the barrel as compared to the CZ-75, but it's not delayed gas blowback.
Correct it is not gas operated.
It uses a locking block.. or falling block, it's actually related to the p38.
Unlike a common browning tilting barrel locking system the 92 has a block with wings that fit into the slide, This locking block sits under the barrel.

The barrel rides on it's own set of rails, the slide and barrel recoil as one unit back a short distance where a pin is struck dropping and unlocking the barrel from the slide, at this point the barrel stays put and the slide continues rearward.

When the slide comes back it pushes the barrel forward causing the locking block to rise into the slots in the slide and linking back up.

This slide vs tilt action is one reason a 92 can often run a suppressor can without a recoil booster.

Another good thing about this system is it's virtually impossible for the gun to be fired out of battery.

This type of system was necessary for a open slide design.

P.S Some people think the "falling block" operation of a 92 means it wont' fire upside down.. Spoiler, it will :P it does not depend on gravity it is mechanically forced downward.

High round shooting over a period of years or in one range session? The CZ 75 frame is steel whereas the Beretta is aluminum. I heard of CZ slide stops breaking but can't recall anything else.
I've seen some pretty high round count guns from competition shooters, inexcess of 100k.
on the other hand I'd have to agree I would suspect the CZ's steel frame to win out in the end.

Still cracked frames aren't the weak point on the Beretta, it's the locking blocks.. this has greatly improved over time as Beretta kept improving that part and I think the 3rd Gen's are rated some where around 35k rounds expected service life.

Im not sure what internal weaknesses the cz has I never owned one.
 
Im not sure what internal weaknesses the cz has I never owned one.
A non-scientific observation about the CZ's; I have 2. Both pre-B's.

I always feed from the mag, never drop a rd in the barrel.

I have replaced the extractors on both, because they both broke off the claw.
 
Back
Top