CZ ergos...why?
- Thread starter chris in va
- Start date
SteelChickenShooter
New member
I can't say why CZ ended up where they did on my P-01, but I'm glad they did. It is distinctly better in form and fit. Compared to others like XD and Glock- those just don't get me excited. Yes the G-34 is better at distance for targets. That is not the goal in this post. You wrap the hand on a P-01, feel it's heft, and feel the secure fit in the grip, and it just works right. I have and shoot XD's and Glocks for various reasons, but the fit of the CZ is quite better in my hand. If I was limited to just one 9mm, it would be the CZ P-01.
Despite my other posts about certain ammo, I do maintain this is the 9mm of choice for carry. I just have to do my part in making sure I don't load it up with an assortment of oddball ammo. As I said in a different post, my choice of a couple different brands of premium +P work just fine while assorted cheaper ammo did get stuck in the magazines. In the back of my mind, I do recall another post suggesting a magazine spring change. I may or may not do that.
Despite my other posts about certain ammo, I do maintain this is the 9mm of choice for carry. I just have to do my part in making sure I don't load it up with an assortment of oddball ammo. As I said in a different post, my choice of a couple different brands of premium +P work just fine while assorted cheaper ammo did get stuck in the magazines. In the back of my mind, I do recall another post suggesting a magazine spring change. I may or may not do that.
Last edited:
Why not? What exactly qualifies Czech Republic as "obscure"?
Ancient people in a land with a long history of bloody conflict.
It does not surprise me that a manufacturer from that part of the world (or indeed any other part of the world for that matter) is capable of producing a pistol that feels right in the hand to many people.
Ancient people in a land with a long history of bloody conflict.
It does not surprise me that a manufacturer from that part of the world (or indeed any other part of the world for that matter) is capable of producing a pistol that feels right in the hand to many people.
Unlike other Warsaw Pact countries, the Czechs had a rather long history of innovative, interesting, and well made firearms design and many Czech designs have long been popular throughout the world including the CZ-27 pistol, ZB-26 light machine gun, and Vz-24 Mauser rifle. Also, unlike many of the communist "comrades" the Czechs were fairly well known for bucking the Soviets when it came to small arms. The Czechs never adopted any of the common Soviet small arms like the Mosin-Nagant, SKS, AK-47, TT-33 Tokarev, or Makarov PM but rather chose to use their own indigenous designs such as the Vz-52 rifle and pistol, Vz-58 Assault Rifle, Vz-61 Skorpion submachine gun, and CZ-82 pistol. Finally, the CZ-75 was designed from the start for export sales so it is unsurprising that the Czechs would borrow popular features from other successful pistols including the 1911, GP-35 Hi-Power, Sig P210, and Walther P38.
chris in va
New member
Interesting history lesson.
It seems every country has a certain focus on firearm design and was curious why CZ went the route they did.
It seems every country has a certain focus on firearm design and was curious why CZ went the route they did.
Sparks1957
New member
Good one! I've always thought CZ was a descendent of the Sig 210 primarily.
Redhawk5.5+P+
New member
One of the most copied guns designed is the CZ75. Why is that?
From what I read one time the history of CZ (including the Nazi take over in WWII) in a mag, CZ (1975=75) was under the rule of the iron curtain. They didn't want to patented it because they were being so secretive. Well, that didn't work very well, did it?
It just took one, Pandora's box was opened.
From what I read one time the history of CZ (including the Nazi take over in WWII) in a mag, CZ (1975=75) was under the rule of the iron curtain. They didn't want to patented it because they were being so secretive. Well, that didn't work very well, did it?
It just took one, Pandora's box was opened.
Redhawk5.5+P+
New member
FYI The CZ75 (not CZ75B) in the early 80s was bringing a very big premium ($400-$500?) in the USA, if, you could get one.
peacefulgary
New member
The CZ 75B Single Action that I had was "okay" but certainly nothing to rave about.
Pond James Pond
New member
Firstly, I have to ask:
Why not? Are there only certain countries that are supposed to think of this side of their product's design?
"Right! Remember lads! This is the Czech Republic, OK? So no wasting R&D on how the poxy guns feel! Got that?"
Secondly, I agree with some of the statements about comfort in the hand: there are a number of guns that people rave about, ergo-wise, before any other feature. It must be fairly highly placed in their list of priorities, hence so should it be with the manufacturer.
Why not? Are there only certain countries that are supposed to think of this side of their product's design?
"Right! Remember lads! This is the Czech Republic, OK? So no wasting R&D on how the poxy guns feel! Got that?"
Secondly, I agree with some of the statements about comfort in the hand: there are a number of guns that people rave about, ergo-wise, before any other feature. It must be fairly highly placed in their list of priorities, hence so should it be with the manufacturer.
shared traits, and yet very different.
http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Browning and CZ.htm
There are number of things they have in common, but enough differences that they are two different firearms.
The Czech Rep. might have been on the other side of the iron curtain and forced to take certain cues from the Warsaw Pact in what they carried. They always looked to improve designs and create new ones.
http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Browning and CZ.htm
There are number of things they have in common, but enough differences that they are two different firearms.
The Czech Rep. might have been on the other side of the iron curtain and forced to take certain cues from the Warsaw Pact in what they carried. They always looked to improve designs and create new ones.
Redhawk5.5+P+
New member
Magnum Wheel Man
Post #9
If it aint broke.........
Post #9
If it aint broke.........
Magnum Wheel Man
New member
OK... whatever... the High Power is the 1st of what I would call ergonomic semi autos ( maybe I'm forgetting something ??? ) seem the next I can think of is the CZ -75... while the pattern is not exact, both guns fit my hand like they were made for it... I guess that's more what I was trying to say...
color me lazy... "pretty much copy" = 2 fully typed lines above...
color me lazy... "pretty much copy" = 2 fully typed lines above...
Hmmmm, let's see. Steel frame with separate grip panels, to accommodate hi-cap 9mm mag? Yep. Tilting barrel lock-up, with radial lugs? Yep. "Browning" lower lock-up on slide stop pin? Yep. Thumb safety at rear of frame, allowing cocked-n-locked carry? Yep.
I'm looking for things on the two guns that AREN'T almost the same, and can find only the trigger action to separate them? Just what about them is "totally different"?
Really, I can't think of two guns that could be more alike, but still be different? Well, OK, the S&W Sigma is pretty much a copy of the Glock, but beyond that?
CZ75, DA/SA. Browning HiPower, SA.
CZ75, slide rides inside frame. BHP, slide rides outside frame.
As Tom Servo noted, barrel linkup in CZ75 is closer to that of SIG P210 than that of BHP.
CZ75, 16+1 with flush mag, up to 18+1 with mags with extended floorplates; BHP, 13+1 (maybe, because some guns don't run well in +1 mode), up to 15+1 (same caveat) with new Mec-Gar mags.
The BHP has a slimmer slide/frame width, and will fit in most 1911 holsters.
The BHP has a magazine disconnect safety.
The trigger reaches are not the same. A lot of people complain about the reach on the CZ75 being too long. I have long fingers, and find the reach on the BHP too short.
Note that the short reach on the BHP was an intentional design feature, as Browning (and later Saive, after Browning's death) were tasked with shortening the reach from that of the 1911, which many at the time considered too long for medium or smaller hands.
The CZ75 was designed with a gloved hand in mind, and IMO works better if gloves are worn than does the BHP.
The thumb safety on the CZ75 is further forward, higher, and larger than the thumb safety on the BHP.
The CZ75 eats +P all day without a problem. Do that to an earlier (pre-Gen III) BHP, and you'll wear out your locking lugs and possibly crack your frame.
Otherwise, yes, they have indented backstraps, double column magazines, double tapered slides, and typically come in 9mm (or sometimes .40).
They look sort of similar. They really are not. (I've owned both.)
CZ75, slide rides inside frame. BHP, slide rides outside frame.
As Tom Servo noted, barrel linkup in CZ75 is closer to that of SIG P210 than that of BHP.
CZ75, 16+1 with flush mag, up to 18+1 with mags with extended floorplates; BHP, 13+1 (maybe, because some guns don't run well in +1 mode), up to 15+1 (same caveat) with new Mec-Gar mags.
The BHP has a slimmer slide/frame width, and will fit in most 1911 holsters.
The BHP has a magazine disconnect safety.
The trigger reaches are not the same. A lot of people complain about the reach on the CZ75 being too long. I have long fingers, and find the reach on the BHP too short.
Note that the short reach on the BHP was an intentional design feature, as Browning (and later Saive, after Browning's death) were tasked with shortening the reach from that of the 1911, which many at the time considered too long for medium or smaller hands.
The CZ75 was designed with a gloved hand in mind, and IMO works better if gloves are worn than does the BHP.
The thumb safety on the CZ75 is further forward, higher, and larger than the thumb safety on the BHP.
The CZ75 eats +P all day without a problem. Do that to an earlier (pre-Gen III) BHP, and you'll wear out your locking lugs and possibly crack your frame.
Otherwise, yes, they have indented backstraps, double column magazines, double tapered slides, and typically come in 9mm (or sometimes .40).
They look sort of similar. They really are not. (I've owned both.)