Sig 226 vs. CZ-75BD

....Or the New S&W 9mm Version of the M52..

Hello. If your politics don't prevent it, I'm told and have read of S&W's new M52 chambered in 9x19mm with 10 rnd magazines.

Best.
 
regarding the NEW S&W 952...

My politics haven't kept me from getting one, but my budget has. (I got several expensive guns a year or two ago when I had a windfall or two.... The wind isn't blowing any more around my place.) <grin>

A friend has one, and I've shot it. Its nice, but nothing to get really excited about. The Model 52 has a much nicer trigger. He has a Performance Center 5906 and he prefers the 5906 to the 952. (Part of the problem is finding a holster for the 952; nothing available for it, yet.)

It looks like the S&W 952 was really designed as a carry gun that could compete in IDPA, and its pretty good in that respect. But the slide-mounted safety (also present on the Model 52) is a serious impediment to fast first shots. It didn't matter for bullseye shooting, though... (For which the M52 was designed.)

[Edited by Walt Sherrill on 03-22-2001 at 08:04 PM]
 
Hello. I fully agree with your assessment of the 952, but wasn't sure if you'd been made aware of it. I've never cared for S&W autos with the exception of the old M41 and M52.

Best.
 
I love my CZ75, although I went for the DA/SA with safety variant (I prefer carrying cocked-and-locked, as I have no use for trigger pulls over five pounds.) It's big, heavy, quite accurate (I get offhand four-inch groups at fifty feet, and I don't practice with it nearly enough), very reliable, and cheap! 15-round magazines are also cheap and easily available.

It's just me, but I can't stand Sigs. I've put several hundred rounds through a P226 and P228, and they don't fit my hands at all.

You really can't go wrong if you get the gun that you like, but if it were me, I'd get a CZ75 or two.

Later,
Chris

P.S. If you can, you might give the CZ75 SA a try. It's a single-action-only variant of the standard CZ.
 
Older CZs Are Best

If you're going to get a CZ get an older model, the ones with rounded trigger guard and scalloped slide serrations imported by Bauska. They're put together like fine watches with buttery smooth pulls. The new CZ75Bs, while reliable and fairly accurate, have ugly tool marks on the inside and the slide to frame fit isn't as good. Between a NIB P226 with a stainless slide and a CZ75B I'll take the former.

As for elite teams, well the P226 has plenty of credit, folks like British SAS and Navy SEALs issue it. It's no slouch. The CZ75 is mainly popular among ex-Iron Curtain countries, and countries in Latin America and Africa. That's not as important as what fits your hand better. Go with what feels right.
 
Sorry, but the "Ford vs Mercedes" analogy is utter nonsense. I own both CZs and Sigs....the CZ's are MORE ACCURATE, and better handling overall than the Sigs. Sigs are great pistols, but they are highly overrated. After owning both makes, I would definitely choose a CZ over a Sig any day regardless of price.
 
I have both a Sig 226 and and older CZ-75. My vote would be for the CZ. The trigger on the CZ in both double and single action is far better than the Sig. The CZ also feels a lot better in my hand and anybody that has tried it always comments on how good it feels. Accuracy and reliability are a toss up since both are good shooters and neither one has had any malfuncitons with any type of ammo. If you want to add on aftermarket acessories, the Sig is more popular here in the US so that is one advantage of the Sig. Some people will complain that the CZ doesn't drop the hammer but I don't see that as a problem. Matter of fact, I see it as an advantage. If you live any place where the temperature drops down low enough that you might want to wear gloves, the cocked and locked option of my CZ allows you to still get at th trigger while wearing heavy gloves. Can't say the same for my Sig. :( When you look at the higher price of the Sic, I really don't think it's worth the higher price I paid over my CZ. The CZ is a better made pistol and at a better price to boot.
 
I can't recall ever having purchased a 226(9mm), though there have been several P220s.:) I have shot the 226 many times, though, and I am familiar with it. I have to chime in for the CZ.

IMHO, I don't think you will find a better service-size 9mm out there, notwithstanding the excellent pricing currently available. That's just the 'icing on the cake'. You would be able to buy the 75, AND the excellent .22LR Kadet conversion kit, and still be ahead of the game vs. a new 226. As others have mentioned, though, it won't matter if the CZ doesn't feel good in your hand. Thankfully, there are a few more grip choices available for it which can make a big difference for you.

http://come.to/czforum.com
 
Get the CZ

CZ 75 BD. Better gun at a better price! ;) I've owned both (Sig 226 and CZ 75 B), I sold the Sig and kept the CZ. No regrets. I plan to get many more CZs down the road (that is how good they are). I don't plan to buy any more Sigs (except possible the 220 Stainless).

CZ 75 advantages IMO:

1. Better accuracy (in my hands)
2. Better durability (CZ steel frame and inner slide rails should be stronger than alloy frame of Sig).
3. Better balance
4. Less recoil (Sigs have more muzzle flip)
 
I own them both although the Sig 226 is in .357Sig.

I like the trigger on the CZ75B better.

The CZ75B is more accurate in my hand.

The Sig feels better to hold, has a better finish, and is slightly more reliable (although the difference isn't substantial).

I like the Sig more and would part with the CZ before I'd part with the Sig.

I owned the CZ first and it didn't stop me from want the Sig--especially with blackened stainless slide and the stippled grips.

It's worth more, but it's not a better buy--the differences aren't that substantial.

But you'll still want a 226 even after you buy a CZ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top