Was the CZ-75 ever tested by the U.S. military?

M

Martowski

New member
Wow! I'm posting up a storm today!

Seriously... I have a question. A book I have written by Gene Gangrossa, "The Complete Guide to Service Handguns." In that, he states that the CZ-75 bested the Beretta 92 in U.S. military trials in all categories except safety configurations.

On another board, someone had posted that the CZ-75 was used as the "control" piece and bested the Beretta 92 and the SIG 226 during trials.

So, what's the deal? Anyone heard of the CZ-75 being tested by the U.S.?
 
I'm not sure whether the CZ-75 was tested in the XM9 trials or not, but I know that all weapons tested were evaluated against the predecessor weapon (M1911A1). The only two that passed the test were the Beretta 92 and the Sig 226. The selection was based only on cost -- Sigs were actually somewhat cheaper for the weapon, but with the spare parts required under the IFB, the Beretta came in slightly cheaper.
 
Hello. I suspect that Weshoot2 has it right. Back then, trade with the eastern block was not nearly what it is today. I paid well over twice what one pays today for my CZ75s. I cannot remember if the CZ was in the tests or not, but if I can find my copy of the test report, I'll advise.
(Recall, too, that we needed a military base in Italy.)
Best.
 
Does anyone know if the test reports are available on-line anywhere? I've read, in other books, that three guns passed the XM9 tests.
 
Since the test were in the mid eighties I really doubt the CZ was included, remember we were still fighting the Cold War. While I wholeheartly agree that the CZ is a better pistol it did not meet some the the standards in place for the test. I believe the safety issue and lack of decocker.
 
Cz75 is NOT a clone of the High Power, it incorporates much of the BHP's design but it is not a clone. The CZ is more like the Offspring of a BHP and SIG 210. But no the BHP was not tested because it is Single action only.
 
I do not think they were ever formally tested since no contract would have been possible. I knew people who worked on the USAF and JSSAP (Joint Services Small Arms Project) and they never mentioned the CZ75. I'm sure we have some and some even may use em from time to time if ya know what I mean?

The military has been evaluating 9mm pistols ever since they have been around. Serious looking started around 1946.

Some shortened, lightweight 1911s in 9mm and some DA pistols from High Standard were looked at. The S&W M39 was a result of this military interest and it was looked at in 1955.

Between 1965-67 the P38, BHP, Colt Commander and S&W39 were looked at. In 1964 S&W made some M59 prototypes for the USN.

In 1977 the USAF looked at the Beretta 92, Colt SSP, BHP, Fast Action BHP, HK P9, P7 and VP70, S&W M459 and 459A, Star M28. The Beretta was a clear winner based on performance, not politics, from what I heard.

IIRC the XM9/10 trials looked at the Star, FN, HK, Walther, SIG, S&W, and Beretta. Ruger slipped into later trials too but did not pass. Glock and CZ were never in the running.

Nobody passed the first few runs, Beretta and SIG finally made the grade, SIG had the initial low bid, Beretta the final low bid. The slide problems caused a M10 trial that Beretta won again. The Navy bought a bunch of SIGs. The Beretta and SIG passed the compact trials (M11) and SIG (P228) won the bid. The SEALS bought about 2500 more SIG 226s and 1500 more Beretta 92 in 1999 (both models w the new heavier slides I hear).

There are still some S&W, Colt, Ruger revolvers out there too BTW (in 38 and 357). I have seen SEALS with USPs (not the Mk23) and USAF pilots and Navy NIS with Glock 19s...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top