What's the big deal about CZ??

J

Jim LaRue

Inactive
At the risk of sounding ignorant (not that it would be something new ;) ) I was wondering what all the to do is about CZ firearms. I have shot them and don't see them as anythign special, and yet there are always numerous posts about them here in the forum.

If any of you would care to expound upon this problem maybe I can be enlightened, and understand the CZ phenomenon a little better.
 
The best buy going right now. But, have noticed the prices are starting to creep up there now that people are seeing how good they are. At $1500 , Les Baer guarrantees his guns to shot 1" at 25yds. My CZ75B military overrun did the same thing at $299 (I had a good day). The gun is just plain durable, accurate, ergonomic, reliable and so on and so on.
 
"What's the big deal about CZ??"

People like to think they're "in the know" with some purchase they made based on online hype.

Yes, I Ateam, will be the first to admit I am one of those people.

At the ranges I have been to, no one seems particularly impressed by the CZ's build quality, trigger, or the fact it chokes every so often. Only at forums like this do I see the fanaticism. It's a good deal, not a "Gee whiz I gotta have it !" deal, but a decent gun for the price.

Ruger, Daewoo, and a few other second tier gun manufacturer's have handguns in the same ballpark, they just don't get as much attention.
 
I have two CZ's, a 75B Mil and a PCR. They would be amongst the last two guns I would ever sell and I have a bunch of higher priced guns. I have never seen one "choke" or of poor quality or with a poor trigger. Its not just webboard hype. They are the real deal.
 
Less expensive guns always seem to get a boost on these forums. People decry the power of a .380, but a Makarov with 9x18 is OK because you can buy them for $125, even though their accuracy is 3rd world.

I have a CZ 85 Combat. It is a good pistol, comfortable, and decently accurate. CZ-USA has supported me well. But it needed a trigger job, the sights aren't as good as my SIG by a long shot, and the internal fit and finish is poor - it's not a collector's item by any measure. The test Gunweek did versus the Beretta showed it to be slightly less accurate - http://www.gunweek.com/archives/2002/feature0110.html It seems a lot of people like the idea of getting a bargain, and it still is, but it is by no means perfect, nor even competitive of the top 9mm's.
 
Good deal for the money and IMO, fit and finish both inside and out were excellent. I have an 85 Combat. I found the internal fit and finish to be as good as anything out there.

VVG,

Maybe your gun was made on a Monday by someone with a hangover or something. I found the internal fit and finish to be every bit as nice as my Belgian made BHP that I have had for 20 years. I have heard this before about CZ's however. Mine is a very recent acquisition and maybe quality control has improved.
 
Never owned one but................

Shot a friend's full-sized all metal .40 cal. Yeh, I'm surely impressed with everything about it. Field strippped, it shows nice quality and workmanship. Sights are great. It has that "inside-out slider connection where the slide fits down inside the frame rails which would seemingly make it a little more rigid and sturdy.
Exellent ergonomics (uh fits yer hand real good..) and heavier weight soaks up recoil.
 
In my experience, a CZ-75 is arguably the best appliance-grade 9mm pistol available. Easy to understand, easy to operate, easy to hit things with. No memorable bad habits; no green rubber parts to cause controversy. The Honda Civic CRX of service pistols. Or, put in culinary terms, like the best vanilla ice cream you've ever eaten.

I don't own one, nor will I buy one, but I'd feel very well-armed were I issued with one.

'coach
 
I have two CZs and I'm working on getting a third.

My first, a CZ-75, was purchased after comparing them to a Beretta 92FS and a Taurus PT-92. The CZ was just more comfortable for me, just as reliable as the 92FS and cost much less so that's the one I got. My second, a CZ-70, was purchased because it was real cheap at a gunshow and I just liked it.

Both CZs have been great fun to shoot and I haven't had one problem with either. That makes me sold on them.

Sure, there are lots of other good pistols out there. Makarovs and Rugers look like great deals. I'd buy a Ruger if Bill was more supportive of our rights.
 
CZs are the rarest of rare birds in the gun world - a real honest-to-god bargian. I have two (three tomorrow!), my father has another one, and a good friend has yet another. I'm pretty familiar with modern CZs, and here are my observations.

Let's go down the line -

First off, they work. The only time I've ever had a CZ choke was one that went over 5k rounds without cleaning under the extractor. I drove out one pin, pulled the extractor, scrubbed it out, and finished the match. No more bobbles.

They are accurate. Not bullseye-gun accurate, but not bad. I can keep every round in the -0 area at twenty-five yards offhand. Part of this comes from the fact that they offer guns that can be carried cocked-and-locked. Not many manufacturers do.

They have good triggers. Most could use a trigger job out of the box, but most guns from any manufacturer could use a trigger job out of the box. Poor factory triggers are a way of life these days, but CZs are better than most.

Magazines, including 15-rounders, are cheap and easy to find.

All this, for half the price of a new SIG Classic, and two-thirds the price of a new Glock.

There are things I don't like about CZ75s (the B-model firing-pin safety, the serrated trigger on the PCR, the pain-in-the-butt mainspring release) but overall, they're the best gun for me out there.

My question is, why aren't they more popular? Really.

- Chris
 
I've shot CZ75's, 97's and 85's, and 40's, as well as a Baby Eagle in .40S&W (close relative of the CZ75 family). I'm not terribly impressed with any of them. I find that the triggers are just hard for me to get used to - they are very stiff in DA, requiring a lot of work just to get them going back - and once I start the pull, I just seem to suddenly 'yank' through them and spoil my aim.

The CZ75 and 40 that I shot both seemed to dislike me. The 40 jammed a few times (though the gun was nearly new), and the 75 apparently broke a part on one shooting trip with it(not sure, as the gun wasn't mine and my friend only briefly explained to me what happened - something like the guide rod came apart or something). It kept shooting, much to it's credit, but began to jam every few rounds. It's choked on Winchester white box 147 gr and 115gr rounds. The 147 gr rounds had flat noses and seemed to get hung up on the base of the feed ramp with alarming regularity.

For about $300-$350, I think they are ok, but I much prefer my $320 AO 1911 - much better trigger, and hasn't choked yet!
 
In general, I was raised on S&W, Ruger - all of the mainstream guns. Berettas, Sigs, H&K's were newer when I was growing up.
After 30 years of gun exposure to find a "new" gun that is the same quality and priced quite a bit lower than the other guns of comparible quality, accuracy and function is really something cool in "my" gun world.
I learned of CZ's just last year and bought one. It impressed me alot. The second week I had my CZ83 .380..we did a 25 yd "ransum test" and it shot 1.900" at 25 yds with Win. S-Tips with a 5 shot group. I didnt know how well the gun shot at the time and MANY people at the range were oooing and aaahing, they all wanted to know what "pocket gun" just shot bette than their Sig or 1911 did. Since then, I have owned a couple more and they have been good guns. I had a Compact that had teething problems but got it working as it should. I have shot 75's, 85's, 83's and 100's all are on par with the other "better guns" out there.
I wont scream the praise of the "almighty CZ" from my podium, but as people have replied in this same thread....for what you get for your money and for how little this old gun company is known
in the states....they are worth a mention, well ok, alot of mentions. They are one of the generally one of the best guns around and at a very good price.
Shoot well
 
My $.02 worth....

I own three CZ handguns. My CZ83 has unquestionably the finest, smoothest, just plain nicest trigger pull (both SA & DA) of ANY handgun I've ever fired. I own a variety of makes and models - old & new, S&W, Ruger, Beretta, etc. - and this CZ83 is hands-down, goin'-away, the best trigger in the whole bunch.

Both my CZ83 and CZ75 Compact are very nice shooting guns in every respect. The trigger on the 75 is not as smooth as the one on the 83, but it's still great.

None of them has ever FTF. I wouldn't presume to estimate the number of rounds through each of them, but in the thousands - and NO FTF or FTE.

Accuracy wise, they'll outshoot me. ;)

Then - when you figure the CZ cost relative to the high dollar jobs - the CZ's look even better.

They may not be able to leap tall buildings in a single bound, but they're just as fast as a speeding bullet. :D :p
 
I think some ignorant people look down on CZs because they are ex-Soviet Bloc in origin. I've owned a CZ-75B, along with SigSauers and Glocks, and got plentiful trigger time with multiple Beretta M9s. Functionally, it was infallible with all ammunition (115-147gr, hollowpoints, handloads, etc.). Which can't be said for the Berettas I've shot, which had a funny habit of choking on NATO FMJ. In terms of "part polishing," the CZ was comparable to the Glock and Beretta, with the SigSauer being the nicest inside & out. The SigSauer had a better trigger and was tighter and smoother than the CZ, but again the CZ was comparable to the M9 or Glock in this regard. And of course the SigSauer costs about twice as much as a CZ-75B, so it should be nicer. And of course 15 round magazines are cheap and abundant.

I got rid of mine, but it helped make up for my purcase of a SIG P210, which beats the hell out of all of the above. :D
 
I just bought a new CZ 75B a couple weeks ago. It is a very good gun at a good price. It's not my favorite gun, but it really does shoot well. I've had no problems of any kind with it and fit and finish are excellent. The only things I don't like about it are the sights and the DA trigger could be better, but it's not bad.

Overall I really like it, but I wouldn't really miss it too much if I got rid of it.

The main factors that caused me to get it were:
1. .22 Kadet conversion kit
2. 15 round magazines
3. Price

Once I get the Kadet kit I'm sure I'll get a lot more use out of it!
 
Gebelleh- When you get you Kadet follow the fitting instructions and there is more advice on the czforum. They can be a little ammo sensative, CCI Mini-Mags are working great in mine.

I bought a CZ cause I didn't have one and I'm not disappointed, equal to guns costing several hundred dollars more.
 
To VVG

Your experience with the 85 Combat differs greatly from mine.

The trigger wasn't wonderful, out of the box, but the only gun I've had that was wonderful out of the box was a SIG P-210-6. I had mine 'smithed, and later had a better sear installed.

My IDPA shooting buddies were impressed, and four of them have bought 85 Combats, too, this past year, and several others have bought 75Bs.

After a trigger job, the Combat it would shoot with my P-210-6 and Browning Hi-Power out to 20 yards. Beyond that, the P-210-6 would outperform any handgun I've ever shot. (I sold it last year to help finance a pickup truck.)

Under 20 yards, I preferred (and still prefer) the CZ-85 combat: it just fit me better. Mine has the best DA trigger of any semi-auto gun I've owned, including a SIG P-239, a SIG P-220, and a Beretta 96 (made in Italy.) Unlike most SIGs I've shot, I find the DA/SA transition to be easy... The SA trigger isn't quite up to custom 1911 standards (I have one of those, too), but its pretty darned good...

Sounds like you've got a Grapefruit. (Not quite as sour as a lemon.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top