[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Can you imagine if the Army would have adopted the CZ-P09 instead of Sig? (Page 2 of 2)
|
Quoted: On a P07/09, you can switch between SAO and DA/SA. Quoted: Quoted: For general issue, I feel a DA/SA would have been a better selection. On a P07/09, you can switch between SAO and DA/SA. The p07/p09 can be a da/SA with safety or da/sa with decocker. Parts are included for both. I prefer da/sa with decocker for my use. |
|
Quoted: 21 rounds of 9mm will make your handgun a touch large but at least it's not a hk mark23 Quoted: Quoted: P07 is best polymer framed CZ. P09 is a huge bitch. 21 rounds of 9mm will make your handgun a touch large but at least it's not a hk mark23 The mk23 is great to club a SEAL in the head. |
|
OP you dont understand. The military wants the term MODULAR in EVERYTHING they do. The CZ was too expensive and likely would have made the Sig look like junk. The P320 doesnt feel like quality at all. Hell I think the Glock 45 would have been the best pistol to field. It doesnt need a safety as it will NOT fire without a trigger pull and its a full size frame with a mid size slide and its frankly a step up from the P320. |
|
Quoted: Honest Outlaw on YT did a review of that I believe and he said it was a piece of shit! Quoted: Quoted: I think a PO9 F Nocturne is going to be my next handgun buy. The mags are pricey though. Honest Outlaw on YT did a review of that I believe and he said it was a piece of shit! If I remember right, all the FTF issues they had came from the long optic mount screws being on the ejection port side. |
|
Quoted: Glocks suck though. Quoted: Quoted: Should adopt the G17 and be done with it. American made now, available with a manual safety, contains like 19, 20 individual parts? Any retard can detail strip it with a 3/32 punch. Glocks suck though. Attached File No way man. |
| I tried a P09 years ago, it had the longest, squishiest trigger I ever felt. I got a P10C, terrible trigger slap. Sent it back to CZ, still has the slap. Can't stand to shoot more than one magazine through it. Longtime CZ fanboy, my P01, full size 75 Omega and 97B have been faultless. |
| I do like the polymer frame CZs, would like to have one sometime. But DA/SA is outdated. Go with what 99% of law enforcement use, a striker fired pistol of some kind. And maybe this time actually test the fucking thing, and not select it based on the shit you will derive in retirement. |
|
Quoted: That's true, they're perfectly capable of jamming without any accessories attached. Quoted: Quoted: The 1911 does whats needed. It doesnt need a light laser and optic Ones being fed M1911 ball ammo don’t jam, skippy. Or maybe all those units we bought for the mil up through 1945 were built with secret sauce or something. |
|
Quoted: If I remember right, all the FTF issues they had came from the long optic mount screws being on the ejection port side. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I think a PO9 F Nocturne is going to be my next handgun buy. The mags are pricey though. Honest Outlaw on YT did a review of that I believe and he said it was a piece of shit! If I remember right, all the FTF issues they had came from the long optic mount screws being on the ejection port side. Does this mean it runs fine and you just need shorter screws? |
|
Quoted: The plastic decocker always felt cheap to me. If you're going anachronistic DA/SA, why not wood & steel? I've got a bunch of legacy DA/SA stuff but the trouble is getting optics on them at a reasonable height is a challenge. I posted this in another thread. If you put the dot in the center of this target zone, you are very close to a miss if not guaranteed a miss due to the height. Looking at pictures of the Nocturne slide, the sight sits much lower. Attached File I prefer DA/SA, but options with a low mounted optic on the slide are limited. I don't like striker guns so I'm not even considering them. Is the decocker on the PO9 made of plastic? Or were you referring to the frame? |
|
Quoted: That's true, they're perfectly capable of jamming without any accessories attached. Quoted: Quoted: The 1911 does whats needed. It doesnt need a light laser and optic  How to Keep Your 1911 Running |
|
Quoted: I've got a bunch of legacy DA/SA stuff but the trouble is getting optics on them at a reasonable height is a challenge. I posted this in another thread. If you put the dot in the center of this target zone, you are very close to a miss if not guaranteed a miss due to the height. Looking at pictures of the Nocturne slide, the sight sits much lower. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/80518/1000020818_jpg-3597834.JPG I prefer DA/SA, but options with a low mounted optic on the slide are limited. I don't like striker guns so I'm not even considering them. Is the decocker on the PO9 made of plastic? Or were you referring to the frame? Quoted: Quoted: The plastic decocker always felt cheap to me. If you're going anachronistic DA/SA, why not wood & steel? I've got a bunch of legacy DA/SA stuff but the trouble is getting optics on them at a reasonable height is a challenge. I posted this in another thread. If you put the dot in the center of this target zone, you are very close to a miss if not guaranteed a miss due to the height. Looking at pictures of the Nocturne slide, the sight sits much lower. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/80518/1000020818_jpg-3597834.JPG I prefer DA/SA, but options with a low mounted optic on the slide are limited. I don't like striker guns so I'm not even considering them. Is the decocker on the PO9 made of plastic? Or were you referring to the frame? Been a long time since I handled a CZ pastic DA/SA. I thought the decocker was plastic, someone above says it's metal. If I have to use DA/SA, I'd prefer cocked & locked w/ a thumb safety, like a CZ75. |
|
Quoted: On a tangent of this, do any units issue WMLs? Was the rail specced for trials, or just what was already in production so it comes with the gun? Looking at you "shoulda gone M9a3" guys. Quoted: Quoted: The 1911 does whats needed. It doesnt need a light laser and optic On a tangent of this, do any units issue WMLs? Was the rail specced for trials, or just what was already in production so it comes with the gun? Looking at you "shoulda gone M9a3" guys. Rails, optics mounting, and different grip sizes were the modularity specified in the competition. Glock satisfied the modularity component. For Beretta to have competed w/ the 92, they would have had to go back to a frame mounted safety (yes, I know, the Army demanded the slide safety in 1985, turns out we hated it), and some kind of removable backstrap for different sized grip panels. They probably could have competed w/ a 1&1/2 action hammer gun like the little Kel-Tecs, and they could have had restrike capability like a Taurus. |