Posted: 1/18/2012 7:23:51 PM EDT
|
I have been looking at buying this gun.
Would like any reviews pros and cons about either the stainless or the matte black. Or any recommendations for any other handguns within the same price range that you would choose. (no glocks) Thanks |
| I have a CZ 97B which is the larger .45 version, it's one of the most reliable & accurate pistols I own. Out of the box and with no mods the SA/DA trigger is superb, reminds me of the trigger action on my old S&W mod.29 revolver. I was actually looking to add a CZ 75/85 to my collection and recently picked up a P-07 Duty. Trigger is almost as good although there have been some other issues so I'll see if it's as reliable as it's steel cousins. it was much cheaper than a new 75 so I was willing to take a chance, but CZs are great pistols with great reputations. There are also quite a few clone/variations like the EAA Witnesses & baby Desert Eagle, and I heard Armscor or ATI is importing a clone as well. |
Steve Camp (now deceased  ) did a very good review of the CZ-75B on his website, which is still up: http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/CZ75.htm
|
|
Quoted:
Steve Camp (now deceased ) did a very good review of the CZ-75B on his website, which is still up: http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/CZ75.htmGreat read. Thanks for the link. |
|
the cz75b was the first handgun i ever owned and bought.
I sold it and I still wish I had it back. There is one thing I would change on it––-I would get the CZ-75BD (decocker!). I hate manual safeties and that is ultimately why I sold it. I would love to have a CZ75bd with the decocker...that would be a perfect gun to me. ~Norinco |
|
Quoted:
the cz75b was the first handgun i ever owned and bought. I sold it and I still wish I had it back. There is one thing I would change on it––-I would get the CZ-75BD (decocker!). I hate manual safeties and that is ultimately why I sold it. I would love to have a CZ75bd with the decocker...that would be a perfect gun to me. ~Norinco Same here. Nah. I started with a satin nickel CZ75B and also had a black polycoat CZ75B compact. Both were decent guns. I sold them both after trying a M&P9pro. The CZs did nothing better than the M&P, were heavier, had less holster and sight options, and the M&P was easier to maintain with a more durable finish. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
the cz75b was the first handgun i ever owned and bought. I sold it and I still wish I had it back. There is one thing I would change on it––-I would get the CZ-75BD (decocker!). I hate manual safeties and that is ultimately why I sold it. I would love to have a CZ75bd with the decocker...that would be a perfect gun to me. ~Norinco Same here. Nah. I started with a satin nickel CZ75B and also had a black polycoat CZ75B compact. Both were decent guns. I sold them both after trying a M&P9pro. The CZs did nothing better than the M&P, were heavier, had less holster and sight options, and the M&P was easier to maintain with a more durable finish. Thanks for the information. I will look into those as well. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: the cz75b was the first handgun i ever owned and bought. I sold it and I still wish I had it back. There is one thing I would change on it––-I would get the CZ-75BD (decocker!). I hate manual safeties and that is ultimately why I sold it. I would love to have a CZ75bd with the decocker...that would be a perfect gun to me. ~Norinco Same here. Nah. I started with a satin nickel CZ75B and also had a black polycoat CZ75B compact. Both were decent guns. I sold them both after trying a M&P9pro. The CZs did nothing better than the M&P, were heavier, had less holster and sight options, and the M&P was easier to maintain with a more durable finish. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the cz75b was the first handgun i ever owned and bought. I sold it and I still wish I had it back. There is one thing I would change on it––-I would get the CZ-75BD (decocker!). I hate manual safeties and that is ultimately why I sold it. I would love to have a CZ75bd with the decocker...that would be a perfect gun to me. ~Norinco Same here. Nah. On the same note, I own 3 CZ pistols. After trying the M&P I never looked back. The trigger reset travel on the CZ is waay to long for my tastes. The trigger on the M&P feels better, I have small hands, the geometry of M&P is simply better for the pull. That being said CZ fits my hand better, its beaver tail/shape is VERY ergonomic. CZ accuracy can not be rivaled by my M&P, from the bench rest that is. Combat/competetive/defensive shooting I cant tell the difference. I started with a satin nickel CZ75B and also had a black polycoat CZ75B compact. Both were decent guns. I sold them both after trying a M&P9pro. The CZs did nothing better than the M&P, were heavier, had less holster and sight options, and the M&P was easier to maintain with a more durable finish. Thanks for the information. I will look into those as well. |
|
I'll kick the trend here.
I went from M&P to CZ. I wanted a few things and have been searching for a while and found it. Saftey only and Good trigger. I looked at 9mm 1911's and just never could like them. I love 1911's but to many compromises; single stack, price, reliability issues ect. I then saw an Old Painless post featuring his CZ-01. I got to reading and found my new gun. CZ75 Compact. Nightsights, SA only trigger, drop free mag and presto new carry gun. I then added a full size SP-01 to it. Gains over my M&P: Better trigger, lower bore height, steel frame. Cons: More $, fewer accessories, and heavier. |
|
Quoted:
The CZ 75 comparisons to modern striker fired pistols in uncalled for. Designed over 35 years apart. Also, the weight difference goes without saying.......steel frame vs plastic frame. The OP asked for comparisons to pistols in the same price range except for glock. I gave a short synopsis of why I switched from one design to the other. Hardly uncalled for. |
| CZ's are awesome I have always been impressed with mine and others I shoot. a previous poster mentioned the M&P, and I have a M&P 9mm and I have to say their are things I like about both but if I had to pick one I would grab a CZ. They seem more natural to me in pointing, griping, and ergonomics, I also prefer the SA/DA over the striker fired guns though ( I am a bit old school) Dont get me wrong I absolutely love my M&P. I suggest going to a range where you can rent a cz75 and some other handguns and find what works for you, or if you have friends with a good handgun collection take them to the range with you! |
The CZ 75 P01 has become my favorite of my handguns. Great size, accurate, smooth, overall great gun. My wife tried it one day at the range and liked it so much she claimed it, so I bought another. My parents liked it so much they bought one. If I ever some across a deal on one I'll get more.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Go for it http://http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg120/fritzy_photos/IMG_0433e-1.jpg http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg120/fritzy_photos/Guns/IMG_1233e.jpg http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg120/fritzy_photos/IMG_0444ecrpe.jpg http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg120/fritzy_photos/Guns/IMG_1236e.jpg http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg120/fritzy_photos/IMG_0443e.jpg The high polish stainless CZ 75 B is absolutely gorgeous. 
Thanks I added the Cocobolo grips it came with rubber ones |
| The CZ75 platform is an amazing shooting gun. I owned the SP-01 Custom (predecessor to the Shadow) and the 75 Compact. Having owned (or own) Glock, Kahr, Taurus, Sig, HK, Ruger, CZ, XD, Beretta and various 1911s, the SP-01 Custom was the finest shooting 9mm I ever owned, and certainly one of the best regardless. The 75 Compact was a fine gun as well that I shot better overall than my 9mm Glocks. Sold both as I really don't need range-only guns, which is what they were in my collection. I will likely purchase a plain CZ75B when the price is right. |
|
The CZ-75B was my only pistol for a long time.
Overall they are really good pistols, especially if you like the ability for Condition 1 on a DA/SA pistol. Pretty accurate, fairly reliable, ergonomics are good, and the polycoat finish is durable. However they do have the downsides: 1. They are too expensive at their current price point. I can't justify $500 for a vanilla CZ-75B as there are better choices for that coin. 2. They do have malfunctions (had a few FTEs and a couple doublefeeds in 3-4K rounds). 3. The slide is very thin, and kinda hard to grip when you have a malfunction (this can be remedied with training). 4. Slide stops are a known breakage item. 5. There were issues with CZ-75s with the Omega trigger. I think they may have been worked out though. 6. CZ's marketing on the CZ-75 being the world's most popular pistol is bunk. It was a awesome design when it came out, but it had no patent protection. That is why there are so many clones. It was easier to copy it than to build a new pistol from the ground up. Overall they are really good handguns, just overpriced now. CZs are weird in that they are underrated by the general firearms community, but overrated by CZ owners. I'd highly recommend trying one out before buying one to decide for yourself. |
|
Quoted:
I am curious as to why you would day they are overpriced. Relative to what? What features make it "vanilla" relative to those pistols? When they were around $400 or less there wasn't any competition that could beat it for the price. At $500 they now have to compete against the Glock/M&P/92FS/PPQ/FNX etc. That is not even to mention the clones which are about $100 less.That is not saying its a bad pistol, its really good. I just don't think its worth $500 after owning a couple of them. The vanilla comment just was a vanilla CZ-75B. Meaning I'm not including the 85 Combat/P01/SP01 models that are even more expensive. ETA: Its like the Hi-Power. A superb pistol, but its current price point has placed it out of the market to be competitive. |
|
You make an interesting point.
I would extend it to all the steel/alloy framed pistols though. 1911, High Power, Beretta 92, and Sig fans also exhibit the same behavior. And full disclosure here, I own a 1911, CZ75B, and Walther P1, among other traditional steel framed pistols, as well as polymer "wonder guns" as well. Frankly they are two separate classes of pistol, IMHO, and other than the fact that they are handguns, have little in common. Also, the die hard fans of either type will never change their minds, ever. I personally appreciate both types, as they both bring different and interesting things to the table. Now, as to the CZ, *FANBOY MODE ON*, I think they are still bargains compared to other metal framed pistols. YMMV etc...etc...etc... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I am curious as to why you would day they are overpriced. Relative to what? What features make it "vanilla" relative to those pistols? When they were around $400 or less there wasn't any competition that could beat it for the price. At $500 they now have to compete against the Glock/M&P/92FS/PPQ/FNX etc. That is not even to mention the clones which are about $100 less.That is not saying its a bad pistol, its really good. I just don't think its worth $500 after owning a couple of them. The vanilla comment just was a vanilla CZ-75B. Meaning I'm not including the 85 Combat/P01/SP01 models that are even more expensive. ETA: Its like the Hi-Power. A superb pistol, but its current price point has placed it out of the market to be competitive. Your post assumes the CZ series pistols are somehow inferior to those pistols that are similarly priced (and thus should be cheaper). This is simply not so. Pistol preference is highly subjective and very dependent on the style one has become accustomed to. I like Glocks and cut my teeth on a G-17, but IMO they are very "vanilla" when compared to even the basic CZ-75. They are all quality service pistols. Also, I don't know how prices are where you live, but around here, all those pistols, are from $50-$150 more expensive than a CZ-75B. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I am curious as to why you would day they are overpriced. Relative to what? What features make it "vanilla" relative to those pistols? When they were around $400 or less there wasn't any competition that could beat it for the price. At $500 they now have to compete against the Glock/M&P/92FS/PPQ/FNX etc. That is not even to mention the clones which are about $100 less.That is not saying its a bad pistol, its really good. I just don't think its worth $500 after owning a couple of them. The vanilla comment just was a vanilla CZ-75B. Meaning I'm not including the 85 Combat/P01/SP01 models that are even more expensive. ETA: Its like the Hi-Power. A superb pistol, but its current price point has placed it out of the market to be competitive. Your post assumes the CZ series pistols are somehow inferior to those pistols that are similarly priced (and thus should be cheaper). This is simply not so. Pistol preference is highly subjective and very dependent on the style one has become accustomed to. I like Glocks and cut my teeth on a G-17, but IMO they are very "vanilla" when compared to even the basic CZ-75. They are all quality service pistols. Also, I don't know how prices are where you live, but around here, all those pistols, are from $50-$150 more expensive than a CZ-75B. I do consider them slightly inferior from the build quality on the CZs I've owned, and the malfunctions I had with them. That is my opinion though, so YMMV. 
Only one on my list that is more expensive in my local area is the 92FS/M9, but its roughly $30-$50 more. However, the 92 series have a forged frame, no cast parts, and chrome-lined bore. All that said, I still like the CZ-75. I will eventually add another one back to the collection because they are good handguns. I do wish I would have bought a OD P-01 when they were $400. |
|
Quoted:
I do consider them slightly inferior from the build quality on the CZs I've owned, and the malfunctions I had with them. That is my opinion though, so YMMV.
Only one on my list that is more expensive in my local area is the 92FS/M9, but its roughly $30-$50 more. However, the 92 series have a forged frame, no cast parts, and chrome-lined bore. All that said, I still like the CZ-75. I will eventually add another one back to the collection because they are good handguns. I do wish I would have bought a OD P-01 when they were $400. My CZ experience dwarfs my Glock experience, and I've honestly had more failures with Glocks than I've ever had with all my CZs. I don't think they're overpriced either. I think years ago they were just way under-priced. The prices are simply catching up to their value. |
|
Quoted:
The CZ-75B was my only pistol for a long time. Overall they are really good pistols, especially if you like the ability for Condition 1 on a DA/SA pistol. Pretty accurate, fairly reliable, ergonomics are good, and the polycoat finish is durable. However they do have the downsides: 1. They are too expensive at their current price point. I can't justify $500 for a vanilla CZ-75B as there are better choices for that coin. 2. They do have malfunctions (had a few FTEs and a couple doublefeeds in 3-4K rounds). 3. The slide is very thin, and kinda hard to grip when you have a malfunction (this can be remedied with training). 4. Slide stops are a known breakage item. 5. There were issues with CZ-75s with the Omega trigger. I think they may have been worked out though. 6. CZ's marketing on the CZ-75 being the world's most popular pistol is bunk. It was a awesome design when it came out, but it had no patent protection. That is why there are so many clones. It was easier to copy it than to build a new pistol from the ground up. The slide stops are definitely the weak point, but from what I've read slide stop breakage is mostly an issue on the .40S&W models and on guns used for competition where ammo was used to make major power factor. That's just what I've read, I can't say for sure. I have a bunch of CZ pistols and I have tens of thousands of rounds through mine, and I've never had a slide stop break. Also yes, I would stay away from the Omega trigger models. Aside from the spring issue, I believe they also weren't working with the Kadet adapters. I don't know if that's been resolved yet or not, but personally I just don't bother with them. |
|
I own Sig P220, Browning BDM, CZ 75B stainless, CZ75B 30 year , Walther P5, Browning BDA 380, Helwan Brigadier (just for fun ) and even Dawoo .22
I have owned Taurus PT92, Taurus PT908 Sig P232 and may be forgetting one or two of all the above only the two CZ75b, the BDM and the Walther P5 have been flawless out of the box ( the P5 was used) all others have had at least one but not more than 3-4 FTF (failure to feed) and or stove pipe when new i wolud bet my life on either of my CZs or the BDM, just my experience. |
|
*The following is my opinion... Its closest competitor is the Beretta 92, which is also an excellent gun. I've scored well with a Beretta 92 (.mil qual), I plan to buy a Beretta 92, but between the two, I'd take the CZ first every time. The Beretta's safety is in the wrong place, it is more prone to major parts breakage (slide stop and slide), and it costs ~$100 more. The Beretta points quite naturally, but the CZ75 has some of the best ergos in the business. Comparing the CZ75 to a polymer pistol may or may not make sense depending upon what you want to do with it. Polymer frame guns are lighter (better for carry), but the added weight of metal frame guns seems to provide better balance and make them much nicer to shoot. |