Hello All,
I wanted to ask a question of people I've come to respect, but on a forum that is not 'in one camp' or the other.
I've read a lot of great things about the CZ 97 pistol, and have been able to handle them once or twice.
Many seem to think they are very soft shooters, and very accurate- loving them, in fact.
I have some CZ experience, and find them very good handguns, but even with the full CGW pro package treatment, the trigger isn't as precise as a 1911 trigger can be. [don't get me wrong- I LIKE the CGW trigger setup!]
Also, even in SAO configurations, the CZ75/97 pistols seem to require more 'reach' to consistently actuate the trigger without shifting my grip [my fingers always have a bit of unused material in gloves also- just a hint short for my palm size].
I am trying to figure out objective differences that make them so popular.
Capacity is NOT an issue for me- I'm in CA, so more than 10 is not legal for me anyway.
In looking into them, I noticed that the weight was around 42oz, but my full railed 1911 has a weight of around 43oz.
So, is there something else other than weight that makes them such soft shooters?
What I am 'seeing' is a gun that is almost as heavy as my railed 1911, with a trigger that won't feel as precise as my 1911, with trigger and safeties that are awkward for me to actuate [unless I convert it to SAO and then the safety is still awkard], and which seems to have the same accuracy potential.
I am NOT fixated on the 1911. I WANT to like the CZ 97 pistol. Yet, I am just not seeing what makes it better than a well-tuned full-rail 1911.
Am I missing something?
And yes, if I ever got a CZ 97, it would HAVE to be modified to SAO, so having DA/SA options is not relevant to me on this pistol.
I just feel like I am missing something, and thought some of you may be able to shine some light on it.
Oh, and I also tend to do my own work- including having built/fitted 1911s from frame up, or replacing the ignition parts and stoning surfaces to get the right feel [while maintaining safety] on the sear/hammer engagement area. If someone were to say 'the 1911 is too complicated- it is easier to work on the CZ97', that would also not be relevant to me.
Thanks for any insight you can provide. I am going to also ask on the sig forum, but no where else [for the present].
I wanted to ask a question of people I've come to respect, but on a forum that is not 'in one camp' or the other.
I've read a lot of great things about the CZ 97 pistol, and have been able to handle them once or twice.
Many seem to think they are very soft shooters, and very accurate- loving them, in fact.
I have some CZ experience, and find them very good handguns, but even with the full CGW pro package treatment, the trigger isn't as precise as a 1911 trigger can be. [don't get me wrong- I LIKE the CGW trigger setup!]
Also, even in SAO configurations, the CZ75/97 pistols seem to require more 'reach' to consistently actuate the trigger without shifting my grip [my fingers always have a bit of unused material in gloves also- just a hint short for my palm size].
I am trying to figure out objective differences that make them so popular.
Capacity is NOT an issue for me- I'm in CA, so more than 10 is not legal for me anyway.
In looking into them, I noticed that the weight was around 42oz, but my full railed 1911 has a weight of around 43oz.
So, is there something else other than weight that makes them such soft shooters?
What I am 'seeing' is a gun that is almost as heavy as my railed 1911, with a trigger that won't feel as precise as my 1911, with trigger and safeties that are awkward for me to actuate [unless I convert it to SAO and then the safety is still awkard], and which seems to have the same accuracy potential.
I am NOT fixated on the 1911. I WANT to like the CZ 97 pistol. Yet, I am just not seeing what makes it better than a well-tuned full-rail 1911.
Am I missing something?
And yes, if I ever got a CZ 97, it would HAVE to be modified to SAO, so having DA/SA options is not relevant to me on this pistol.
I just feel like I am missing something, and thought some of you may be able to shine some light on it.
Oh, and I also tend to do my own work- including having built/fitted 1911s from frame up, or replacing the ignition parts and stoning surfaces to get the right feel [while maintaining safety] on the sear/hammer engagement area. If someone were to say 'the 1911 is too complicated- it is easier to work on the CZ97', that would also not be relevant to me.
Thanks for any insight you can provide. I am going to also ask on the sig forum, but no where else [for the present].