CZ Goodness…

[FairWarning]

I'm a big fan of CZ across the board----pistols, PCCs, rifles, and shotguns!

Especially love the company trait of having a low bore axis for pistols.

 

[wild cat mccane]

CZ actually have super high bore axis.

Bore axis is incorrectly measured by all as the height of the slide. Since the whole premises is based on how tall the slide is away from your hand which causes the recoil felt, it should be measured from where your trigger finger sits and measured up from there. As you can see from there CZ has a very tall bore axis.

A hammer fired gun will always required a taller slide to fit a hammer. The benefit of a striker fired is your slide doesn't need to be tall. It's one of the reasons the P320 makes zero since. The slide is very tall.

 

[TunnelRat]

The slide is tall on a P320 because its modular system came from the P250, which was a hammer fired pistol. When you look at the rear of the slide and frame on the P320 you can even see where the hammer was on the P250.

As time goes by I put less and less importance in the notion of bore axis. I seem to shoot SIGs well, even at speed, which would seem to be counter to the fact that they have a high bore axis. Here’s a decent video from a USPSA Master shooter in Production and Carry Optics on the topic.

https://youtu.be/RKg8Mlzyxro


The X5 Legion remains one of the more popular pistols in competition and people like Max Michel continue to do well despite the high bore axis of the P320. You’re a Walther fan and certainly Walther isn’t on the low end of the bore axis scale.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Willie Lowman]

While I wouldn't completely rule out bore axis as a factor; I shot Glocks competitively for several years. I shot a P320 X5 Legion for a season and my scores were comparative to what I got with my G34. I have switched to a CZ TS2 which has better ergonomics and a far superior trigger and my scores have improved.

Bore axis is a factor but not the only one.

 

[wild cat mccane]

I don't disagree TunnelRat. Just correcting the point.

I am pro Walther (pre PDP). They are a bit flippy, but that is also because they are very light weight.

Having owned a P250RS, I agree. But the AXG starts to correct this with a grip that is higher up. So you can see the future for Sig strikers is not forever the P320 as is.

But like the AXG it doesn't change the bore axis (measured bore down to finger) for the P320, the CZ just enjoys a high hold, mostly metal line up that is heavier.

 

[TunnelRat]

I don't disagree TunnelRat. Just correcting the point.

I am pro Walther (pre PDP). They are a bit flippy, but that is also because they are very light weight.

Having owned a P250RS, I agree. But the AXG starts to correct this with a grip that is higher up. So you can see the future for Sig strikers is not forever the P320 as is.

But like the AXG it doesn't change the bore axis (measured bore down to finger) for the P320, the CZ just enjoys a high hold, mostly metal line up that is heavier.

You don’t even have to look at something as recent as the AXG. Look at the P365 and the bore axis on that. It shows how a modular system designed as a striker from the ground up can be done. Even the Beretta APX is better in that regard, even if it is a commercial flop.

I have an AXG and an X-Compact frame for the same FCU. The AXG is a bit better than the X Series grips, but they’re very close. To me it’s less that your hand is getting up higher on the AXG and more that it’s molded better to your hand (interesting note, it was actually a CNC operator that designed the AXG frame in his own time, not even an engineer). The original P320 grip module is one of my least favorite grips of all time. That is at least one positive of a modular design is the company can make changes over time, if they actually put in the effort.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Trooper Joe]

Love my PCR



TROOPER JOE