CZ75 or 92FS
- Thread starter TJB101
- Start date
I've had both, wouldn't go back to either if I were spending my money. But if someone issued the Beretta to me I'd use it in complete confidence. I can't say the same about CZ. When CZ's were selling for $300-$350 they were a bargain. I wouldn't buy one at the prices they are asking today.
Both pistols were introduced at about the same time, 1972 for the Beretta, 1975 for the CZ. Both are dated designs with better options today. The CZ has a loyal internet following among those who play range games, not so much in the real world among people interested in a combat pistol.
The Beretta is a little thick and big for what it is, the CZ's slide inside frame design makes the slide too thin and hard for me to get a grip on. While the Beretta is thicker, it is also lighter, has a better trigger and was far more reliable in my experience. Accuracy was about the same.
For a traditional DA/SA all steel pistol I think the discontinued Smith 5906 series are hard to beat.
Both pistols were introduced at about the same time, 1972 for the Beretta, 1975 for the CZ. Both are dated designs with better options today. The CZ has a loyal internet following among those who play range games, not so much in the real world among people interested in a combat pistol.
The Beretta is a little thick and big for what it is, the CZ's slide inside frame design makes the slide too thin and hard for me to get a grip on. While the Beretta is thicker, it is also lighter, has a better trigger and was far more reliable in my experience. Accuracy was about the same.
For a traditional DA/SA all steel pistol I think the discontinued Smith 5906 series are hard to beat.
muzzleblast...
New member
I like both the M92 and the CZ75. Could I only keep one, it would be the CZ. It feels better in the hand and points more naturally. M92 trigger is likely to be better out of the box, however.
Agree that you need to try both. I have owned a Beretta 92FS for many years. But I have moderately large hands and for many with smaller hands, the grip of the Beretta is just too fat to allow for a comfortable reach to the trigger in double action model.
I have shot a few CZs but frankly, I was not impressed with the quality of the double action triggers. The Beretta 92 series has a better stock DA trigger which can be improved further easily and cheaply with a mainspring swap. For those who prefer a decocker only version, a kit is now available from Beretta to convert the F model Beretta 92 (with safety/decocker lever) to a G model (decocker only) and these can be installed with no gunsmithing experience.
Jeff Cooper did not hide his disdain for DA/SA pistols, which he called "crunchentickers" and preferred SA pistols. He liked the CZ because it could be carried cocked and locked like an SA pistol.
I have shot a few CZs but frankly, I was not impressed with the quality of the double action triggers. The Beretta 92 series has a better stock DA trigger which can be improved further easily and cheaply with a mainspring swap. For those who prefer a decocker only version, a kit is now available from Beretta to convert the F model Beretta 92 (with safety/decocker lever) to a G model (decocker only) and these can be installed with no gunsmithing experience.
Jeff Cooper did not hide his disdain for DA/SA pistols, which he called "crunchentickers" and preferred SA pistols. He liked the CZ because it could be carried cocked and locked like an SA pistol.
I cant say anything about the CZ as I dont have much expierence with one but I do with the Beretta. I was in the NG when they came out but I refused to accept them. I kept my M1911A1.
Fast forward many years I was offered a job teaching bomb disposal but part of the job required I qualified and carried a Beretta, I never fired one but figured I could at least qualify with it. Wife, who had used them insisted I get one just to make suree. So she brought me one.
It was a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face. Right off the bat I liked it. Whats more I only shoot my cast bullets. The 92FS was the first 9mm I ever had that didnt care if it was cast or not. (I later found out the Ruger LC9s Pro was the same way).
I started shooting the crap out of my 92FS, in USPSA and other types of matches and never had a problem with it. The only FTF was a couple times some ammo made it through the pregressive loader coming out with out a primer. That certainly wasnt the guns fault.
Its accurate and I believe it could match my M1911A1 in the relibility dept.
Again I dont have much experience with the CZ so cant speak of it, but there certainly isnt any thing wrong with the 92FS.
Fast forward many years I was offered a job teaching bomb disposal but part of the job required I qualified and carried a Beretta, I never fired one but figured I could at least qualify with it. Wife, who had used them insisted I get one just to make suree. So she brought me one.
It was a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face. Right off the bat I liked it. Whats more I only shoot my cast bullets. The 92FS was the first 9mm I ever had that didnt care if it was cast or not. (I later found out the Ruger LC9s Pro was the same way).
I started shooting the crap out of my 92FS, in USPSA and other types of matches and never had a problem with it. The only FTF was a couple times some ammo made it through the pregressive loader coming out with out a primer. That certainly wasnt the guns fault.
Its accurate and I believe it could match my M1911A1 in the relibility dept.
Again I dont have much experience with the CZ so cant speak of it, but there certainly isnt any thing wrong with the 92FS.
CZ for me. Smaller grip and it feels as good as a Browning Hi-Power. It's also a smaller package and is less bulky for carry or conceal. Trigger pull is superb. Finally, with the Kadet Conversion Kit, you can use the same frame to train with or to teach others how to shoot with.
From a gunsmith perspective, it has fewer parts to do the same job. I took an armorer's course on the Beretta 92 and learned to detail disassemble them. That came in handy when I had to reassemble one as part of my exit exam from gonnesmithing school. There are so many more parts on the 92 than on the CZ.
CZ hands down.
From a gunsmith perspective, it has fewer parts to do the same job. I took an armorer's course on the Beretta 92 and learned to detail disassemble them. That came in handy when I had to reassemble one as part of my exit exam from gonnesmithing school. There are so many more parts on the 92 than on the CZ.
CZ hands down.
saiga21308
Moderator
buy both i did i like hammers strikes myself heres my old S&w 459
with grip tape and rubber finger groves on the grip
https://ibb.co/n893JH
My early CZ75 9mm is my bestest hand gun... just plain fits me , accurate, reliable, fairly easy to strip n clean... mags are plentiful and cheap
so far I have poked just about every on sale ammo through it with only some stupid cheap aluminum rounds not feeding reliably after 3 mags worth..
but as said we each have a different hand... the OP should obviously play with all in this class and do own cost fit feel assessment
The fact that MY CZ75 is old and problem free these many years is no indication that one he buys will be
I bought a sequential set of Walther PPK .32s....one was perfect one was a PITA...traded it away....I suspect slide to frame fit a tad too tight...
I had several issued Berettas...good arm IMO, no problems...never bought one for personal use...mostly cuz I am a most bang for the buck fruggle shopper
My worthless advice is seriously consider the CZ75
so far I have poked just about every on sale ammo through it with only some stupid cheap aluminum rounds not feeding reliably after 3 mags worth..
but as said we each have a different hand... the OP should obviously play with all in this class and do own cost fit feel assessment
The fact that MY CZ75 is old and problem free these many years is no indication that one he buys will be
I bought a sequential set of Walther PPK .32s....one was perfect one was a PITA...traded it away....I suspect slide to frame fit a tad too tight...
I had several issued Berettas...good arm IMO, no problems...never bought one for personal use...mostly cuz I am a most bang for the buck fruggle shopper
My worthless advice is seriously consider the CZ75
robert1804
New member
I have both. I'd choose the CZ if I could only have one pistol. Bought my Beretta about three years ago but haven't shot it much till lately, sort of "rediscovered" it now. A lighter hammer spring and some thinner grips made a real improvement. The Beretta has some nice things about it. The single action trigger is pretty good. The factory sights are spot-on. The bench rested accuracy is actually very good, better than my CZ's except a P-09 and a TS 9mm. As a reloader the Beretta is easy because it shoots to very nearly the same POI with a wide variety of bullet weights and velocities, plus it has a deep throat allowing long OAL. And it cycles ammo some of my other 9mm's won't.
mikejonestkd
New member
Both are excellent choices, but they do feel different in your hand. I suggest shooting both to get a good feel for them.
I shoot my 92FS more, and am more accurate with it, but I like how my 75B feels better. For me its a wash.
I shoot my 92FS more, and am more accurate with it, but I like how my 75B feels better. For me its a wash.
I wanted a steel frame 9mm under $1000, so it was pretty much just between the 92 and the CZ. I chose the CZ due to my brother's experiences with the 92 in the service, and the experiences of some friends when dealing with Beretta customer service, and a friends recommendation. Also I wanted something a little different.
Also I've had to use the warranty on my CZ, and the customer service department was very polite and helpful through the process.
To suggest the Beretta is no good is someone engaging in "reification" (treating an opinion as a fact).
You don't buy shoes if they don't fit. Neither should you buy any firearm if it does not fit right off the bat.
So do some fit testing and pick the one that feels best. The Beretta will have a better trigger out of the box. The CZ will set you back some change to get the trigger right.
Neither got to where they are by accident.
You don't buy shoes if they don't fit. Neither should you buy any firearm if it does not fit right off the bat.
So do some fit testing and pick the one that feels best. The Beretta will have a better trigger out of the box. The CZ will set you back some change to get the trigger right.
Neither got to where they are by accident.
stuckinthe60s
New member
im my day, most men had big hands. but....the military has changed. ill leave where im going with that to your imaginations. lol.
the beretta was a fine pistol once it went over to dual rail.
the beretta has big sights. good for tired eyes just awakened during an attack. no 'hair thin' gaps between front post for alignment like a 1911a1, rather, a true line of white. nice tall post. fast acquisition.
quick recoil recovery with all brand nato rounds fired out of it.
my vote is for the 92.
the beretta was a fine pistol once it went over to dual rail.
the beretta has big sights. good for tired eyes just awakened during an attack. no 'hair thin' gaps between front post for alignment like a 1911a1, rather, a true line of white. nice tall post. fast acquisition.
quick recoil recovery with all brand nato rounds fired out of it.
my vote is for the 92.
Last edited:
So TJB101
you now have the internet answers.... seems to me you are back at square one
Some few say, consider this OTHER gun....
many say the CZ as many say the Beretta
I, like you, have done this drill a few times... took me some thinking to separate the chaff and actually I only was ever to ELIMINATE a consideration (thankfully) by additional searching of the few claims on a gun I was considering--- to see if the bad points for any one of them followed any trend across multiple web sites....
even with our good web information I still have fondled and bought a few that ultimately did not turn into my new Fav.....
Ancedotal... but slightly relevant... I wanted a 1911
Lots of Taurus bashing but the PT 1911 with all the added features at half the cost of so called better 1911s was appealing to me... had some meager experience with the brand and found a good discount source ( Army Base Exchange).... made a choice that I do not regret...despite all the negatives I read about the BRAND
you now have the internet answers.... seems to me you are back at square one
Some few say, consider this OTHER gun....
many say the CZ as many say the Beretta
I, like you, have done this drill a few times... took me some thinking to separate the chaff and actually I only was ever to ELIMINATE a consideration (thankfully) by additional searching of the few claims on a gun I was considering--- to see if the bad points for any one of them followed any trend across multiple web sites....
even with our good web information I still have fondled and bought a few that ultimately did not turn into my new Fav.....
Ancedotal... but slightly relevant... I wanted a 1911
Lots of Taurus bashing but the PT 1911 with all the added features at half the cost of so called better 1911s was appealing to me... had some meager experience with the brand and found a good discount source ( Army Base Exchange).... made a choice that I do not regret...despite all the negatives I read about the BRAND
If it's sarcasm, it didn't work for me.
I have both pistols (my CZ is an 85) and would have a hard time deciding between the two if I could only have one. Flip of the coin for me and, for this reason, it likely comes down to how either pistol fits you. I don't have huge hands but they're larger than average.