Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Browning High Power or CZ-75?

Always wanted a SA no frills STEEL 9mm. I really like the CZ75 compact, but went with a SA XD-9.

For a day-in day-out pack/truck gun which would you choose and why?

** Edited for clarification ...

BHP = Browning High Power

Huh? BHP or CZ 75?
- - - - - - - - - - -

(But you already went with a Springfield Armory XD-9?)

Anyways, with anyone of the above 'three' - you still make a good choice.

I have yet to own a 'polymer' pistol but do own a Fabrique National Hi-Power and an all steel CZ-85 'Combat' - and between the two of them I would hate to have to choose 'one'.

I've had both (and no, not a cheesy BHP knock-off but the real deal Browning Hi-Power sport, factory hard chromed) and I prefer the CZ-75. Better trigger, better feel in my hand, and better accuracy, as compared with my factory stock BHP. The BHP's are good guns, I just prefer the CZ75.

I've never owned a CZ-75, but I have owned maybe 7 or 8 P35's. I would like to make a run at a slick CZ. Maybe one of these days. It would have to be pure fun to shoot.

P Weed ...

It is something that recently re-entered my head. I flip flopped about 10 years ago on which one I wanted and never got one. Finally got an XD-9 a few years after that (~7 years ago).

Have a 1911. But with all this plastic Glock and XD chatter I was thinking about a real steel 9mm. Those are the two I remember lusting after. Figureed I'd throw the Q out to the gallery and see what those with vastly more experience than I thought regarding these two rigs.

Thanks!!

If you already have a 1911, you might think about the CZ-75B(SA)
Single action only, it would run just like your other stuff, and be a hoot to shoot.

They both are quite good but I am sure I see a CZ75 in my future

Hank

I would like to try a CZ 75B, I've owned Hi-Powers for years but never a CZ

The CZ75 doesn't have the constraints of working around 1911 patents at the time. one advantage and IMO a big one is you have both SA and DA with the CZ 75. the BHP is SA only. you can carry condition one, or just hammer down, or hammer down safety on. just depends on what you feel comfortable with. The CZ 75 also is about half the price. the BHP is a very cool gun and I would love to own one just not at the price of 2 CZ's

in regards to the XD and since you are talking a pack/truck gun. I couldn't shoot the XD 40 I had worth a crap. I have had a lot better luck with glock. The glock has a better wall to the trigger, for some reason I shoot them well, and for your use honestly I would get a glock 19.

I betcha' I know which one Kevin Gibson would choose!

The BHP is, without a doubt, a great gun. But out of the box I'd take the CZ75. The BHP's I've shot and handled really remind me of what 1911's must have been back in the 1970s: great guns, if you have "the guy" work on them first. Nowadays, when autos that shoot well out of the box are almost a dime a dozen, the "its great once you get it back from the gunsmith" paradigm is kind of outdated.

No reason not to get one, though Practicality should have as little to do with the choice as possible.

Edited to add: note the caveat in the above statement: "the BHP's I've shot and handled." I gladly defer to the more extensive experience of others; if my limited experience has been anomalous, then I'll cheerfully amend my opinion

I really have a weak spot for the CZ 75. Just a great accurate and soft shooting gun.

One thing I dislike is the price of mags.

I do shoot my XD well. So there won't be a Glock in my FORESEEABLE future. Thr idea of an XD-45 is kinda appealing though.

Can't really go wrong with either pistol. By the way I have a XD-45 and it's really easy to shoot, reliable, and accurate to boot.

I've had'em both. Prefer the Browning...but that's only because the trigger reach in double action on the CZ was a fraction long for me.

Dan

Yeah, what he said.

I WILL say, that I've had a couple of the Italian Tanfoglio CZ clones that were better made than the early CZ 75 I owned. I wasn't too impressed with the paint job, or the soft steel of the CZ. Loved the feel of it in my hands, but the Eyeties did a better job (this was before the "one size frame fits all" of the current Tanfoglios).

If your a purist than the Browning otherwise I would go for the CZ! My buddy bought a polymer CZ in 40 and I shot that better than any handgun I have owned or shot! I was impressed to say the least. I own a HK USP 45 which is my most accurate but that 40 could really shoot with it or above it. I would like to find a steel CZ in 9mm to plink with.

I am a fan of the 9mm because that is what the BHP was built for.
I am a died in wool hi power lover.
No finer pistol made, IMO. YMMV.

Ernie

BTW, when in doubt, buy both!

I've got several Brownings and the CZ. The CZ is a little heavier but it feels like real steel that will last forever compared to the BHPs. I think my CZ may even shoot a little better than the BHPs, but it may be just the extra weight keeping the bobbing around smoother. The CZ also goes out with me more often these days than my Berretas or my XD / XDMs.

So take your hearts desire, you won't regret either choice.

I have a BHP, and overall I like it. The one thing that I do NOT like about it is the magazine disconnect feature. Some people do like that feature though, as it is easy to make the weapon safe around the house by simply removing the magazine.

My dislike stems from having an inoperable pistol during a magazine exchange. When the mag is out of the weapon, all you have is an expensive club in your hand. Ruger semi autos have the same feature, which is one of the reasons that I won't own one of their center fire semi autos. Again, it's picking nits.

Overall, if you can live with that feature, you'll probably like the BHP.