CZ75 or 226 both in Stainless

[bigalf]

Gentlemen looking to add a full size all metal 9mm to the collection. I want something in stainless, I have kind of focused my search on either a CZ75B in stainless or a Sig 226 in stainless. I have experience with Sig P series guns (220 and 229), so I kind of want to try something different, but that dang 226 in stainless is sexy. One issue I have with my 229 is a tent to cover the slide lock so the gun never actually goes to slide lock...which isn't a huge deal but kind of stinks, so at this point I am leaning towards the CZ, plus I don't have one.

 

[92G]

Both are nice. CZ more of a shooter. Sig more for cool factor.

can I ask why all steel sig? Its damn heavy.

for CZ i am a fan of the clones speicifically tanfoglio/EAA and tristar T-120 or C-120. Great value and shoot just as well as my CZ-75 BD

 

[thormx538]

226 Legion SAO instead of SSE? It's almost the same color.

 

[DW357]

CZ for the win! Well I'm biased since I have a polished stainless 75B

 

[M1911]

I prefer the CZ. Lower bore axis.

 

[PATRON]

I have both in 9mm love both,but I like the CZ just a little more than the Sig.

 

[richc]

I have both. Actually several of both. And I like both.

The CZ75B is s more natural shooter imho. I like the grip better.

The Sig 226 had a bigger grip. With moderate sized hands I find it a tad less comfortable.

If you're from MA you'll find the CZ75B is harder to buy. Not impossible but generally only through a private sale.

 

[bigalf]

This basically confirms what I was thinking. I'm going with the CZ. I already have a EAA/Tanfoglio in 10MM that I like a lot, which is basically a CZ clone.

 

[DW357]

Great choice. Here's my cajunized 75B...

View attachment 179216

 

[Gammon]

The SIG is by far the better built pistol. The CZ is a little rough around the edges. Low bore axis makes the CZ a much better shooter; the SIG 226 is an old design whose time has come and gone.

 

[nstassel]

I respectfully disagree that a 226 is better built. The 1980s cz was very rough but new ones are decent out of the box.

 

[LuvDog]

CZ for the win. I need more of them, but they're definitely harder to come by around here.

 

[DW357]

I respectfully disagree that a 226 is better built. The 1980s cz was very rough but new ones are decent out of the box.

Yep

 

[Doogz]

Newer Sigs can have their own problems as well.

I'd secure a CZ as they're not as easy to find, then buy a Sig.

 

[Gammon]

I respectfully disagree that a 226 is better built. The 1980s cz was very rough but new ones are decent out of the box.

I own both and my opinion is the result of a side by side comparison. The new CZs (mine is an Accu Shadow) are rough by comparison with my SS SIGs (Stainless Elite and X 5 All Around). The SIGs have no rough edges, CZs do.

 

[MMArtist]

CZ all day.

Not a Sig fan. Very over rated imo.

 

[nstassel]

I own both and my opinion is the result of a side by side comparison. The new CZs (mine is an Accu Shadow) are rough by comparison with my SS SIGs (Stainless Elite and X 5 All Around). The SIGs have no rough edges, CZs do.

Your post reminds me that I was very impressed with the quality of the lone x5 I handled. It was much slicker feeling than the German 226 I had in the 80s.