As an instructor, I strive to be a good student. Good students are always learning. And last week in Canada, I learned that CZ pistols (pronounced “see zed” in Canadiese) are as reliable as a Ford.
A Ford Pinto, that is.
There were four CZ75-pattern guns (one Tangfolio and three genuine CZs) used by three different students over the course of the week, and every one of them had reliability problems.
The owners were great students and never let the pistol problems interfere with the class. They had fantastic attitudes and shot very well when their guns worked. But from failures to feed to failures to extract to failures to eject to failures to lock back to premature lock back, we saw the whole spectrum of handgun malfunctions from those guns.
The Glocks in the class didn’t have any consistent problems. Even the two S&W 3rd Generation pistols ran well except for some grip and lubrication hiccups. In fact, the only gun that had more problems was a used, second-hand Para P14.45, and who is surprised by that?
CZ pistols are both popular and successful in the world competition arena. They’re also very common among various militaries throughout the globe. But here in the U.S., they’ve never really earned a serious share of the market. They have a reputation for reliability and durability problems. And after four straight days of watching them choke, I’d say it’s a well deserved reputation.
In fairness, one student got his gun working 100% on day four after replacing the extractor spring. The pistol had a little under 14,000 rounds through it when the troubles began. If that had been the only CZ that suffered such trouble during the classes, it would be excusable. But all four?
The CZ is a shootable gun. The CZ Shadow I shot had an excellent trigger and was accurate enough for me to hit an 8″ range marker at 100yd. The owner (class host Rob Engh) reports that he’s easily averaging 0.17 splits and on some drills turning in 0.14 and even 0.13 splits with that same pistol!
Nonetheless, if a gun can’t be depended upon to go bang when the trigger is pressed, it’s a paperweight. Speed and accuracy mean a lot less when you’re prying a stuck case out from underneath an extractor claw.
I’m sure there will be CZ fans who will talk about their personally owned guns that have gone x-number of rounds without a problem. And I don’t doubt it. But when put to the test under the stress of a high volume shooting class, these guns simply couldn’t make it. Not one, not two, but all four.
Zed is not your friend.
Train hard & stay safe! ToddG
Folks, the cold hard reality is that these 4 pistols are not the sole basis for Todd’s post. They are merely a demonstration of a larger truth: That the CZ75 isn’t all that it’s been cracked up to be. When they are adopted it’s often because they are the low bid pistol. Yes, a lot of nations have used it…but ask yourself how much those nations know about handguns, how much those handguns were actually used, etc.
The CZ design is somewhat exotic in the US and many out there know more about the mystique of the guns than they do about living with one as a sidearm on a day to day basis while putting it through high round counts. You see the exact same thing with 1911’s or hi-powers. People own some 1911’s that have never given them any problems despite the fact that the individuals don’t really know all that much about 1911’s. They get overly confident in their knowledge and the next thing you know they are arguing that Larry Vickers doesn’t know what he’s talking about when he calls the 1911 an enthusiast’s handgun that requires more TLC than other designs.
There’s more to it than 4 guns. Those 4 guns are just living up to the reputation of the family weapons.
The four failed CZ’s are a legitimate basis for casting some doubt on CZ’s but I would hardly generalized CZ’s as CRAP as someone has posted. So then is an M-16 is crap because an AK-47 is more reliable? Are Corvettes crap because a Honda Accord requires less maintenance and more reliable? This article was wonderful in that maybe CZ will take note and improve their product for the better but even if they don’t, CZ’s aren’t crap. They’re just not as reliable as Glocks. So what? No one ever said they were and it’s not as if they are having catastrophic recall failures. Besides, with all do respect to Glock, what a boring world it would be if everyone shot Glocks.
Exactly. I’m not saying CZ sucks. Plenty of people have and like CZs. But they have proven tine and again to be less reliable and less durable than most of the modern competiors.
Plenty of gun owners will never push their guns hard enough to worry about it. For those who do, however, the deficiencies are there. So unless there is some overwhelming advantage, it seems like a poor choice for folks who run their pistols hard.
Todd, I think you’ve been preemptively banned from CZForum…and your passport is longer valid in the Czech Republic.
This whole discussion is an excellent example of why people shouldn’t get too emotionally attached to their firearms.
Some of the comments in this thread need to be engraved in stone somewhere as “textbook cases of emotional attachment to material, inanimate objects.”
High comedy 🙂
Military and police contracts are most often awarded to the LOWEST BIDDER and/or have other incentives or even outright subsidies in order to win the contracts, so that is a mute point regarding quality and reliability.
CZ’s are world-class weapons by any measure: quality, reliability, durability, you name it. Mine CZ75 BD has over 10,000 rounds thru it over more than fours years without a single issue. It has rarely seen more than 300 rounds in any single day, but that doesn’t change the fact that it has been 100% reliable.
All mechanical devices will fail. Operator use and maintenance both play important roles in MTBF.
Definitely seen more reliability/durability issues (and those are two separate things) with commercial Cee-Zeds on a per-capita basis than with the more modern duty guns of the Glock/HK/Beretta/SIG persuasion.
no firearm is perfect
glocks are prone to limp-wristing, berettas are huge for 9mm, etc etc
i dont have a ton of experience with CZs but i would be confident that with proper maintenance that they would be quite reliable
Nothing wrong with an observation of 4 pistols.
One being a CZ copy and the others might not being real deal Czs.
The Norinco NZ75 is sold in Canada and quite popular.
I don’t think the most reliable CZs are sold there due to barrel length restrictions.
Nor is using 10 round mags any sign of reliability or durability testing.
They have been Junk from day one.
So, even if these 10 shot guns were actual CZs.
They were probably modified in some way into gamer’s guns, as few can CCW in the Great White
North.
Most CZ guys know that Blazer ammo is a No Go in most See-Zeds, so ammo could have been a real culprit. Even steel cased ammo like Wolf
is touchy.
Some 75Bs have weak extractor springs. An easy $5 fix in most cases, and Blazer ammo works perfectly from there onward.
I’ve seen and had Glocks, H&K and SIGs jam.
Same with 92Fs and even a M&P.
In over 25 years an many continents of living with CZUB products, both pistols and rifles.
My CZs are not perfect either but usually run 100% with good ammo.
Todd, I think you should avail yourself of a
P-01 or PCR and some standard capacity mags.
Shoot about 300 rounds through a CZ and become impressed as others new to the CZ game have been
and remained.
Oh, yes.
During the war in the Balkans, and my travels there.
I didn’t see any Glocks or XDs,
ony a few Berettas and Hi-powers mixed in with m majority of MAKS and Toks.
Know that the CZ75 (as carried be the CRO MUP Police and others in Bosnia ) was THE pistol
to have on your side during that conflict.
Brunner!
Quality, reliability, accuracy and unmatched ergonomics!
For more info on what you or others out there are missing:
http://www.cz-zone.com
http://www.czforum.com
http://www.cz-usa.com
http://www.czub.cz
No, as the co-owner of CZ Forum, I can say the gentleman isn’t banned, as he A) never signed up that I know of, and B) never violated any forum rules.
I have sent a reccomendation to CZ-USA to have a current production pistol tested, “torture tested” if you will, by a disinterested third party. I also asked if it was possible to get a copy of the Czech Military tests that replaced the Glock pistol with the CZ-75 Phantom.
How many rounds were shot during this class, BTW?
1900 rounds over 4 days through my Shadow. I was one of two people that did all four days. The pistol was lubed on day two. All my issues were directly related to the extractor spring.
Other than the Tanfoglio all guns were real deal CZs. I used 17 round Tanfoglio mags with internal pinning to make them 10 rounds. The other people used both Tanfoglio and CZ mags.
Friday night one of the students was at my class with her CZ that she used at the course. It had problems all night. It has the ambi slide catch and the part that is pushed up by the mag follower was catching on live rounds. Causing the slide to lock back early. Comparing my slide catch to hers mine is the newer style .40 slide catch (or so Angus told me) and doesn’t stick as far out as earlier designs. Not sure if that is available for her 85(I think that’s the model she has).
If mags are a known issue then I would say Todd’s findings are still not out of line as some would suggest. If a gun doesn’t work with what its supplied with, then it doesn’t work. Simple. And that is all he stated happened. You can’t start throwing in disclaimers after the fact.
As for mods to the guns. All 4 guns are running factory parts, mine included. Yes I added the competition hammer and slimmer grips. But all parts are factory issued.
OK, so you used aftermarket non CZ magazines altered from thier original profile, and some of the others were using the same type of mags.
[quote] If a gun doesn’t work with what its supplied with, then it doesn’t work.[/quote]
I would have to state not one of those CZs came from the factory with Tanfoglio magazines, just guessing there. 🙂 Were the Glock people running Glock factory magazines, would you know? I do apologize, I am sure nobody was checking what mags people were using, but I thought someone who was there might know. No, I am not disputing that the three CZ pistols there, of which (was it two CZs for four days, or just yours and the Tanfoglio for all four days?), had issues, anything mechanical will break. Heck, I had a Smith Model 10 revolver jam on me.
Yours was a Shadow, another an 85, do you know what the other CZ was, if you don’t mind me asking? A Tanfoglio is not mechanically identical to a CZ75; some have actually called the Tan the CZ Improved, due to a lower number of parts used, but having had several of both Tanfoglio, (6 Witness pistols), and CZ, (10 so far), I don’t believe it is superior. I have had a bit of exposure to both sides.
I think I might have a bit of trouble loading up 1900 rounds, I am not sure I have that much lead on hand. Guess that will take one heck of a marathon casting session. I must be a piker, I do normally shoot 100-200 rounds in a session with my sidearm, but I haven’t been able to find any matches near me for a few years. Before I got into CZ, I did use a first generation Witness 40, (first Witness 40 to come into the US, actually) years ago in IDPA style local matches in AZ, with no issues not ammunition related. Someday, ask me why I will never shoot WinClean again. 🙂
Nope, never won one, but that wasn’t the gun’s fault.
I do thank you for your observations, and will be happy to post anything I hear from CZ-USA or CZ-UB on this issue.
Mine was the only CZ to do four days. The alterations to my mags is only to limit the number of rounds and does not affect the mag beyond that. Also my issue was totally extractor related. Not mag related, although initially I thought it was. But since the new extractor spring I’ve had zero issues.
The 85 was used on the first two days and she used factory ten round mags. The other CZ was a Shadow as well I believe and was only used on day 3 with a combo of factory and Tanfoglio mags. That shooter then used a Tanfoglio for day 4. Then with all Tanfoglio mags.
I’m not sure where the idea that the Tan has less parts comes from. The CZ has the mag break and the two piece sear. Whole the Tan has the trigger bar plunger with 4 parts instead of the CZ spring setup. I’d say at most one or two parts difference, maybe. The CZ Shadow has a far better trigger than the Stock II can ever have.
If CZ actually considers having a “disinterested” party do a 50,000 round test on a gun, Todd is the guy to do it. He holds no allegiance to any one company and will report every tid bit of info on the gun as he has done previously for S&W and HK, and is doing right now for HK. A more fair reviewer you won’t find.
I find it humorous that people are attacking Todd for this article, and getting so emotional about it. I was one of the ones with a problem gun and can’t fault him on his writing. Yet people that weren’t on the course are trying to tear his article apart and accuse him of being anti CZ, and not impartial etc. Weird
Rob E,
“I find it humorous that people are attacking Todd for this article, and getting so emotional about it. I was one of the ones with a problem gun and can’t fault him on his writing. Yet people that weren’t on the course are trying to tear his article apart and accuse him of being anti CZ, and not impartial etc.”
People get their egos all tied up in their possessions, and pistols are no exception.
Back when I was on the staff at GlockTalk, I actually made a Glock Win95 desktop theme. Later, when circumstances forced me to sell my first P7, I actually cried, because my mystical magic HK sword went away and I wasn’t a member of the elite tribe of P7 owners anymore.
I got over it, thankfully. 😉
These days I’m more interested in the sword of no-sword.
Wait. So because I reported actual first hand observations I’m not a disinterested party? But the same people who are calling me biased use CZ’s web site as a source of “neutral” information?
Guys, I have zero personal investment in CZ’s success or failure. I’ve actively invited folks to post their positive experiences with CZ. And if the next four CZ pistols I see in class run flawlessly, you can be sure I’ll report that, too.
But at this point, I think we’ve disproven the claim that the CZs were all dirty abused guns while the other guns in the class were all pristine safe queens; that the CZs were shooting crappy reloads produced by blind paraplegics while the other guns were shooting new factory premium ammo; that the CZ dominates the world military market; and, most importantly, that the observations from this class are somehow out of sync with common experiences wi the CZ.
I am not attacking anyone, asking for information, and seeing the inconsistancies. For instance,
[quote]There were four CZ75-pattern guns (one Tangfolio and three genuine CZs) used by three different students over the course of the week, and every one of them had reliability problems.[/quote]
Yet you say,
[quote]Mine was the only CZ to do four days.[/quote]
He says,
[quote]And after four straight days of watching them choke, I’d say it’s a well deserved reputation.[/quote]
But you said,
[quote]The other CZ was a Shadow as well I believe and was only used on day 3 with a combo of factory and Tanfoglio mags. That shooter then used a Tanfoglio for day 4. Then with all Tanfoglio mags.
[/quote]
So the 85 was, according to you, only used 1 day, and the Tan, one day. And yours was the only one used for 4 straight days with the same magazines.
Malfunctions were listed as,
[quote]failures to feed to failures to extract to failures to eject to failures to lock back to premature lock back,
[/quote]
Other than the failure to eject, which you traced to an extractor spring in need of replacement, every issue listed is magazine related. And you said that magazines used were either altered non CZ nor listed as CZ compatible, and CZ factory ten round magazines, which are known to be problematic. Okay, maybe the magazines in Canada are bad. I have contacted CZ-USA, and they are looking for data to forward to me, but the preliminary report is current production guns all went through the testing described for the P01. Probably not with neutered magazines, though. They are taking my request for reliability testing under advisement, but maybe with someone with facts a bit more in order, a bit more scientific.
Certainly, as I stated before, anything made by man can and will fail, and in my years running ranges for several different outfits, I have seen every single maker represented fail at one time or another, even CZ. That was an 83 owned by a customer, jammed quite a bit that day – bad magazine.
Did Todd write a collumn about how unreliable and problematic 1911s are, considering his post about them? After all, quoting again,
[quote]Nonetheless, if a gun can’t be depended upon to go bang when the trigger is pressed, it’s a paperweight….I’ve seen a few 1911s come through class without stoppages. [/quote]
I would love to read that article. So would the millions of afficiandos of the 1911 pattern.
Thank you for your time. I haven’t heard back from CZ-UB yet on the testing data for the Phantom.
commandar, you forgot two, the Czech Republic no uses the CZ Phantom, and the Phillipene National Police force contracted to replace thier Glocks with the CZ P07, a force of just under 120,000, if I read my data correctly.
Please, have a nice day!
Dave,
I like 1911s.
1911s are the only autoloaders I carry.
I don’t need to see that hypothetical article because I can tell you straight up that I’ve seen plenty of wretched pulsating balls of fail from nearly every major 1911 manufacturer on the market. They’re generally ill-built from substandard parts anyway, and then tinkered with by people who don’t know what the heck they’re doing.
I generally would steer new shooters away from the 1911 platform, unless they’re willing to become real gun geeks.
It doesn’t hurt my feelings.
Again, I say this as somebody who currently has yet another $2k+ 1911 currently under construction: If I was starting all over again, I’d probably have a gun safe full of identical, beat-to-hell Glock 19s.
People worry way too much about guns and not enough about shooting.
I apolologize Todd, I failed to respond to your statement, no, at this point, I think I would be interested in asking someone who has no connection to this article to do the testing, nor any connection to CZ or CZF. Yep, that knocks me and mine out of it, too.
I wonder what Rob Leatham had to say when he shot the Springfield P9 back in the day, being a Tanfoglio gun, do ask him, if you can? He’s closer to me, but you run in the same circles, maybe.
I am not using CZ’s website for any information, I am contacting them for the information I mentioned about, realibailty testing and data from the recent Czech Military trials of the CZ Phantom, might also have data from other tested pistols, could be very interesting. I would have to contact them, as I don’t know who else would have that information, plus mentioning reliabilty testing perhaps should also include a segment with the neutered 10 round magazines.
The weather must be very nice in Canada this time of year, I hope you are all enjoying it while we sweat in 110 here in Free AZ. 🙂
Tam, love that turn of phrase! I had a Springfield 1911A1 years ago, good pistol, no issues I can remember, but I just didn’t like Single Action. That would be my reason for steering absolute newbies away from the 1911, because it, like the Glock Safe Action trigger, is really meant for people who train consistantly and continously. Glockers go nuts when I tell them the Glock is really an experts gun. 🙂
I am not worried about the maker, CZ will prosper just fine with or without me, same as any other manufacturer. I am also quite fond of, and carry, my Smith Model 10 38 revolver. I can hit what I aim at with it reliably, and the ammo is known for good consistant results, I take it that’swhat you mean by “not enough shooting”?
That does remind me, I just moved, and need to get back to the range ASAP, been over two weeks…
I think I might add that all indications show that when the British SAS were cracking frames on theier well worn P-35 Brownings.
They wanted to adopt the CZ75 as the new service pistols for the regiment.
The authorities would have no part in them using
a Communist designed or then mad gun, so they went with the p226. Of which they had continued problems with frames cracking, as do shooters around the world.
I think if there was a better mousetrap for the
Czech National Police. They would have replaced the Cz75, 75B, PCR and P-01 75D Compacts, years ago.
Other countries like Brazil and Israel love their issued CZ pistols.
People cite that the Czech Army (ACR) has adopted the Glock 17.
Well, not so true. Only the special Forces unit.
has. it is a very small unit and dos not represent the overall usage of pistols in the ACR, which mostly uses the Cz82 and 75B pistols.
Frankly, once you get out of the vacuum of the USA and Canada.
The CZ brand well represented and highly trusted/ respected among military/police and civilian shooters around the world.
Hrm, been shooting a CZ since 2000. Can think of only one malfunction with it, failure to feed.
Stopped counting at a hundred thousand rounds through it.
“Dogzard”,
Over a hundred cases of ammo with not one dud primer, worn out mag, or broken part?
I was born at night, dude, but not last night.
Todd’s article reflected on the paperweight Para Ord on days one and two. He wrote this article due to the fact that the CZ is still basically an unknown gun in his cirlce of training and observation. That made it something unique and interesting to him.
Oddly, most Instructors in the States and Canada
don’t like CZs because they have never held one, or for heaven’s sake, even fired one.
Those that teach most of the year outside of
N. America. Have grown to know them well and hold them in high regard, especially after students show up and kick-ass all the way through the class!
Stone Cold reliable like a Chevy Truck!
The Ford Pinto analogy from a guy that’s never owned or fired a CZ, is just unfair.
The terrible thing is I had a Pinto wagon…worked great until my brother wrecked it. 🙂
I think USPSA GM Petros Milionis shot for Team CZ before he left CZ due to reliability issues… I could be wrong, tho.
Never heard the name, I’ll run it past Angus Hobdell, who is CZs top shooter.
He shot for CZ about 5 years ago.
In my early shooting days, from 2000 thru mid-2004, I owned four different CZ pistols. Two PCRs, one commercial CZ-75B, one nickel CZ-75A. My experience with them was similar to Todd’s. All four guns malfunctioned and broke parts on a regular basis, and this was not with a particularly intense firing schedule.
Nor is my experience unique. I personally know two USPSA grandmasters who used to shoot CZs, but switched to a different platform because they couldn’t keep them running.
All my experience has shown me that CZ pistols cannot stand up to even a moderate amount of shooting. Sorry if that hurts any feelings.
I once had a customer with a Glock tattoo…
If Glock would send me some ammo, I’d get a Glock tattoo on my forehead…
I think that’s actually legal in Nevada, but you need to be licensed or something. 😉
“CZ’s are world-class weapons by any measure: quality, reliability, durability, you name i”
Why the hell did both of my CZ firearms have issues straight out of the box, then, if they are world class weapons by any measure of quality and reliability?
CZ 452- something was screwed up with the sear and headspace. They fixed it, thankfully, and I still have it.
CZ 75- grip screw crossthreaded from the factory, broke off into the frame. Had it repaired with larger screw and sold it.
I can excuse one lemon from a maker. I cannot excuse two in a row…
I am both a CZ and a Para-Ordnance owner.
I’ve never ran my CZ-40b through a course, but I did run my P-14 through two, Thunder Ranch Texas and Gunsite 250 . My particular P-14 was purchased new in 1996, and is not fitted very well, with gaps and sharp edges around the grip safety. In class, the grip and the manual safety raised blisters because of sharp corners, but the pistol ran reliably in both classes. However, those two classes wore it out; less than 500 rounds after the last class, the grip safety stopped blocking the trigger. Upon detail stripping, I had to replace the trigger bow because the grip safety wore a groove in it.
Hasn’t been reliable since.
I replaced it first with a XD Service Model in 9mm, and have since gotten an M&P in 9mm to supplement that.
Todd is just observing the trends as he sees them. Like other large volume instructors I know, they see what works more often than not, and say so. You CZ owners out there who have examples that work, congratulate yourselves like owners of working Bushmasters do.
“Mock not my magic bow!”
One thing I’ve noticed in these comments is a tendency to go ‘apples-to-oranges’: “Well, my 20-year-old CZ75 works just fine, so ALL CZ’s must be okay!”. Todd saw 4 CZ’s throw problems; odds are strong that they weren’t all made back in the Golden Age of Czech Arms. Gun companies do go into and out of periods of good and bad quality control- go ask Taurus. I think what we see here is that CZ is in a bad patch.
I also noticed a recursive in Dave’s posts: Todd noticed a pattern of malfs with CZ’s so Dave wants a ‘disinterested’ test? Dave, if the ‘disinterested’ test still shows problems, will it become ‘interested’ in your eyes? Do you have eny reason to suspect that Todd was in any way predjudiced before the class in question, or are you trying to impeach the witness rather than argue his evidence?
Disclaimer: I owned a fullsize CZ in 9mm for about one week, two years ago… I found that, while the ergonomics were excellent, it was just too big and heavy for its caliber to use as a full-time CCW, and that the felt recoil and muzzle flip were worse than I had expected in an all-steel fullsize 9mm. Not to my taste, but then again that’s not something that should affect anyone else’s choice.
But . . . but . . . but they’re *beautiful!*
Guns are machines. They work or they don’t. No matter how much you love one, it will never love you back; it’ll just run or not run. I am not a high-volume shooter, and I’ve had failures with Para, Glock, H und K, and SIG. I have NEVER, EVER, NEVER had ONE SINGLE FAILURE of ANY KIND with the magnificent Springfield XD .45!
Of course, I’ve owned it for nearly a year and put maybe 500 rounds through it. :p
KEV said: “I think I might add that all indications show that when the British SAS were cracking frames on theier well worn P-35 Brownings. They wanted to adopt the CZ75 as the new service pistols for the regiment. The authorities would have no part in them using a Communist designed or then mad gun, so they went with the p226. Of which they had continued problems with frames cracking, as do shooters around the world.”
This is exactly the kind of stuff that hurts CZ owners. Can you cite a single piece of reliable documentation to support the statement that the SAS wanted to adopt the CZ? Can you point to a single published fact regarding their supposed complaint about cracked SIG slides?
I worked for SIG and had occasion to discuss the P226 with multiple active duty SAS members. They never complained about cracking frames to me. Did they crack frames sometimes? I’m sure they did. But not a single one every mentioned a desire to switch to CZ.
“The Ford Pinto analogy from a guy that’s never owned or fired a CZ, is just unfair.”
Never fired one? Dude, I talked about shooting Rob’s pistol in the original post! I also handled at least one other CZ during the class and had it malf in my hands. How the hell do you have any idea how many other times I’ve shot, handled, or even owned a CZ pistol?
These are simple, straightforward observations of events witnessed by multiple disinterested people. Which is more than I can say for many of the comments above being posted by folks whose email addresses suggest more than a cursory connection to a certain Czechoslovakian gun manufacturer…
Chris Rhines: “If Glock would send me some ammo, I’d get a Glock tattoo on my forehead…”
I’ve got a Gen4 G19 on the way. Next time I talk to Glock, I will personally make arrangements for them to send you an entire box of 9mm ammo. I expect to see that tattoo before the Summer is over.
ah, sweet jebus, laughing this hard before bed is not a good idea. Thanks Todd.
Sorry, was I unclear? Please, let me restate, with quotes.
[quote]And last week in Canada, I learned that CZ pistols (pronounced “see zed” in Canadiese) are as reliable as a Ford.
A Ford Pinto, that is.
But when put to the test under the stress of a high volume shooting class, these guns simply couldn’t make it. Not one, not two, but all four.
Zed is not your friend.[/quote]
He is showing a bias.
how the hell is that a bias? he is simply reporting what happened.
oh wait, you mean he’s biased against Ford. Ok now I get it.
Sorry, hit the wrong button, wasn’t going to post that unfinished.
As I was about to say, he has a bias, and that’s OK. So, I would like a third party who has no connection to either him or CZ to do testing, but I think CZ has lost interest in this particular blog, as testing observed, (this blog and thread has been reviewed by CZ-USA senior staff, BTW), was not scientific in any manner whatsoever. Also, as I stated before, the blog is misleading using disingenous phraseology to state he watched 4 guns fail over 4 days, which was proved to be incorrect, it was 1 gun for 4 days with an operator caused fault, 1 CZ for 2 days, 1 CZ for 1 day, and 1 Tanfoglio, which is NOT and never has been a CZ made product, for one day. This from the person who had the operator induced failure in his CZ pistol. Once again, that’s OK, his school, his methods, his ruels, his observations, his blog, he can state that the moon is made of green cheese if he wishes. We’ll just argue over what cracker to spread it on.
But, as I posted on thehighroad.org, using Todds own logic and observational style, I saw 5 out of 6 HK USP pistols on the rental range I ran 8+ years ago fall apart in less than a year, and I saw Tucson Police Department issued HK USPs fail, one from an officers on duty holster, in front of me. As a range RSO for an indoor range, I saw many firearms throw a lot of lead down range. So, here and now, using the same criteria, maybe with even more credible evidence, (TPD switched to Glock due to HK issues), I declare all HK pistols to be crap and unreliable, never to be trusted by anyone with half a brain cell!
Now honestly, would anyone believe that? Of course not, and neither do I. I’d love to have a P7 in my small collection, and a vP70z, just because. 🙂
The man doesn’t like CZ, he has seen some fail, fine. I don’t like Glock, have seen some fail, have had three fail in my hand, and I will never own an HK USP, having seen several fail in front of me. We have our biases, as does any living human being.
DaveP, does my post answer your question? If not, please do not hesitate to request further data.
But, seriously, this has been run to death here, on THR and CZF. We may agree to disagree, at this point, if you wish.
Todd,
How big a box? 😉
Ooh, SNAP!
Todd, your blog has been reviewed in Kansas City and they have lost interest, baby. You are oh-vah!
Sorry, I don’t believe I meant it that way you took it, I wanted him to know his observations have been looked at by CZ-USA, who did give it all the attention they believe it deserved. I thought he might be pleased to know the company actually took an interest in what he had to say, regardless of his supporters comments. 🙂
Please continue to have a nice day.
I declare all HK pistols to be crap and unreliable, never to be trusted by anyone with half a brain cell!
Now honestly, would anyone believe that?
No. Since you’re not ToddG. I trust ToddG
He’s got oodles of experience and if he says CZ is a nice gun, but unreliable, then I’ll defer to his judgement.
The only bullet you can be 100% sure that your gun will launch is the one that just left the barrel.
Other than that one shot, your gun sucks.
Well, Less, I have oodles of experiance too. I have never heard of Todd before this, so you see, we are in the same boat.
By the way, thanks for calling me a liar. 🙂 Have a great day.
Yeah, Dave, you pretty much have: you’re engaged in a religous defense of your favorite toy, and nothing will keep you from altering the reality to meet your fantasy. In short, your credibility is zero.
If you’re an example of the average CZ user, I’m glad I stuck with Glocks.
Congrat, dude: you’ve shamed your tribe.
I’m still trying to figure out his bias here. He reported on the events that occurred. your nitpicking of “4 guns over 4 days” is truly strange. He was here for 4 days, over the course of those 4 days he saw 4 CZ type guns fail, repeatedly. So that’s 4 guns over 4 days. How else would one write it?
So lets just say you’re running a class, and 4 people with HK’s show up, say, all USPs. And lets says say they shot on different days, but one or two went the whole 4 days. And during that course those 4 guns all had repeated failures of some sort or another, not operator induced either (unless you’re calling my not swapping out a spring operator induced? cuz officially there is nothing on the CZ website, nor in the manual I received with the gun that even hints at when spring changes should be done, I just normally do them on my own, earlier usually). And then you decide to comment on it, because you really haven’t seen a HK at a class before, and certainly not 4 of them. Tell me, how would you write the article? Would you say that those HKs must have been Monday or Friday built guns, therefore their malfunctions were not of any import. That all that is HK is Golden? Probably not.
If you want to read about scientific tests, with detailed reporting on a guns performance and a breakdown on it’s malf’s, read Todd’s updates on his HK45. Or hit the archives and read the P30 ones, or the not so glowing M&P ones. Todd has no bias, he did not start the day saying, I don’t like CZs, in fact he still hasn’t said that. He liked mine just fine. He simply noted that it didn’t run all that good until I replaced that spring.
You clearly have a bias, and it shows quite plainly in your posts. Had you done any research into Todd, his background, who he worked for and the jobs he did while there, you’d certainly understand that is one of the most knowledgeable people in the country when it comes to pistols, their usage, strengths and weaknesses.
but hey, whatever.