G
Guest
·Gents,
Thought it would be interesting to compare both pistols, in the same caliber, and report my findings. Turned out to be a lot of fun. So here goes:
Both the pistols are box stock, two tone models with about 200 rounds through each.
Fit and finish: Both were excellent, with a slight edge to the Hi-Power.
Sights: Hi-Power has high visibility sights and uses a "white stripe" pattern on the rear and same on the front. However, the front is painted white the whole length and it's hard get a decent sight picture. Especially, in bright light. The CZ, on the other hand, has excellent high visibility sights with the 3-dot pattern so familiar. The dots are sllightly smaller than we see, normally, but are painted with a greenish paint that almost glows. The sights seem to draw your eye to them. This round goes to CZ. Whoever designed the BHP "Practical" sights needs to be flogged...IMHO.
Grips: BHP stock wood grips have always felt funny to me and I change them out. They work and that's all I can say about them. CZ's are black plastic and feel fairly good. I'd say BHP and CZ tie on the grip issue.
Capacity: BHP 10+1 CZ 10+1 Both share the same capacity, magazines and are of excellent quality. Both being made by Mec-Gar of Italy.
Fit and Finish: Equal. Two-tone, Black slide and white chrome silver frames.
Ease of handling/pointability: Both pistols index well and point naturally. The better sights on the CZ make target acquisition easy. Not so, the BHP.
Ambidextrious Safeties: Both. Browning type feels a bit mushy and is harder to engage. CZ is more positive and nicely shaped. Those with small hands will find the safety a bit of a reach for your thumb. It does become easier with practice. You can also engage/disengage the safety with the index finger of your dominant hand.
Slide Release: Equal/left side of the frame.
Mag Well/Speed Loading: Browning has a standard well where-as the CZ has an enlarged, flared, and beveled "chute". Reloads are definetely faster with the CZ.
Magazine Release: Equal. I found I had to rotate the pistol slightly to release the magazine from either pistol.
Trigger Pull: BHP-SA / CZ-DA/SA. Both triggers exhibited substantial creep and were a bit "gritty" feeling, but broke cleanly. Call it equal, but the CZ allows single action "cocked and locked" carry or conventionall DA/SA.
Hammers: Spur type. Hammer bite? No, but I've never had a problem with that. If you do, bob the hammer slightly and your home free.
Weight: Equal, at 35-36 oz.
Accuracy: Both exhibit acceptable combat accuracy. Double taps from 10 yards yielded two rounds, about an inch apart, from the BHP. The CZ groups were about3/4" to 1 1/2". Both pistols placed their rounds dead center at 10 yards.
Reliability: Ammunition was Federal Hydra-Shock 180 grain JHP and PMC 165 gr. FMJ. No stoppages were experienced in either pistol with factory ammo.
Overall Impression: The BHP comes in a hard plastic case with a spare magazine. The CZ comes in a hard plastic case with a spare magazine and the follow accessories: Mag loader, cleaning rod, cleaning brush and an ingenious "snap cap" for dry firing. It appears that CZ is listening to the user community and is offering a few extras with their guns. The CZ wins on price point, too, being up to several hundred dollars less than the BHP.
Synopsis: It's a win-win situation. If you want a superb SA auto the BHP is you best bet. Should you want the option of DA/SA the CZ is a suberb choice. A final option would be to do as I did and buy both!
Those on a budget will find the CZ a welcome choice. Perhaps saving enough to buy some excellent leather, ammo, and accessories.
Should I have to go into "the dark place" I would feel well armed with either pistol.
Thought it would be interesting to compare both pistols, in the same caliber, and report my findings. Turned out to be a lot of fun. So here goes:
Both the pistols are box stock, two tone models with about 200 rounds through each.
Fit and finish: Both were excellent, with a slight edge to the Hi-Power.
Sights: Hi-Power has high visibility sights and uses a "white stripe" pattern on the rear and same on the front. However, the front is painted white the whole length and it's hard get a decent sight picture. Especially, in bright light. The CZ, on the other hand, has excellent high visibility sights with the 3-dot pattern so familiar. The dots are sllightly smaller than we see, normally, but are painted with a greenish paint that almost glows. The sights seem to draw your eye to them. This round goes to CZ. Whoever designed the BHP "Practical" sights needs to be flogged...IMHO.
Grips: BHP stock wood grips have always felt funny to me and I change them out. They work and that's all I can say about them. CZ's are black plastic and feel fairly good. I'd say BHP and CZ tie on the grip issue.
Capacity: BHP 10+1 CZ 10+1 Both share the same capacity, magazines and are of excellent quality. Both being made by Mec-Gar of Italy.
Fit and Finish: Equal. Two-tone, Black slide and white chrome silver frames.
Ease of handling/pointability: Both pistols index well and point naturally. The better sights on the CZ make target acquisition easy. Not so, the BHP.
Ambidextrious Safeties: Both. Browning type feels a bit mushy and is harder to engage. CZ is more positive and nicely shaped. Those with small hands will find the safety a bit of a reach for your thumb. It does become easier with practice. You can also engage/disengage the safety with the index finger of your dominant hand.
Slide Release: Equal/left side of the frame.
Mag Well/Speed Loading: Browning has a standard well where-as the CZ has an enlarged, flared, and beveled "chute". Reloads are definetely faster with the CZ.
Magazine Release: Equal. I found I had to rotate the pistol slightly to release the magazine from either pistol.
Trigger Pull: BHP-SA / CZ-DA/SA. Both triggers exhibited substantial creep and were a bit "gritty" feeling, but broke cleanly. Call it equal, but the CZ allows single action "cocked and locked" carry or conventionall DA/SA.
Hammers: Spur type. Hammer bite? No, but I've never had a problem with that. If you do, bob the hammer slightly and your home free.
Weight: Equal, at 35-36 oz.
Accuracy: Both exhibit acceptable combat accuracy. Double taps from 10 yards yielded two rounds, about an inch apart, from the BHP. The CZ groups were about3/4" to 1 1/2". Both pistols placed their rounds dead center at 10 yards.
Reliability: Ammunition was Federal Hydra-Shock 180 grain JHP and PMC 165 gr. FMJ. No stoppages were experienced in either pistol with factory ammo.
Overall Impression: The BHP comes in a hard plastic case with a spare magazine. The CZ comes in a hard plastic case with a spare magazine and the follow accessories: Mag loader, cleaning rod, cleaning brush and an ingenious "snap cap" for dry firing. It appears that CZ is listening to the user community and is offering a few extras with their guns. The CZ wins on price point, too, being up to several hundred dollars less than the BHP.
Synopsis: It's a win-win situation. If you want a superb SA auto the BHP is you best bet. Should you want the option of DA/SA the CZ is a suberb choice. A final option would be to do as I did and buy both!
Those on a budget will find the CZ a welcome choice. Perhaps saving enough to buy some excellent leather, ammo, and accessories.
Should I have to go into "the dark place" I would feel well armed with either pistol.
