CZ P-07 Appreciation Thread

[TBT]

I feel you with the HK man (they are fine guns indeed though). I chose the P-07 over pretty much everything out there. I wouldn't say that money was no object as I wasn't willing to drop $3000 on a custom 1911 but my budget was probably $1000. I tried the Sig Sauers, HKs, Walthers, all of them really. I did a lot of homework and handled a lot of guns. The P-07 ended up winning because of what it is, not what it cost.

And I couldn't be happier.

[Cyanide971]

TBT, I agree completely about HK; fine firearms but, just wasn't my cup of Java. I just wish that CZ would make a DAO and/or striker-fire version of the P-07. Seriously! Imagine a constant 6.5-7# pull ala Sig P250.... I'd be all over that!!!

Until then, my assorted, mixed DAO family will have to suffice lol. But for DA/SA, make mine the P-07

[jr24]

TBT, I agree completely about HK; fine firearms but, just wasn't my cup of Java. I just wish that CZ would make a DAO and/or striker-fire version of the P-07. Seriously! Imagine a constant 6.5-7# pull ala Sig P250.... I'd be all over that!!!

I really just wish they made the safety larger/easier to use. The P-07 is fantastic as a DA/SA but if I could get the safety to work reliably on my draw it would be a Phenominal SAO carry gun.

Still it takes some of the Glock 19's time as EDC, I seem to bounce between them.

[TBT]

I vote yes on the larger safety. I wonder if that's one of the things Randy @ Apex is thinking about manufacturing for the platform? He mentioned that the gun was exceptional as is and that CGW offers some really fine upgrades but that Apex might have something up their sleeve for it too. It was in a thread over on M4Carbine.

I'm really not interested in a DAO/Striker version of the gun. There are tons of very high quality striker guns out there (P320, VP9, PPQ, M&P) if that's what I wanted and I'm not really interested in a DAO like the P250. Just not my cup of tea.

Coming from the 1911 if I decide at one point that I want a consistent trigger (unlikely with the results I'm seeing training with the DA/SA setup) then I'll just toss the safety on it and have a trigger that is hands down better than anything offered int he striker world.

[WVsig]

The P07 is a good gun for the money but even with upgrades from CGWs there is something very similar which is better IMHO....

I looked long and hard at it and almost pulled the trigger on one but ended up going a different direction. I will most likely pick one up later because they are an excellent value. A lot of gun for the money.

[Hunter0924]

I published a review on the CZ P-09 not too long ago. It is a fine pistol and I wound up buying the test sample.

http://rangehot.com/cz-p09-pushing-p...uty-pistol-is/

[TBT]

I did read that review. Very well done.

[Limnophile]

The P07 is a good gun for the money but even with upgrades from CGWs there is something very similar which is better IMHO....

And, that would be ... ?

When I bought my CZ 75 Compact it came down to it or a CZ 75 P-07 Duty. The second generation P-07 is making me think the Compact could use company.

[WVsig]

Sphinx SDP Compact....

[Walt Sherrill]

I've got both the P-07 and the SDP, and they shoot far more similarly than you expect.

I like the SDP better, but I like the P-07 a lot.

They look alike, and shoot more alike than you'd expect. The SDP in the final analysis, is a more refined gun and worth every penny of the extra cost (which is substantial), but the P-07 is a LOT of gun for the money!

(And I won't be surprised, in a year or two, to see a new striker-fired CZ. They did it with the CZ-100... The trigger in the P-07/P-09 is very good, and they don't have a lot of pressure to improve THAT part of the gun.)

[TBT]

I don't think most people would argue the P-07 over the SDP unless they are arguing value. The examples I have seen all have been slightly better fit, finish, and trigger. But they've all been better. I could see one in my future someday just as a more refined version of my working gun.

[WVsig]

I've got both the P-07 and the SDP, and they shoot far more similarly than you expect.

I like the SDP better, but I like the P-07 a lot.

They look alike, and shoot more alike than you'd expect. The SDP in the final analysis, is a more refined gun and worth every penny of the extra cost (which is substantial), but the P-07 is a LOT of gun for the money!

(And I won't be surprised, in a year or two, to see a new striker-fired CZ. They did it with the CZ-100... The trigger in the P-07/P-09 is very good, and they don't have a lot of pressure to improve THAT part of the gun.)

I hear you Walt. The P07 is a nice gun. The law of diminishing returns is definitely at play. The price difference gets smaller when you look at the CGW P07 custom and the Pro Grade. Which is getting closer to the Sphinx.

I had a lengthy discussion about the Sphinx and the P07 Pro Grade from CGW with David. He builds a great gun but it is a different breed then the Sphinx. These are Davids words not mine.

[WVsig]

I don't think most people would argue the P-07 over the SDP unless they are arguing value. The examples I have seen all have been slightly better fit, finish, and trigger. But they've all been better. I could see one in my future someday just as a more refined version of my working gun.

Well put. I believe the P07 is a great working gun. It is a function over form gun while the Sphinx might be a more refined the P07 will serve you well.

[TBT]

People focus too much on the price difference too.

I guess that makes sense if you are on a budget but if you are just comparing A with B... when I think about what I've spent on ammo this year (and a friggin iPhone 6 plus for my 17 year old that came in just under a grand with a case...) the $400 or so that the SDP comes in at above the P-07 doesn't seem like a very good reason to "keep shopping" to me. $475. $875. Whatever. If you like it enough to shoot it a lot that will be the least expensive part of the journey.

See. I'm already talking myself into one.

[WVsig]

People focus too much on the price difference too.

I guess that makes sense if you are on a budget but if you are just comparing A with B... when I think about what I've spent on ammo this year (and a friggin iPhone 6 plus for my 17 year old that came in just under a grand with a case...) the $400 or so that the SDP comes in at above the P-07 doesn't seem like a very good reason to "keep shopping" to me. $475. $875. Whatever. If you like it enough to shoot it a lot that will be the least expensive part of the journey.

See. I'm already talking myself into one

So true. At $10-$11 for factory ammo you can shoot $400 pretty quickly. That's why I bought a Sphinx and reload for it. With range brass and copper plated bullets I can reload 124gr 9mm for about $.12 a round. Not factoring in my time.

[TBT]

I need to get into reloading. That's probably the next thing I'll do. Unless of course you people talk me into adding an SDP first haha.

[Cyanide971]

Originally Posted by Walt Sherrill

(And I won't be surprised, in a year or two, to see a new striker-fired CZ. They did it with the CZ-100... The trigger in the P-07/P-09 is very good, and they don't have a lot of pressure to improve THAT part of the gun.)

A few design changes to the original CZ 100, with possible influence from the P-07 in regards to the trigger, universal rail, grip texture/stippling, and a good set of night sights, and I think it'd sell like hotcakes (I absolutely love mine).

[TBT]

My issue with the possibility of patterning a striker-fired gun after the P-series guns would be the bore axis. I could be crazy but the axis on these guns don’t seem to be as low as everyone always seem to proclaim. Is it high? No. Not really. It just is what it is. And it’s very shootable as is. Talking to people that know more than I do a lot of the P-series shootability comes from it being a hammer fired gun because of the resistance the hammer assembly provides in slowing the slide down. Don’t know if that’s true or exactly where I've heard that but one of the comments was that if the P-series were striker fired they wouldn't be nearly as good tracking shot to shot as they are. May have been Mike Pannone I saw that comment from? I don’t know. Maybe someone who knows more than I do can comment.

[Walt Sherrill]

Originally Posted by TBT

...Talking to people that know more than I do a lot of the P-series shootability comes from it being a hammer fired gun because of the resistance the hammer assembly provides in slowing the slide down. Don’t know if that’s true or exactly where I've heard that but one of the comments was that if the P-series were striker fired they wouldn't be nearly as good tracking shot to shot as they are. May have been Mike Pannone I saw that comment from? I don’t know. Maybe someone who knows more than I do can comment.

The following comments are conjecture, and I welcome different or opposing viewpoints, as there may be points I'm overlooking -- and I'd like to know if that is the case.

I've not encountered the argument (underlined above) in years of reading on this subject, and I'm a long-time CZ enthusiast. There could be something to it -- but I suspect there are ways to compensate for changes that would come with moving to a striker assembly in place of a hammer assembly. (As I note below, a heavier slide can be used to slow slide velocity, if that is desired -- as can a heavier recoil spring.)

The hammer spring does the slowing, as it is compressed by the slide movement. The weight of that spring is frequently modified to give a lighter or heavier hammer strike. A heavier hammer spring affects felt recoil by storing a small additional amount of the recoil force and passing it back to the frame when the hammer is dropped. I suspect that most of us would notice something different (if only a heavier trigger), but not notice much difference in recoil -- except, that with heavier recoil springs, the recoil sometimes feels subtly longer and maybe gentler. (It's mostly illusion, just spreading the recoil out a bit as the heavier spring slows and stores.)

While the hammer spring DOES help slow the slide, I suspect that any resistance at that point in the firing cycle could easily be compensated for by a different recoil spring and/or by adding a buffer in the recoil spring assembly. Even variable rate springs or dual spring assemblies might have the desired effect. I the spring is too strong, the slide is hard to rack, which is probably one of the reasons some of the force is used to charge or partially charge striker springs.

Some pros use very light recoil springs to allow greater slide velocity and then use buffers to "cushion" the impact as the slide slams to the rear -- *which helps reduce barrel rise. Faster slide and less flip. (*An addition to the original comment, for clarity's sake.)

(The buffers aren't used to protect the frame, but to change the shape of the recoil impulse.) I've heard of that technique used with with striker-fired guns, but suspect it would work with hammer fired guns, too. As is the case with the hammer spring, the force hitting and being absorbed/affected by the buffer isn't directly returned as the slide slams forward -- a fraction (perhaps very small?) of the stored recoil force is delayed until the trigger is pulled. Slowing down the slide is NOT the objective for some shooters.

The main function of the recoil spring is to make the gun function (load the next round, cock the hammer or charge (or partially charge) the striker spring, and not to protect the gun or the shooter from recoil. (Heavier slides can be used in place of heavier springs, if slide velocity is a concern.)

A heavier recoil spring alone can cause some barrel DIP as the slide slams home, but a less strong recoil spring with a buffer seems to offset that natural "dip" in some gun designs. A too-heavy recoil spring alone can be a problem, causing more dip, and while the gun still functions, it can take longer for the gun to be brought back on target. (This is seldom discussed on these forums, but there are great examples shown in videos on YouTube.)

It's a design/user choice issue. There are a LOT of striker-fired guns used in the gun games with great success. I think we'll start to see Gray Guns-tuned SIG P320 out there in the near future (in the IDPA SSP or USPSA Production divisions).

Would a P-series CZ not stack up? Hard to say until we see it done ... but I suspect it's coming. (That too is conjecture.)

.

[TBT]

It's all over my pay grade Walt. I'm pretty sure that the comment was in the P-07 thread at m4Carbine forum but I couldn't be entirely sure. And I could be misquoting it as well. That thread is a huge to search through though. Maybe I will if I get the time.

[TBT]

All I can find is Randy from Apex talking about the benifits of the way CZ was able to extend the mechanical dwell time of the barrel etc.

Apologies in regards to my poor memory. I think there was more discussed on it but I can't find it. Until I do just assume that I'm insane and should have kept my mouth shut.

[Walt Sherrill]

Hopefully, others here will have some thoughts on the topic. You're doing exactly what I do sometimes -- pose a question to see what answers can be found.

As noted in my comments, SPEEDING UP THE SLIDE was the intent of some of the pros... so a slower slide isn't always a desireable trait. (The pros I mentioned talked about speeding up the slide, and using a buffer to keep barrel rise a low as possible.)

I wonder if any of us participating here have the reflexes and/or ability to capitalize on any of the potential advantage?

A few of the pros probably do... but as we've discussed elsewhere, the guys with the best scores aren't always the fastest. Many of the best pros seem almost slow as they go through a course of fire, but their times can be astounding!

[TBT]

It was a comment from Mike Pannone:

The bore axis is about 3/16" higher based on back-strap/bore axis dimensions but the addition of a hammer adds to the force holding the slide locked longer. Striker fired guns tend to unlock faster. For that very reason my LW 1911 CCO in 9mm shoots softer than my G19,17 or 35. Bore axis is critical when it is dramatic and on the same locking/mechanical system. I shoot both and the P-series guns shoot softer, especially the P09. There is absolutely no way not to notice when you shoot them side by side. That said my P09 shoots softer than my SP01 as well.

Not sure if that's all valid or if I read too much into what he was saying.

Hopefully it's okay for me to post that...

[Walt Sherrill]

He seems to be talking about the shooting experience -- and that may be valid. But I suspect some of the same "effect" could be achieved with different springs, recoil systems, and buffers. The fact that the P-07 and P-09 have polymer frames, and the SP-01 doesn't, may affect felt recoil, too. Plus the fact that the larger P-09 is heavier and has more polymer to distribute recoil force through it. (Polymer can be, in effect, a very modest buffer-- between the gun and you.) A heavier slide could slow down the faster movement of the slide in a striker-equipped gun, too.

The SP-01 has a steel frame and is heavier! I'm surprised that the P-09 feels "softer" than the SP-01, but I've not shot either of those guns. Most folks rave about the SP-01. I wonder if we're going to see some "tricked-out" P-09 used in the gun games, soon? They'll probably have to come up with somewhat wider grips -- and higher-cap mags. The newest versions have interchangeable grips, I think, and that may address the somewhat thinner grips on the P-07/P-09. (They're not THAT thin, but do feel different in the hand than some CZs and CZ-pattern guns.)

Nothing to argue with in his analysis -- but it seems to be more about how the gun FEELS when being shot than how it well it performs.

.

[TBT]

I've actually heard several people muse over the P-series being softer shooting the metal offerings from CZ. I've never fired an SP-01 or P-01 so I can't offer any experience myself.