The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 9, 2001, 11:00 AM   #1
Rob96
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 31, 1999
Location: Allentown,PA
Posts: 1,908
CZ97B vs 1911

How does the CZ97B compare to a full sized 1911 for CCW? I am currently saving up to purchase another 1911 but have looked at the CZ97B and wondered how well they would carry IWB or on the hip. I already own a CZ75B am very impressed with their quality and accuracy. Just wonderring how well they carry as I already know how well the 1911 carry's.
Rob96 is offline  
Old July 9, 2001, 11:28 AM   #2
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 5,689
The 1911 is going to win a CCW comparison with the CZ97B every time IMO. The CZ97 has a larger grip, more width, as long if not longer, and weighs more both loaded and unloaded.

I love CZs and particularly the 97; but I wouldn't carry one unless I was going to carry open.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old July 9, 2001, 11:55 AM   #3
Mal H
Staff
 
Join Date: March 20, 1999
Location: Somewhere in the woods of Northern Virginia
Posts: 14,537
Gotta agree with Bart. My 97B would be the last pistol I would consider for a CCW, especially IWB. It's too big and too heavy.
Mal H is offline  
Old July 9, 2001, 12:28 PM   #4
Ledbetter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2000
Location: California USA
Posts: 4,535
Just for reference

Do you gentlemen also consider the CZ-75B too large for CCW?

Regards.
Ledbetter is offline  
Old July 9, 2001, 12:57 PM   #5
AndABeer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 9, 2000
Location: Lakeland, TN
Posts: 1,622
I personally am waiting with great anticipation for my Blade Tech holster and a set of night sights to arrive so that my CZ75B can become my new carry gun. It is currently the most accurate, fastest shooting handgun I own and size/weight are not an issue.
__________________
"The key is to not pull the trigger but to squeeze it." Evil Emporer Zurg

"You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." Unknown
AndABeer is offline  
Old July 9, 2001, 01:20 PM   #6
ddt4free
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 8, 2000
Posts: 217
bartholomew's analysis may not hold water.

colt m1911 a1
overall length 8 1/2 inches
weight 38 ounces (2.375 lbs)

cz97b
overall length 8.35 inches
weight 2.5 lbs

The 97 is slightly shorter and only weighs about four ounces more. It also has a ten round capacity. I'm not sure what 3 rounds of .45 averages but if weight was THE issue, don't put em in.


As far as carry goes I would consider them both "BIG" carry guns. If you can carry/conceal a steel framed 1911 I think you could manage the 97b as well. I think the cz reliability might well offset the slight size and weight disadvantage. I never really thought it was that much more or less concealable than a 75b or a 1911.

1911's
I have yet to see a 1911 for less than I thousand bucks that could even approach the reliablity of the 97. Now as I prepare to get flamed, I know they are out there, it's just that I've never seen one. At the range the other day A guy was shooting a Kimber with a $200 after factory bbl and while it grouped very well at 50 feet from the bench, it usually had some sort of malfunction or two for virtually every mag(new barrel was not broken in though, but still!).

97's
To be fair, a shooting buddy had a 97 that would shoot everything but winchester silvertips. I was damn near called a liar on this forum for saying that, believe it or not. Yeah, that's what I do, I have nothing better to do than sit around and make up stuff about guns. The accuracy is superb but not quite on par with the 75b(opinion, not tested).
-ddt

Last edited by ddt4free; July 9, 2001 at 01:55 PM.
ddt4free is offline  
Old July 9, 2001, 02:33 PM   #7
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 5,689
Ledbetter, I consider the CZ75 right at the upper limit of what I would consider good for concealed carry. With the right grips and the right rig, its definitely doable.

ddt4free: The weights you gave are the empty weights for both guns. You are going to see a little more weight by the time you add spare mags. You could of course choose not to carry the extra rounds; but if you aren't going to use the capacity - why carry it?

The two main differences in concealability are going to be the width and height of the guns. The CZ97B has a tapered double-stack magazine well to allow for 10rds. That makes for a fatter grip and a 1.4-1.6" width depending on the grips. A 1911 is around 1.25". The 0.25" difference may not seem like much number wise; but tuck one of each into your waistband and I'll bet you'll notice the difference right away.

The second issue is height. The CZ97 is 5.9" tall compared to 5.25-5.36" for the M1911. The M1911 is already difficult to conceal in full-size due to the tendency of it's grip to print. Adding another half-inch or more in height isn't going to help with that problem. For comparison, note that even a heavy-duty monster like the Desert Eagle is only 1.26" wide and 5.69" tall.

Having said all that, my initial evaluation of the CZ97B was based on gut feeling more than scientific analysis. I've carried a 1911 and I've had the opportunity to shoot the CZ97B. A good holster can make concealing a 1911 easy; but IWB carry or a high-ride are almost a must and height and width are important to both those styles of carry. From handling and shooting the CZ97, I loved the gun - the extra weight helped make followups with .45 quick and easy. However, I just didn't feel the gun would make a good CCW gun.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old July 9, 2001, 03:41 PM   #8
ddt4free
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 8, 2000
Posts: 217
Good Points Bart

Thanks for a well thought out and articulate response.

I agree, the thickness and height could make alot of difference for IWB carry. Especially true for smaller framed men and women or those in warmer climes. I just didn't have the guns or figures handy or I would have provided them.

Quote:
You could of course choose not to carry the extra rounds; but if you aren't going to use the capacity - why carry it?
Reliability , Accuracy, and Expense are the only reasons I can think of. But even those reasons don't hold much water against a really well made 1911(if they exist, I've seen em on tv anyways).

I would offer this for all to ponder though. I know a guy big enough to conceal a desert eagle(maybe even two in winter). I only wanted to provide a more scientific analysis of the question because I feel it would not be prudent to recommend against the 97 without seeing the person asking the question.

My gut feeling is that I would not have a problem with either gun in small of back with some sort of over shirt. I couldn't carry either with just a tee shirt for cover though.

If there were more civil and intelligent exchanges like your own, this would be a much better forum. thanks -ddt
ddt4free is offline  
Old July 9, 2001, 08:52 PM   #9
croyance
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 30, 2001
Posts: 3,604
I do carry a commander 1911 with only a t-shirt for cover. In the small of the back, just about anything can be concealed, if you keep good posture.

The commander 1911 has the thickness and height of the full sized 1911, the two most difficult dimensions to conceal. A shorter grip would be easier to conceal, but more difficult to draw and control if needed.

They don't have a thinner version of the CZ97, which in my opinion makes it harder to conceal. I do like their products, but for CCW would stick with a CZ-75 B or PCR.

And if I need ten rounds in a magazine for a 1911, Chip McCormick makes ten round magazines for 1911. I'd keep them in a magazine holder, with a flush seven or eight round magazine in the 1911.
croyance is offline  
Old July 9, 2001, 09:48 PM   #10
Marcus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 27, 1998
Posts: 1,156
I`d go with the 1911 for CCW too. As much as I like CZs the CZ-97 was a disapointment when I first handled one. The DA trigger reach is enormous! I have large hands and long fingers so this is normally no concern for me (I like my CZ-75`s trigger reach just fine) but even with the hammer at half cock I had to rotate my grip to effectively engage the trigger on the 97. The finish was noticably worse than my 75B Mil. and it `s a really chunky gun. It was much bulkier than the P-97 Ruger I traded in and the Witness 10mm which I got instead. I regularly carry my CZ-75B CCW. I was just carrying it today IWB in an ARG style holster with a DeSantis belt under a polo shirt,no sweat. Concealable and comfy. The Witness is a little bulkier/ heavier and the grip is a bit longer with it`s thick plastic baseplates,it`s notably harder to conceal than the CZ. I can do it but it`s not as comfy and I have to be more careful to keep it from printing. The CZ-97 is bigger still IMO CCW with it would be somewhat of a chore. Marcus
Marcus is offline  
Old July 11, 2001, 12:06 PM   #11
ddt4free
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 8, 2000
Posts: 217
cocked and locked 97

i must admit, after further analysis, that the 1911 is probably always going to be easier to conceal than a 97. Not to say the 97 is not concealable.

Someone mentioned the long trigger pull of the 97. I believe that is an apples to oranges comparison. sure there is a long reach to the trigger in double action mode on the 97 but, lest we forget, the standard 1911 is incapable of that altogether. when the 97 is carried cocked and locked like I would carry a 1911, the reach is much shorter and very comfortable.

I don't think i would go as far as to call the 97 grip fat, as(for me) double stack .45's like the para seem as large or larger(still comfortable in my stubby paws). and as bart metions, there is only 1/4 inch difference in the grips and that is only an 1/8 inch on either side of the axis. This is a major deal given that we are comparing a single to a double stack. A 1/4 inch difference is very slim indeed and I think a halmark of the entire cz line. -ddt
ddt4free is offline  
Old July 12, 2001, 05:13 PM   #12
WESHOOT2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 14,270
Buy the one you like best; both can be great, and both can beworn in a correct holster.

Suggest the CZ97 to be more reliable from the box.
__________________
.
"all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"
WESHOOT2 is offline  
Old July 12, 2001, 05:41 PM   #13
Rainbow Six
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2000
Location: West Georgia, USA
Posts: 1,314
Based on pictures and posts on the forum, I had the CZ97B figured to be just smaller than a hockey stick. I held one today and it actually felt good in my hand. I want to shoot Joe Klug's first but I may end up with one. FWIW, I would never carry it concealed. I wouldn't hesitate to carry it open in a good holster though. It's not near as big as I figured it would be.

R6
__________________
Si vis pacem, para bellum...

"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." -Jeff Cooper
Rainbow Six is offline  
Old July 12, 2001, 05:56 PM   #14
mbott
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1999
Location: Central, OH
Posts: 619
Rainbow Six,

You will like how it shoots! I've become a real fan of quite a few CZ's since the first of the year.

--
Mike
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member
NRA Certified Basic Pistol, Basic Rifle and Personal Protection Instructor
Law Enforcement Sales, Retired
mbott is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09457 seconds with 7 queries