PDA

View Full Version : CZ 50 or 70 - Opinions on Quality & Reliability


Oak '58
September 27, 2000, 12:40 PM
Hello again!

I've seen a LOT of positive comments lately about the CZ-75 line of pistols, and they sound very interesting given their resemblance to the BHP.
Now I've started to notice ads for their little brothers, the CZ-50 & 70 in .32 auto.. since I've been looking for a mousegun, these look pretty attractive.

So...do these little guns possess the quality & reliability of their larger kin? If so, does the price range I'm seeing of $120 - 150 NIB sound right? What's the difference between a 50 & a 70? Finally, most of these ads say "Cal 7.65 / .32 Auto" - are the two truly interchangable, or will ammo be a problem? :confused:

Thanks to all who reply, & safe shooting!

------------------
"Skeptical scrutiny can separate deep insights from deep nonsense."

Destructo6
September 27, 2000, 01:48 PM
7.65 Browning is Europe's name for our .32 Auto cartridge, or vice versa.

From reports, the CZ-70 is a slightly modernized -50. "Modernized" in the same vein as the Colt series 80 vs 70 and the CZ-75 vs -75B: the trigger suffers as a result.

Reports also are that they are not as reliable as CZ's modern pistols. I still want a -50 and a prewar -27.

Walt Sherrill
September 27, 2000, 02:00 PM
I have a CZ-50 and am a frequent reader on the Curio & Relics list -- which specializes in older weapons.

The CZ-50 is a Soviet Bloc knockoff of the Walther PP, and its an adequate gun. The word on the list, however, is that the older CZ-50 had "softer" metal than the virtually identical CZ-70. (The primary difference between the guns was WHEN they were made.)

If I were you, I think I'd go for the CZ-70 or, better yet, simply buy a Kel-Tec P32. If you're going to hobble yourself with a .32 acp weapon, get one of the best ones you can buy. It'll be far more reliable, just as accurate, better for Plus P ammo (which it will handle with no problems), and far, far more concealable.

(I just recently sold a CZ-75 and have a CZ-85 Combat; I really like the modern-day CZs, and shoot my CZ-85 in IDPA competition.)

Oak '58
September 27, 2000, 02:17 PM
Thanks to you both for the info!

Walt - yes, I almost bought a P32 last week, but when I started seeing the ads for the CZ-50 for less money, I thought it was worth checking into. But "adequate" is not a word that I want to hear in reference to my "last resort" or deep-conceal gun. Then again, at these prices it might be worth it as a fun little plinker. I'll go back & look at that P32 again - they just got in a new style that I hadn't seen before. Kind of an olive-drab frame & stainless(?) slide, looks interesting. Thanks again, Oak

------------------
"Skeptical scrutiny can separate deep insights from deep nonsense."

Walt Sherrill
September 27, 2000, 06:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oak '58:
Thanks to you both for the info!

...Then again, at these prices it might be worth it as a fun little plinker. I'll go back & look at that P32 again - they just got in a new style that I hadn't seen before. Kind of an olive-drab frame & stainless(?) slide, looks interesting. Thanks again, Oak

[/quote]

If you want an inexpensive fun plinker, look around for a used .38 S&W revolver. The ammo will be cheaper and I guarantee you that it will be more accurate (unless its been abused.)

Several of the CZ-50 shooters on the C&R list have been complaining about the slide PEENING the frame and barrel as it slams forward. Somethings too soft. I haven't shot mine enough to see any change. Probably won't.

The color of the frame of the P-32 isn't really the color of the frame. What you see is the polymer cover, which can be removed and replaced with one of a different color. The frame is aluminum.

If you haven't done so, check out www.kel-tec.com (http://www.kel-tec.com) and www.ktog.org. (http://www.ktog.org.) All you ever wanted to know about Kel-Tec weapons.

(I have a Kel-Tec P-11 which I used to carry. Have found a better carry gun in a Star Firestar Plus [alloy frame], but the P-11 is a pretty good weapon.)

jsosko
March 29, 2002, 09:38 AM
I AGREE WITH SOME OF THE OTHER SUGGESTIONS. I HAVE A CZ70 AND I LIKE IT. I DIDN'T HAVE REAL HIGH HOPES FOR IT THOUGH. I JUST WANTED ANOTHER HANDGUN TO TAKE WITH ME TO THE RANGE. I HAVE HAD NO PROBLEMS TO SPEAK OF WITH IT, AND IT ALWAYS CYCLES FINE. I PAID $105 FOR MINE WITH ONE MAG AND NO HOLSTER (ITS UGLY ANYWAY). IF THE AMMO WAS CHEAPER THAN $8 A BOX I WOULD CERTAINLY RECOMMEND IT AS A PLINKER. I SHOT IT LAST NIGHT FOR THE 3RD OUTING, IF YOU JUST LIKE HANDGUNS IT IS WORTH BUYING. I WOULD NOT USE AS BACKUP BECAUSE OF ITS SIZE. IT IS THE SAME SIZE AS A MAKAROV.

THAT KELTEC LOOKS GREAT AND I AM INTERESTED IN TRYING ONE.

LOOKS LIKE A GOOD BACK UP CANDIDATE

Eric Larsen
March 29, 2002, 09:49 AM
The question of quality in buying a CZ 50-70 gun is always gonna be a question. Cz quality isnt a question in my book. Simply put they make great guns.

The question here is they are "surplus" guns. You dont know the guns history at all and buying one is taking a chance either way.

As stated above the 70 is a little better gun...but its a large/heavy gun for a .32 caliber. (7.65/.32 auto are the same thing)

If you want a little dependable plinker in the same style and price range. Look at the FEG SMC .380....ammo is the same price and you get more oooommmph. Plus they are new production and are a nice little gun.

Shoot well

Mike Irwin
March 29, 2002, 09:49 AM
I got a CZ-70 last year. Trigger pull is heavier than stink, but it's a fun gun to shoot.

Accurate too, but the sights aren't anything to write home about.