CZ 75 vs BHP

>>33809280
>Is a Hi-Power Mk2 still a viable modern handgun?

Yes, the Hi-Power is still a relevant design and excellent handgun. Compared to the 1911, the Hi-Power runs circles around it as a combat handgun.

And the CZ 75 is just a Hi-Power clone, despite what czech fags tell you.

>>33809280
>how
Lower bore-axis
>inb4 "low bore-axis is a meme!" Extremely basic caveman tier physics

More rounds per mag
No mag safety
Ability to have either a decocker or a safety

The basic mechanism and even looks are almost totally the same.

>>33809381
>despite what czech fags tell you.
isn't "the cz75 is a hi-power clone" exactly what the czechfags will tell you?

File: 1465959088297.jpg (61KB, 500x485px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 500x485px

>>33809388
This

>>33809388
No. Czechfags swear that the CZ 75 is a completely original design despite once cracking it open and seeing it's basically a Hi-Power with a double-action trigger mechanism

>>33809384
>muh mag safety
wow, something you can easily fix in five minutes
>more rounds per mag
15 round flush fitting mags have been a thing for the Hi-Power for the last 10 years
>muh optional decocker
It's funny how millennials are so terrified of cocked and locked carry

>>33809280
>Is a Hi Power Mk2 still a viable modern handgun?
Yes. It's just that handguns aren't really important part of military equipment so who the fuck cares. For all that's worth you can issue straight-blowback .380, 9mak or even fucking .32acp and since it's used once in a blue moon nobody will complain.
>>33809414
There are DA Hi-Powers as well.

>>33809441
I'm aware of the HI-Power BDA

>>33809433
What i was just pointing out the differences holy shit, now thats what I call autism.

>>33809414
Thats not true, Im a czfag and completely agree that it is literally a hipower mechanism, I have never seen otherwise.
You might be thinking of ak/makarov fags.

>>33809280
It's alright, if dated. For it's size you'd really want like 17+1 capacity, then it'd be perfect, but as it stands, 15+1 is as good as it gets, which would be impressive in the 80's.

I mean, not to say it's bad, even just 13+1 (or 10+1, if AWB states or places like Canada), is enough to matter.

For recreational shooting or sport shooting, there's nothing wrong with it, the magazine disconnect is bogus but that can be fixed.

>>33809381
How is it a Hi-Power clone when the trigger is completely different and the slide is on inverted rails?
Are the FNX, P226 or DP51 also Hi-Power clones?

>>33809433
>REEEEEE MILLENNIALS
Take a nap.

>>33810457
Its a very thin gun for a double stack, almost single stackish.

File: CZC hipower.jpg (123KB, 960x669px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 960x669px

>>33809280
CZ perfected the Hi-Power.

There's 3 decades between those designs, if not 4. The CZ utilizes some of the Browning designs but in all fairness, what modern pistol doesn't? They are both great guns and you can carry either into combat and trust them.

>>33810618
That hammer makes me retch.

>>33810985

It is 'custom', Be glad they didn't add a drink mixer and an mp3 player.

>>33809280
The Hi-Power is a John Browning design, it will be viable as long as guns as we know them today are

>>33809280
Well the Hi Power is pretty much a piece of garbage for how much it costs while the CZ75 is decent for the price. CZ75 trigger and safety are miles better, capacity is better, DA/SA.

CZ75 gets the vote, from me.

File: 1486154653543.jpg (26KB, 411x412px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 411x412px

>>33809381
>CZ 75 is just a Hi-Power clone

>>33811242
The Hi power started out as a Browning design but eurofags changed it to fit their manufacturing processes and requirements

My biggest issue with the CZs is their fit and finish. I would be willing to pay more for a CZ that was more carefully machined and didn't have tool marks all over the internals and that had a nicer finish than that crappy paint they currently use. As they're priced right now, they fall into a strange no-man's land where they're too expensive to be called a budget option (like they once were) but not made with enough skill and care to be called a premium product either.

>inb4 none of that actually matters

Other products at the same price point are better than the CZs in this area. They have the means to do better; the reason they do not is because it would cut into their margins.

File: f22C1mC.png (3MB, 1298x2000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1298x2000px

>>33809280
The CZ is a modern handgun using a double stack magazine, and a browning tilting barrel, those are the only things the CZ has in common with the Hi power.
By that metric every modern handgun aside from a select few are browning hi power clones.

Saying the CZ is a better gun is just another example of poorguns trying to justify the cheaper option being 'better", slapping a poor DA/SA trigger and over building the gun to justify poor metallurgy and QC definitely dosent make it a "better clone" by any stretch.
That, along with the fact that the Hi power is half an inch shorter in height and overall length, making it more concealable white an LONGER barrel while having the 1 less round to play with with modern mags.
Calling price a sticking point is retarded, just buy used, surplus is sub 400 and even production models used in great shape are sub 650, pic related surplus top for 375 and its shape is the same as my production model I got for 600, the finish is just different.

I dont really know why your specifying the MK2 Hi powers for being a modern handgun, but I think any of the hi powers are still an ok choice,

Triggers feel entirely different. Guns shoot entirely differently.

I wish someone made modern tacticooled Hi Powers with rails.

>>33812405
>I dont really know why your specifying the MK2 Hi powers for being a modern handgun, but I think any of the hi powers are still an ok choice,
I've found mostly the Mk2s to be in a decent price range, the Mk3s are the ones demanding too much i typically find.

>>33812482
The sights might be the shitty blade sights GI 1911s had, and the safety might be small compared to the mk3s but you can change both of those, so other than that, yeah they are fine

File: 1545d0905e0c78d874b3452c7ef190eb-d5o5oos_zps502af764(2).jpg (21KB, 480x317px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 480x317px

>>33812477
Just a single slot rail, ledge sights and a slightly bobbed spur hammer and the hypothetical MKIV would be fantastic

Some Florida company was making frames for a while with or without rails in various steels, aluminium alloys and titanium and one south African guy made a polymer frame

File: image002.jpg (23KB, 462x321px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 462x321px

>>33812951
Aaand the poly frame. Looks like shit but that's not the point

>>33813128
fucking gross

File: 7257483822_46f78fba0a_b.jpg (250KB, 1024x667px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 1024x667px

>>33813128
Aaand the M95 Detective

>>33812951
needs
>novak style night sights
>17 or 18 round magazine fitting flush
>no disconnect
>synthetic grips
>wide spur hammer

>>33813187
>17 or 18 round magazine fitting flush
Not without lengthening the frame,slapping a funnel on or widening it. The 17s arent flush

>>33813506
Yeah?

>>33814045
Then why bother when two extra rounds would take away from one of the nicest parts of design?

As far as duty size goes, the BHP, CZ75, and clones thereof (Tanfoglio Witness, various turkshit, IWI 941) are all still perfectly usable. I prefer the CZ P-01 for being a bit more compact for civilian use, but you can't go wrong with any of the guns I mentioned, or an M9/92FS for that matter. Wonder nines got their name for a reason.

>>33814673
Hi powers are a lot slimmer than people think too. They might be longer than a glock 19 but they have significantly less bulge and conceal quite well if you have a good holster.

>>33814555
Because slim doesn't really mean that much to me in double-stacked.

File: 20161001_164238-1.jpg (3MB, 1445x3460px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1445x3460px

>>33811882
Tell me why small machining marks on the inside of a gun matter in the slightest.
Because the p-01 is the only pistol to pass NATO testing.

Pic is my CZ
The marks are above the minimum spec for the f35 parts I make.
If those marks are fine in a $1,000,000 f35 part, why does it matter with a gun?

Also, modern CZ finishes are completely fine.
You are thinking of the finishes from like 20 years ago.

If ur gona dislike CZs, at least make a logical argument.

File: hi power notes.jpg (1007KB, 2200x1324px) Image search: [Google]

1007KB, 2200x1324px

>>33809280
The Mk 2 was a very limited production variant in the 80s. Most Hi Powers you'll see on the market are Mark III's (new production) or original Hi Powers (pre-1980s).

And no, the CZ 75 isn't a "next step," though it is a very good gun in its own right.

>>33815271
>Because the p-01 is the only pistol to pass NATO testing.
>t. guy who drank the CZ marketing kool-aid

The "testing" that CZ did (talked about in their announcement here: http://cz-usa.com/press-release/cz-p-01-gets-nato-approval-the-next-generation-of-perfect-pistols/) is not a NATO protocol pistol test, because there a NATO protocol for pistol testing does not exist.

The "tests" that they ran on the P01 have nothing to do with NATO; they are a part of CZ's own testing procedure, which they are intentionally misrepresenting as being part of a NATO test by conflating them with the announcement of being awarded a NATO stock number.

>>33815271
The fit and finish and qc in general are fucky with czs, that means they can range from very good or just dogshit and thats a fucking problem when any CZ you get might be great or might be trash.

>>33810618
>machining marks
>garbage trigger
"perfected"

>>33815271
Have you ever handled a Jericho and a CZ together? The machining on the Jericho I handled was some of the best I have seen in any gun, and it completely blows that of a CZ out of the water despite the two guns having the same design and price point.

>>33815587
is that why jerichos can be found all over the place in competitive shooting events?
>>33815271
Ill never understand people crying about tool marks. Ten seconds with some 1000+ grit and a wool wheel and you've got a mirror shine.

>>33815614
Shitty qc and machining marks may not be a problem where you can see but its indicative of a lower quality of care which can be a problem if they fucked something up where you cant see, like the firing pin channel or a burr inside the housing for the safety, somewhere where it wouldnt be readily apparent but will shorten the life of parts and could cause a big fuckup when the gun is needed.

File: DSC_1375R.jpg (1MB, 2957x1959px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2957x1959px

>>33815776
if you think machining marks are an indication that the gun will have substantial mechanical issues then I dont know what to tell you.

That said I'm not trying to imply that the CZ is by any means flawless. My firing pin roll pin caved in within the first 3 months of ownership because I dryfired it so damn much. This was pretty early but not really a surprise based on what I read online. And the machining marks would bother me if they didn't take 10 seconds to fix, even if they weren't there I would have polished up the internals just for it's own sake because I like to tinker and play.

>>33815826
I 100% believe that CZ has a lower standard of care when assembling guns, and that if they arent going to put enough care into tool marks where they are readily visible, why would they put any extra care into the places you cant see, that are much more important to the life and safety of a gun.

That said, CZs can be great guns and their custom shop does nice work, but none of that makes up for a history of shitty QC.

>>33815926
>I 100% believe that CZ has a lower standard of care when assembling guns

you can believe whatever you want but the overwhelming consensus is that problems with CZs are decently rare aside from the one or two known issues, which are really more to do with the design than the labor quality. Groupthink and confirmation bias aside, the "history of shitty QC" doesn't seem to bother most people who own and use them.

>>33816046
>decently rare aside from the one or two known issues
I agree with that statement but but that lower quality of care from those one or two known issues that keep cropping up is enough to warrant more concern about everything else. They are great guns ive shot them and looked them over, but ill never pay money for one of them because of those persistent issues.

If they arnet going to be consistent enough to not have tool marks, they might not be be consistent enough or care enough to not fuck up something else.

When i take my car to mechanic or buy a new car, i dont want muddy footprints on the floor, or grease all over my steering wheel. It dosent mean they fucked up something while working on my car, but it does mean they dont care enough to not dirty up my car, why would they care enough to do the rest of it right.

File: 1468803019205.gif (4MB, 426x232px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 426x232px

>>33816106
Perfectly respectable stance. For me, I dont mind that stuff because I replace known issues before they even get to happen to me normally. I also use all my guns as range toys so it's not the end of the world if one fails on me. Just comes down to differences in expectations and needs. The awesome extent to which the CZ line fits my hands and the pure aesthetic design, coupled with the practical advantages like the low bore axis and awesome aftermarket, are more than enough to let me overlook the small issues with it.

Wouldn't hold it against you if you wanted something more reliable for a carry piece or anything of the sort though.

>>33814943
>doesn't really mean that much to me
>to me
And nobody is gonna tool up a whole new frame for you because of two rounds when +2 baseplates exist

>>33809381
>And the CZ 75 is just a Hi-Power clone, despite what czech fags tell you.

And you will only believe that if you have the mechanical knowledge and understanding of a chimp.

File: 1338878651026.gif (1MB, 158x129px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 158x129px

>>33813128

>>33809381
I see you have a rare disease where you cannot stop spewing bullshit from your mouth, running down your chin and onto your keyboard. Quite tragic.

>>33813128
cant lie. Sorta getting a raging boner from that.

>>33818837
But just think, we could have Polymer 80% BHP lowers!!11!

>>33819130
A little texturing would go a long way

File: hi power art.jpg (115KB, 656x654px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 656x654px

Hi Power art 4 y'all