CZ97 v Sig Sauer P220

[jpfive]

I am considering the 97BD as my next CZ.  However, Sig's P220 has recently caught my eye - and many of these are available - both new and used.  Not so the 97BD.  Anybody here have experience with these guns?

[miataeric1]

Not sure which model of 97 you're looking for, but I've been doing some research lately and have found them available at many places online. I, personally, am NOT a fan of the looks of the Sig's. I've never shot one, but they just look ugly to me, not to mention the price point.

[jpfive]

The B's are readily available now, but the BD's are harder to find.  I prefer the looks of the 97 also, but that is pretty subjective.  Anybody own both?  Shot both?

[DragonDog]

I owned both.  Sigs are in my opinion ridiculously overpriced these days.  My P220ST would not feed nor extract certain ammo.  While it was accurate and comfortable to shoot, the CZ97B is just as much if not more so on both counts.  The extra 2 rounds is a bonus.

I sold the P220 and now have only a beautiful glossy blue CZ97B in my steel framed .45 auto collection.

[Sancho]

But the 97 seems like such a HUGE pistol.  I don't own a Sig 220 but I do have a Sig 226 (same size) in 40 S&W.  The 226 doesn't seem so large to me.  And it sure shoots nice.

Sancho

[schmeky]

I currently have both and I've had several Sigs in the past.  The P-220 is an outstanding weapon.  It will feed practically anything and is the better choice if you want to shoot lots of HP ammo.  Accuracy wise it's a toss-up, the 220 and the 97 are superbly accurate out of the box. 

The 220's grip is probably more universally liked being slim and ergonomic.  It's also the logical choice if you ever want to conceal carry.  I'm not a big decocker fan, but I perfer the decock mechanism of the Sig over the CZ.  The Sig's SA out of the box will be much better than the CZ's, DA on either is not great.

Sig's are ridiculously over-priced for what they are, i.e. stamped sheet metal internals, etc., whereas the CZ uses forged internals and solid steel construction.

Kind of an apples and oranges comparison.  I say get one, then save your lunch money and get the other.

[jpfive]

I currently have both and I've had several Sigs in the past.  The P-220 is an outstanding weapon.  It will feed practically anything and is the better choice if you want to shoot lots of HP ammo.  Accuracy wise it's a toss-up, the 220 and the 97 are superbly accurate out of the box. 

The 220's grip is probably more universally liked being slim and ergonomic.  It's also the logical choice if you ever want to conceal carry.  I'm not a big decocker fan, but I perfer the decock mechanism of the Sig over the CZ.  The Sig's SA out of the box will be much better than the CZ's, DA on either is not great.

Sig's are ridiculously over-priced for what they are, i.e. stamped sheet metal internals, etc., whereas the CZ uses forged internals and solid steel construction.

Kind of an apples and oranges comparison.  I say get one, then save your lunch money and get the other.

Thank you.  Your analysis tracks pretty well with what I was beginning to conclude from reading reviews.  The main advantage that I am seeing in the Sig right now is the availability of quite a few nice used pistols.  I've also seen some nicely discounted NIB units on GB.  The only source that I have found for a new BD is the CZ Custom shop - however, a new one from them, complete with trigger job, runs close to the Sig Elite in cost.

Nobody has to defend CZ to me, or sell me on them.  I own four - two pistols and two rifles.  I love them both.  I would be proud to have another.  However, I don't own a Sig...  What's a guy to do...?  I'm watching two right now - one online and one in a local pawn shop's gun case.  If I can get the price right on either I might just take the plunge.  Otherwise, I'll be calling CZ custom on Monday to order the BD with the trigger job.

Thanks for the input, folks.  Luv this forum.