Why a safety lever on the CZ 75 instead of a decocker?

[Metal Wonder Nine Guy]

At the time that double action Autoloaders were starting to gain traction in military and law enforcement, why did CZ decide to go with a safety only configuration for the CZ75? Earlier DA pistols like the Walther PP/PPK/P38 and Smith and Wesson 39/59 had the safety/decocker levers.

The Beretta 92 originally had a safety only lever configuration, but that was quickly changed to a Walther P38 style decocker safety lever on the 92S model in the late 70's shortly after the 92's release.

We know that the 75 was originally designed for export, so was this feature meant to attract people who preferred cocked and locked pistols?

[rkwhyte2]

Plenty of decocker model CZ's out there.

[Metal Wonder Nine Guy]

Plenty of decocker model CZ's out there.

Oh, I know. I'm just curious as to why the CZ 75 originally came with a safety lever as opposed to a decocker.

[Earl Keese]

Maybe because it's more versatile and simpler to manufacture.

[M1A4ME]

Maybe they wanted Jeff Cooper's approval.....

So, which model sells more pistols.  The CZ75B or the CZ75BD?

[eastman]

were there any CZ 75 variants with a decocker before they added the firing pin block?

[SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM]

were there any CZ 75 variants with a decocker before they added the firing pin block?

Nope, don't think so other than the VZ52 comes to mind. This is the answer right here. The S&W has a fpb and also locks and blocks the firing pin from movement when engaging the decocking lever. The walther design is supposed to block the firing pin from the hammer when decocking but as anyone who had one of the early S&W manufactured PPK/S models knows they were recalled for an issue where the firing pin would not be sufficiently blocked when using the decocker and the gun would fire unintentionally.
Something that is also noteworthy is the decocking feature on the VZ52 wasn't reliable and even though it had an fpb when those guns were imported into the US it was highly recommended that the decocker not be used because of the chance of unintentional discharge.
The modern CZ decocking lockwork is perfectly reliable.

[Earl Keese]

The VZOR 50/70 had a de-cocker. It's been so long since I had mine apart I don't remember if there was any sort of fpb.

[briang2ad]

Maybe because it's more versatile and simpler to manufacture.

Very true.  It IS simpler and by far compared to the decocker CZ went to.  Manufacturing and also maintenance is easier.  I also find decocking the safety model a breeze once I learned to put my off hand thumb on the rear of the slide then releasing.  So you can carry C/L or DA/SA without changing anything. 

I held off on the real reason:  Jeff Cooper was on contract to help CZ design guns.   

[skin]

 In 1975 99% of all pistols were designed for military use were safety models. Not many people before the 90's wanted a decocker model. Even today most sales are safety models. There are exceptions like glock which has neither conventional safety or decocker.

[Metal Wonder Nine Guy]

Maybe because it's more versatile and simpler to manufacture.

Very true.  It IS simpler and by far compared to the decocker CZ went to.  Manufacturing and also maintenance is easier.  I also find decocking the safety model a breeze once I learned to put my off hand thumb on the rear of the slide then releasing.  So you can carry C/L or DA/SA without changing anything. 

I held off on the real reason:  Jeff Cooper was on contract to help CZ design guns.   

That's probably the main reason why. The CZ75BD has that little cage inside the frame that holds the decocker assembly together. Like Earl said, the safety version is much simpler to put together. From what I've read on this forum, it is a little more difficult to work on the decocker model CZ 75's.

Didn't Cooper pick up a CZ 75 in the 1980's and not the 1970's?

[M1A4ME]

Don't know when Jeff Cooper tried a CZ75 and decided it was "alright for a pistol shooting a mediocre cartridge."  I do remember reading it was one of a very few pistols that got his seal of approval "for serious social use."

Left few out of the sentence first time around.  Thought it, just didn't type it.  Gotta get those fingers working faster.

[briang2ad]

Don't know when Jeff Cooper tried a CZ75 and decided it was "alright for a pistol shooting a mediocre cartridge."  I do remember reading it was one of a very pistols that got his seal of approval "for serious social use."

My point was that many make a paraphrase of Cooper way overblown.  I think it is a tribute, but muted at that.  For Cooper there was only one serious carry condition. 

[Tok36]

I wonder if Cooper was any good at making barrels. 

[Walt Sherrill]

At the time that double action Autoloaders were starting to gain traction in military and law enforcement, why did CZ decide to go with a safety only configuration for the CZ75? Earlier DA pistols like the Walther PP/PPK/P38 and Smith and Wesson 39/59 had the safety/decocker levers.

I think the answers are probably both complicated and simple:

• First, the CZ was designed to be a SA/DA gun (i.e., it could start from cocked & locked or hammer down, and then function like a typical SA gun or a standard DA/SA gun. rather than the more conventional DA/SA design.  Manually decocking was something routinely taught in handgun training, and decockers weren't widely known or sought.

• It appears that the CZ-75 wasn't designed with military or police usage in mind; decockers were only STARTING to be popular when it was designed and adding a decocker to a gun already designed to be both DA and SA would have added a whole newe level of complexity to the dseign.

• A 9mm military weapon would never have been integrated into the Warsaw pact with so many different countries and no weapons using 9mm.   The CZ-75 was designed around  the Sellier & Bellot 124 gr. 9mm round.  That caliber was never used in the Soviet Bloc or Warsaw Pact, and personal handguns inside the bloc were generally limited to smaller calibers, but 9mm was popular in the West.  Decockers weren't all that common or popular in the U.S.A. in the late 1960 and early 1970's when the CZ-75 was being developed.  During that period, the U.S. was  -- and still is -- the world's largest and most lucrative gun market.  Its my guess that the CZ-75 was really developed for sale in the U.S.

• The CZ-75 wasn't designed with military or police usage in mind and decockers were only STARTING to be popular when it was designed.   A 9mm military weapon would never have been integrated into the Warsaw pact with so many different countries and no weapons using 9mm. 
  

• The CZ-75 was apparently designed for eventual sale to individuals in the West.  (The Soviet and Czech governments considered the design specs to be potential military secrets, and only a company in Switzerland -- a neutral country in the Cold War -- had license rights; the  government would not sell the licensing rights/specs to a Western nation.  That may have been  short-sighted on their part, as any competent gun maker could  reverse-engineer the design once they got their hands on a CZ.  (Tanfoglio eventually got a set of the design specs when a senior CZ engineer defected to the West.  But it was a number of years before Tanfoglio added a decocker model.)

Except for sales to countries like Canada and West Germany (where many CZs ended up in U.S. GI hands through sales via Base or Post exchanges), it was only after end of the Communist block that CZ was able to focus on the Czechn LEO needs.  They then came up with a decocker design, first seen on the PCR.  That same design was transferred to other CZ models. CZs didn't really start to become  known in the West until the fall of the Soviet Union, and it's only in the past 10-15 years that  they've become more than an interesting  but different gun from Europe.