I was having a hard time trying to choose between the Sig P229 (M11-A1) and the CZ P-01 recently. Decided to throw caution to the wind and ended up buying both. For those looking at these two handguns, I thought I would toss out my initial impressions after running 100 rounds through both.
![Image]()
Sig P229: Quality build, fits comfortably in the hand but the stock DA/SA trigger takes a bit to get used to. I ended up replacing the stock springs with Amory Craft's trigger reduction kit and the gun performs a lot better. After swapping out the springs, this is how the handgun should feel out of the box.
One note on the feel of the P229 is that it sits high in your hand. It doesn't weigh much more than the CZ, but the higher bore gives the P229 a more beefier feel. By no means a deal breaker but noticeable. It's like the Sig is a pick-up truck and the CZ a SUV. This may make the Sig P229 harder to conceal but, not impossible.
I've shot Sig handguns for the better part of 35 years and will openly admit I'm partial to their handguns. I like the take-down lever design and the de-cocker is positioned where my weak hand thumb can activate it while staying on target. The high-bore access does take a bit of getting used to. I shot the P229 after running about 100 rounds through the CZ and forgot that I needed to adjust my point of aim, resulting in lower hits.
CZ P-01: The last CZ handgun I shot was over 30 years ago and I cracked the alloy frame. I really don't have any memory of how that gun shot or felt, so I went into this purchase with a clean slate. The handgun appealed to me for the compact size and hammer-fire design.
The P-01 feels really good in the hand and feels noticeably thinner than the Sig. The handgun came with rubber grip panels that did feel beefy and I changed them out for thinner, wooden panels. The thinner grip and lower bore access, makes the P-01 feel more like an extension of your hand. Dare I say much like a medium frame revolver. It has a more sleeker feel than the Sig.
I liked the stock sights on the Sig much better than what CZ offers. Sig's were nice and bright night sights while CZ's are dull painted, non-night sights. I swapped them out with Tru-Glo TFX sights. Makes a world of difference and on the same level as Sig's X-Ray sights (maybe a touch better).
The de-cocker is tough to manipulate with your weak hand and to activate it with your strong hand, you'll have to loosen your grip that takes the gun off target. Not the end of the world, but I'd give the Sig's design the advantage here. I also like the take-down lever design of the Sig just a bit better. CZ does give you the two notches to line the slide up to allow the slide release bar to be pushed out. The downside is that the slide release bar is solidly in place, requiring a rubber mallet to pop it out and then again, to pop it back in place. I don't remember any of my 1911 handguns (that have similar design) being this tight to take down. Granted, things may get easier with use but it's going to take some effort to begin with.
One more quick note on the P-01's design. It has a plastic recoil spring guide that has a good bit of give to it. I'm sure the plastic part is fine, but I'm not comfortable with a guide rod that has so much bend. Before the first shot was fired, I invested in an M-Carbo steel recoil spring guide.
On the range: Both the Sig and CZ handle wonderfully on the range. My marksman skills aren't what they used to be but at 15 yards, I was pleased with the results. The most noticeable difference is the point of aim. With Sig's high-bore setup, your front sight needs to cover your point of impact. CZ has the lower bore and your point of aim is the more traditional "put your target on top of the front sight".
![Image]()
Recoil is a little gentler with the CZ due to the slide sitting lower in the frame. The energy pushes back into your hand and muzzle rise is noticeably lower. With the Armory Craft trigger reduction kit, the Sigs DA pull is a lot better and the SA seems more crisp. CZ, on the other hand, doesn't have such dramatic DA trigger pull and I think that is because when de-cocked, the hammer goes into a half-cock position. It has a shorter distance to travel than the Sigs.
![Image]()
Some have noted that the CZ slide is more difficult to rack because of it sitting so low, but I didn't experience any issues pulling back on the P-01's slide. The Sig does give you more real estate to grab hold of, but the CZ is manageable.
Final Thoughts: If I had to give up one of these handguns, the choice would be tough. I'm partial to Sig, but the CZ is really impressive. Both shoot well, feel good in the hand and are comfortable to carry. I like the design of the Sig's de-cocker lever but like the stock trigger of the CZ better. I also like the low-bore axis of the CZ but don't hate the high-bore axis of the Sig.
On concealability, I'd lean towards the CZ as being more concealable. The overall length is just a pinch shorter than the Sig and it seems to be shorter. I understand that concealability is subjective with no "one size fits all" solution. But for me, the Sig tends to stick out more for me. Open carry, flip a coin as to which is better.
The Sig does cost a bit more than the CZ. I paid just under $1K for the Sig and the CZ ran $650. Magazines from Meg-Car ran about the same for both. The M11-A1 came with three 15 round mags and the CZ came with two 15 round mags.
Grip panels are a little pricey for the Sig with the CZ options running in the $30 range. Go ahead and add the cost of replacement sights for the CZ (the Tru-Glo ran $110). I think when all is said and done, the Sig ran me $1100 (gun, replacement grips and spring kit) and the CZ ran just under $825 (gun, grips, steel recoil guide and sights).
So which would I choose? As much as I like Sig, if I could only have one it would be the CZ P-01. It nudges out the Sig just enough with fit, feel and performance where I'd hang on to it. But that's me and I believe that there isn't a bad choice between these two handguns. The key is figuring out which fits your needs and likes the best.
Sig P229: Quality build, fits comfortably in the hand but the stock DA/SA trigger takes a bit to get used to. I ended up replacing the stock springs with Amory Craft's trigger reduction kit and the gun performs a lot better. After swapping out the springs, this is how the handgun should feel out of the box.
One note on the feel of the P229 is that it sits high in your hand. It doesn't weigh much more than the CZ, but the higher bore gives the P229 a more beefier feel. By no means a deal breaker but noticeable. It's like the Sig is a pick-up truck and the CZ a SUV. This may make the Sig P229 harder to conceal but, not impossible.
I've shot Sig handguns for the better part of 35 years and will openly admit I'm partial to their handguns. I like the take-down lever design and the de-cocker is positioned where my weak hand thumb can activate it while staying on target. The high-bore access does take a bit of getting used to. I shot the P229 after running about 100 rounds through the CZ and forgot that I needed to adjust my point of aim, resulting in lower hits.
CZ P-01: The last CZ handgun I shot was over 30 years ago and I cracked the alloy frame. I really don't have any memory of how that gun shot or felt, so I went into this purchase with a clean slate. The handgun appealed to me for the compact size and hammer-fire design.
The P-01 feels really good in the hand and feels noticeably thinner than the Sig. The handgun came with rubber grip panels that did feel beefy and I changed them out for thinner, wooden panels. The thinner grip and lower bore access, makes the P-01 feel more like an extension of your hand. Dare I say much like a medium frame revolver. It has a more sleeker feel than the Sig.
I liked the stock sights on the Sig much better than what CZ offers. Sig's were nice and bright night sights while CZ's are dull painted, non-night sights. I swapped them out with Tru-Glo TFX sights. Makes a world of difference and on the same level as Sig's X-Ray sights (maybe a touch better).
The de-cocker is tough to manipulate with your weak hand and to activate it with your strong hand, you'll have to loosen your grip that takes the gun off target. Not the end of the world, but I'd give the Sig's design the advantage here. I also like the take-down lever design of the Sig just a bit better. CZ does give you the two notches to line the slide up to allow the slide release bar to be pushed out. The downside is that the slide release bar is solidly in place, requiring a rubber mallet to pop it out and then again, to pop it back in place. I don't remember any of my 1911 handguns (that have similar design) being this tight to take down. Granted, things may get easier with use but it's going to take some effort to begin with.
One more quick note on the P-01's design. It has a plastic recoil spring guide that has a good bit of give to it. I'm sure the plastic part is fine, but I'm not comfortable with a guide rod that has so much bend. Before the first shot was fired, I invested in an M-Carbo steel recoil spring guide.
On the range: Both the Sig and CZ handle wonderfully on the range. My marksman skills aren't what they used to be but at 15 yards, I was pleased with the results. The most noticeable difference is the point of aim. With Sig's high-bore setup, your front sight needs to cover your point of impact. CZ has the lower bore and your point of aim is the more traditional "put your target on top of the front sight".
Recoil is a little gentler with the CZ due to the slide sitting lower in the frame. The energy pushes back into your hand and muzzle rise is noticeably lower. With the Armory Craft trigger reduction kit, the Sigs DA pull is a lot better and the SA seems more crisp. CZ, on the other hand, doesn't have such dramatic DA trigger pull and I think that is because when de-cocked, the hammer goes into a half-cock position. It has a shorter distance to travel than the Sigs.
Some have noted that the CZ slide is more difficult to rack because of it sitting so low, but I didn't experience any issues pulling back on the P-01's slide. The Sig does give you more real estate to grab hold of, but the CZ is manageable.
Final Thoughts: If I had to give up one of these handguns, the choice would be tough. I'm partial to Sig, but the CZ is really impressive. Both shoot well, feel good in the hand and are comfortable to carry. I like the design of the Sig's de-cocker lever but like the stock trigger of the CZ better. I also like the low-bore axis of the CZ but don't hate the high-bore axis of the Sig.
On concealability, I'd lean towards the CZ as being more concealable. The overall length is just a pinch shorter than the Sig and it seems to be shorter. I understand that concealability is subjective with no "one size fits all" solution. But for me, the Sig tends to stick out more for me. Open carry, flip a coin as to which is better.
The Sig does cost a bit more than the CZ. I paid just under $1K for the Sig and the CZ ran $650. Magazines from Meg-Car ran about the same for both. The M11-A1 came with three 15 round mags and the CZ came with two 15 round mags.
Grip panels are a little pricey for the Sig with the CZ options running in the $30 range. Go ahead and add the cost of replacement sights for the CZ (the Tru-Glo ran $110). I think when all is said and done, the Sig ran me $1100 (gun, replacement grips and spring kit) and the CZ ran just under $825 (gun, grips, steel recoil guide and sights).
So which would I choose? As much as I like Sig, if I could only have one it would be the CZ P-01. It nudges out the Sig just enough with fit, feel and performance where I'd hang on to it. But that's me and I believe that there isn't a bad choice between these two handguns. The key is figuring out which fits your needs and likes the best.
